Liberals know which politics threatens their hegemony. They don't care about standard-issue, old-school conservatives: Mitch McConnell or Mitt Romney. They can beat those in their sleep. They're petrified of GOP adopting working-class, anti-imperialism, anti-corporatist politics: https://t.co/Dbk0KcRVQu
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) July 9, 2021
৯ জুলাই, ২০২১
"Liberals know which politics threatens their hegemony...."
এতে সদস্যতা:
মন্তব্যগুলি পোস্ট করুন (Atom)
পোস্টগুলি
৭টি মন্তব্য:
Alex writes:
"The GOP establishment, which has long claimed to want inroads with minority voters, simultaneously refuses to consider actually fighting for any of the issues which would make inroads with those voters. I believe that this is because the GOP establishment is largely Northeastern WASP mixed with a larger white-collar managerial class. Breitbart's dictum that "politics is downstream from culture" was correct. The GOPs politics is downstream from its culture, which, at least in terms of the party leadership: very restrained, very "dignified," very managerial and technocratic. They seem to believe that if they're just slightly better than the Dems, blacks and hispanics will flock to pull the lever for more corporate tax cuts and endless military interventions.
"Trump was a rejection of this in favor of a more blue-collar, scots-irish hillbilly, evangelical, latin machismo mixed-up culture. Pro-US, pro-working man, pro-American Industries. Trump also understood that political theater isn't bad, it's necessary. People want to feel like they are part of something bigger than themselves, and political theater helps do that. MAGA isn't merely a political slogan, it has become a cultural identifier. There's no policy position associated with boat parades and American flag bikinis and guerilla-style political pranks, but they do work to help cement your coalition with a group identity, "we're the fun ones, and we're not going to apologize for it." Once that's done, you can figure out policies that help the group."
Oh Yea writes:
"It is pointless for Morning Joe to spend airtime on the Ohio Senatorial Primary candidates. The number of Ohio Republicans that watch Morning Joe has to be infinitesimal."
Ken writes:
"I'm guessing you yourself did not watch the Morning Joe segment. I don't have cable, but I downloaded the app so I could watch. I had never heard of Andrew Clark, but he must watch less morning Joe than me because the segment was the just the usual confab of MSNBC contributors shooting the breeze with a Time reporter who had written up her remarkable interview of the famous-author-turned-middle-of-the-pack Senate candidate. And Greenwald could not have watched. They were hardly expressing worry about Vance, more curiosity about whether his about-face will work with Ohio voters and wonder that he would be so impatient to win with Trump as to risk the brand he had successfully built for himself. Not said by them, but I wonder why Greenwald has thrown away his own brand."
I've listened to a fair amount of Morning Joe (on my satellite radio) and I'd say the "usual confab" is ridiculous hand-wringing and hysteria about the GOP. But it would be nice to have a clip of the segment. I will look for it.
I couldn't find a video clip of the segment but Raw Story has report with long quotes:
"He's remade himself, not just remade himself in the image of Trump, but remade himself into one of the crudest, dumbest versions of it," [Charlie] Sykes said. "Really, it is extraordinary, and you know, as you say, you know, human nature is endlessly interesting. We think we've seen all of the various versions of people abasing themselves or, you know, losing their way, but we keep seeing new versions of it, and J.D. Vance is one of the more dramatic examples of that."...
"This is a guy who wrote a book, and had a story that united people across political aisles," Scarborough said. "I had conservative friends, moderate friends, liberal friends, all reading this book. Mika [Brzezinski] and our children, many of them read this book, and this is a guy that could have had a future in really either party, and why in the world, it's just like you said, [Rep.] Elise Stefanik, why in the world would they completely twist and contort themselves to try to fit into this Trumpist sort of mold when this is a guy who's twice impeached. He lost the White House, he lost the Senate, he lost the House. He's not going to get re-elected again. Why would they do that? I just -- I don't understand it..... "It's strategically -- if you're ambitious, this is the opposite of what you do.... I mean, I hope you're right about that. Elise Stefanik is looking around, thinking, 'Hey, I'm No. 3 Republican, and we're going to win back the House of Representatives.' Right now, there's no negative to being dumb, to being racist. [Rep.] Paul Gosar is openly consorting with white nationalists, what price has he paid for that? [Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, what price has she paid? The incentive structure now rewards the most reckless, irresponsible and some of the dumbest politicians out this, at least for the moment. I agree with you long-term, it seems like a terrible life choice, but they're caught up in the moment, and so we're seeing how far are people willing to contort themselves to get power, prestige, money [and] clicks in the age of Trump."
"You have J.D. Vance, Elise Stefanik, Nikki Haley, Tucker Carlson, these are all people who are smart people, who could have gone a different direction, who know exactly what they are doing," Sykes added. "I mean, you have guys like Sean Hannity, who's dumb as a box of rocks, but these other guys, they know, they understand the history, they know what they are doing. They understand the match they are lighting out there, who they are encouraging and what they're doing, and they're willing to do it anyway, and that's what's so sickening about it."
Amadeus 48 writes in an email with the subject line "JD Vance and Panic at Peacock Park"
"Hi Althouse--Somebody assembled a group of the least self-aware people in the USA and then put them on Morning Joe to discuss JD Vance. Someone has a Trump obsession, and it is not the GOP. They just can’t quit him. Charlie Sykes? Remember Charlie Sykes? The red-hot burning brand of talk radio? Remember when he used to snigger at the Democrats? Remember when he used to be married to Judge Diane Sykes? So is Charlie an opportunist or politically transgender? And what about Scarborough himself? Remember when he was part of the Gingrich leadership team that took over the House? Remember all those marriages? Remember when he couldn’t wait to get Trump to phone in to his show? One thing you can say about Joe with confidence is that he is unfaithful.
"That your reader Ken condemns Glenn Greenwald for “throwing away his own brand” just shows how irritated lefties get when people turn the spotlight on them. Glenn Greenwald used to rip up George Bush and his team because he believed that Bush was sacrificing fundamental freedoms in the name of a security state that would sooner or later would abuse its powers. Then he did it to Obama. Then he did it to Trump (and pointed out how the security state had abused its powers to defeat Trump). Now he is doing it to Biden. Glenn Greenwald hasn’t changed. He has been consistent. Also, if Ken doesn’t have cable, he sure knows a lot about MSNBC. He must listen on Sirius."
Jack writes:
"This is a great example of hearing the signal these MSNBC partisans are sending: they are absolutely terrified of Donald Trump ever running and winning again. The signal is to warn off others from joining the MAGA movement. Their comments don’t matter or even make sense, that’s just noise. But the signal is clear."
Ken responds:
"Andrew Clark tweeted that Morning Joe spent 2 shows in a row on Vance, and your Raw Story excerpt must have been from the earlier show since what I watched did not have Charles Sykes. Morning Joe has been airing since 2007, so I've seen enough bits over the years, especially in the run-up to the GOP nomination 2016, when the show featured Trump and took him much more seriously than most of cable news. I'd say their interest in Vance the candidate comes from that experience plus their apparent admiration of Vance the author. The Greenwald I admired was a fearless investigative journalist. Greenwald today has somehow devolved into a right-wing crank."
I say:
2 shows indicates hysteria, no?
Too bad you don't have the opportunity to say "Greenwald today has somehow devolved into a right-wing crank" to Greenwald's face.
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন