Sunday, July 24, 2016

Fast thoughts 7/24

* The Republican convention was satisfying, at least as a Trump enthusiast. There's a bit of poetic justice in watching the Colorado delegation in particular get railroaded on the convention floor via, shall we say, strict adherence to the convention rules. The fact that they were trying to kick up dust at this stage of the game says a lot, but oh well - I guess they 'have to work on their ground game', as they'd say.

* I was sad to see Milo get kicked off twitter, but given how many times they've attempted to punish him, it was kind of an eventuality. Twitter, like Facebook, tries to squelch voices it doesn't like, and Milo's been in their crosshairs for a while. Team Morality at WWWtW huffed and puffed about this, talking about how this was deserved because... well, Milo's followers (not even Milo himself) tweeted mean racist jokes at the actress, and this is absolutely reprehensible. My own view is that I've stopped giving a shit about self-policing racism and sexism among people I'm otherwise sympathetic to (or just find funny), and further that the bar for 'despicable racism' is way too high anyway. I'll worry about sexist comments when making fun of a man's appearance or gender is unacceptable, and I'll worry about Harambe jokes re: black women when mocking 'whitesplaining' is a nigh-universally fireable offense. Or maybe the whole world SHOULD be more relaxed about such jokes in the sense of a free-for-all.

* Speaking of attacking one's own allies, I've come the conclusion that Ted Cruz honestly has no idea how badly he comes off at times. I think part of the problem is that he's made a career out of being the annoying shit to the right people (I liked him flat out calling McConnell a liar, etc), but I'm worried that his ability to be a real shit does not have an 'off' switch, and thus far he's just luckily channeled it in the right direction. His convention floor speech was the most clear case of 'being given the rope to hang oneself with 'that I've ever seen, and I think thoughts about how he's wisely positioning himself for a 2020 run are, shall we say, insanely optimistic. Actually just insane.

* An upside of the Milo banning was that it's provoked some people to come out of the woodwork to support him. Gadfly Notch, being one. Even - shockingly - Wikileaks, who I think are fast changing from 'left-wing favorite' to 'target of left-wing hate'. As of this writing they've managed to skunk Wasserman-Schultz, who has had to resign in the wake of her emails being outed. Not bad work. Who would have thought rogue hacktivists would be cheering on alt-right figures and taking down Democrats this election? We've got one hell of a ride ahead of us.

* The alt-right's performance has been the best thing to come out of this election, and the result has been the rise of a host of figures who are weird, eloquent, funny, and... to be honest, kind of reminiscent of Batman villains. That may or may not be related to me wanting to see Lauren Southern dressed up in a Harley Quinn outfit. Regardless, they're superior replacements to mainstream conservatives, much as I've liked some of George Will's work in the past.

* The Democrat convention hasn't even started yet and already blood has been drawn, with Wasserman Schultz going down faster than Milo at a Black Lives Matter march. Sanders is under pressure not to endorse the Lizard Queen, but let's face it - the guy has no balls, and he'll do as he's told. But between the heat, the Wikileaks scandals, and the wild card that is Black Lives Matter, this shit may be hilarious. If so, it'll be amazing to see happen after the supposedly Hitleriffic Trump, in Cleveland of all places, hardly resulted in any protests at all. (Ohio being an open carry state may have had something to do with that, as I imagine the aura of 'Uh, don't Republicans tend to carry guns?' tends to put the damper on more excited displays of troublemaking.)

15 comments:

Mike said...

Consider that at W4 I was met with staunch opposition for suggesting that conservatives should work toward enshrining patriarchy into the law once again. My suggestion was that the law should be such that unless valid and serious cause can be found in the husband, the state reflexively sides with the husband in all disputes.

If I say that on Return of the Kings, I'll have a thousand amens from pagans, atheists, Christians, etc. Go to W4, the Federalist, First Things, etc. and I might as well suggest we end gay marriage by chucking homosexuals off the Trump Tower.

Crude said...

Lydia seems to have some kind of interesting relationship with feminism, and the rest there have a very loyal relationship with Lydia, so hey. Modern christianity in general seems to largely be privy to the worry of trying to be as inoffensive as possible and avoiding taking a stance which upsets people. As I keep saying, I understand where they're coming from because I used to be on that train. No more.

Mike said...

This is why I am torn as a Christian. Who do I side with? The pagan who believes in patriarchy or the Christian who either denudes it or destroys it? It's why most of the shrieks about the Alt-Right fall on deaf ears with me. I'm like "if you were actually a genuine alternative, maybe I'd be with you and not them."

Mike said...

Best response I've seen so far to the language and decorum issue. I would go a step further and say it goes something like this:

1. Conservative finds a barbarian army marching on the city gates.
2. City walls are breached.
3. Conservative finds that the soldier next to him went off down an ally and summarily executed a dozen disarmed barbarians who were combatants.
4. Conservative plunges a sword through his fellow soldier instead of noting the incident and planning to inform command later.
5. Conservative wonders why most of his fellow soldiers want him tried for treason.
6. Conservative squawks about conduct and decorum toward the barbarian, but fails to note that he killed his countryman rather than remand him into the authorities' judgment.

Mike said...

Looks like they're getting a healthy reminder of why I said Shapiro was foolish for declaring war on trolls.

Crude said...

Shapiro's like Cruz to me, but moreso. On the one hand, I think he's done some great, valiant stuff. On the other hand he behaves like such a little shitstain.

Tpc said...

The pagans don't believe in patriarchy. This is a cool blog. Found it via the recent flambe.

Crude said...

Hey Tpc. Flambe? What, did something happen at WWWtW?

Either way, welcome. Just my personal nonsense-blog.

Mike said...

TPC,

The Alt-Right pagans very much do believe in patriarchy and are well in line with the majority of great pagan civilizations in the past, none of which were matriarchal.

Mike said...

Yeah. They finally kicked a hornet's nest that had bugs in it.

Crude said...

Okay, I'm gonna have a look over there. I have a feeling I'm missing out.

Crude said...

Well that's interesting. I hadn't been there since last I posted, looks like the conversation got fun.

The Practical Conservative said...

Sorry, Mike, alt-right pagans are unserious about patriarchy. They don't support or encourage any structural changes that would lead to patriarchy, Biblical or otherwise. One of the reasons I blog is that much of the alt-right is completely unserious, but some are serious and I'm interested in engaging with and finding them. And also helping SAHMs out. I have had some success with the latter, not sure about the former.


I read MPC, we are in parallel tracks on many issues, and it's interesting that I, also a conservative housewife, have very different views towards engagement with them and other harder-edges of alt-right compared to Lydia. But I also am younger and have little kids and spent my adulthood in internet culture much more than she has, so I have a very different view of the alt-right.

Crude said...

I'm a little out of my depth here - running into names I've not seen, about conversations I have not taken part in - but I suspect the talk of alt-right patriarchy may be related to the historical pagans. Romans and all that.

Then again, I'm out of this loop. The only pagans I've ever seen are tubby, soft-bearded gents playing Magic: The Gathering. Perhaps it's different elsewhere.

The Practical Conservative said...

I think Mike is speaking more symbolically, because rly, I don't think anyone at Return of Kings is a Roman-reconstruction-style pagan.

Bonald, among others, though, who are not pagan but have the same difficulty re: patriarchy, has talked about being "for patriarchy", but he only meant husbands in isolated nuclear families, which is not patriarchy at all.