• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

An excellent article in the Atlantic, an interview with a conservative ideolog, deranged by the fact he believes he knows what the truth is.

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,650
4,258
126

We see here a massive case of projection, ones inner state of madness projected out onto others and the terrible feeling of threat and challenge it creates. He speaks of a Christian nation as fundamental to understanding the constitutional government given to us by our forefathers point to inalienable rights granted by our Creator, as if he himself had any idea who the Creator is. In this way he reveals his hidden from self inner bigotry. He can see only his own form of demented truth because he has made the unconscious assumption that his truth comes from God, the one he in his infinite arrogance imagines exists. He knows nothing but believes he does. That defines a fanatic.

From the arrogance of self flattery that he has capacity to see the truth, he manufactures the very truth that matches the bigotry he was inculcated with by conservative culture and all the mental illness that accompanies it. The fear of punishment creates the fear of future punishment and leads to Stockholm syndrome.

We saw all of this in Nazi Germany.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
29,563
14,194
136

We see here a massive case of projection, ones inner state of madness projected out onto others and the terrible feeling of threat and challenge it creates. He speaks of a Christian nation as fundamental to understanding the constitutional government given to us by our forefathers point to inalienable rights granted by our Creator, as if he himself had any idea who the Creator is. In this way he reveals his hidden from self inner bigotry. He can see only his own form of demented truth because he has made the unconscious assumption that his truth comes from God, the one he in his infinite arrogance imagines exists. He knows nothing but believes he does. That defines a fanatic.

From the arrogance of self flattery that he has capacity to see the truth, he manufactures the very truth that matches the bigotry he was inculcated with by conservative culture and all the mental illness that accompanies it. The fear of punishment creates the fear of future punishment and leads to Stockholm syndrome.

We saw all of this in Nazi Germany.
Change "he" to "she" and I'd swear you were talking about my mother.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
18,499
5,633
136
Love the author's last comment.

Green: I’ll look for that the next time I read the Claremont Review of Books—that effort to make sure our temperatures are lowered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gothuevos

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
49,051
10,560
136
That person is not trying to "save" western civilization. He is trying to preserve a status quo of white protestant christian elites, like himself, being in power and control of western civilization. And he is in full damage control mode.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
29,563
14,194
136
That person is not trying to "save" western civilization. He is trying to preserve a status quo of white protestant christian elites, like himself, being in power and control of western civilization. And he is in full damage control mode.
I don't know about the damage control part, but he is a fucking lunatic just like every other conservative I've ever encountered.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
49,051
10,560
136
I don't know about the damage control part, but he is a fucking lunatic just like every other conservative I've ever encountered.
The interviewer did a very good job of uncovering the dishonesty and irrationality of his positions.
Which are that America is divided, worse so than during the Civil War (objectively false), that the division is because only white Christians are capable of understanding the Founders' true intentions for the Constitution (objectively false), that the people who disagree with him and oppose him are all authoritarians (childish), that he's "ambivalent" to the questions of race and religion, but that blacks are inherently violent and non-christians are incapable of understanding the Constitution (both objectively false), these non-white and/or non-christian Americans are not "real Americans" (objectively false), and thus it would not be unconstitutional to forcibly deny them of voice and power in govt (objectively false). And finally, that he is in no way responsible for or accountable to the rising radicalism and extremism on the right (straight up Pinnochio), but here's some veiled threats of violent civil war.
Let me know if I missed anything.
 

Franz316

Senior member
Sep 12, 2000
895
260
136
Wow that was quite a read. That guy is completely insane, and unfortunately has many others like him. There is no good faith dialog when dealing with someone in this mindset. Their egos and beliefs have merged into one, so you can't change one without destroying the other. Their minds can't handle that.

At this point conservatives have more in common with the Taliban than they do with other Americans.
 
Last edited:

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
29,563
14,194
136
The interviewer did a very good job of uncovering the dishonesty and irrationality of his positions.
Which are that America is divided, worse so than during the Civil War (objectively false), that the division is because only white Christians are capable of understanding the Founders' true intentions for the Constitution (objectively false), that the people who disagree with him and oppose him are all authoritarians (childish), that he's "ambivalent" to the questions of race and religion, but that blacks are inherently violent and non-christians are incapable of understanding the Constitution (both objectively false), these non-white and/or non-christian Americans are not "real Americans" (objectively false), and thus it would not be unconstitutional to forcibly deny them of voice and power in govt (objectively false). And finally, that he is in no way responsible for or accountable to the rising radicalism and extremism on the right (straight up Pinnochio), but here's some veiled threats of violent civil war.
Let me know if I missed anything.
Let's see, how about this gem:
"I would say the leading edge of progressivism now is this kind of woke, social-justice anti-racism. It’s a threat to limited government because it seems to take its lead from scholars like Ibram Kendi ..."

Which politician at the federal level is taking their lead from Kendi?

Or saying this same thing several times in a pretty short article:
"... definition of racism is any policy that results in disparate outcomes for different groups."

Classic straw man.

Or this exchange which you touched on:
Green: Let’s take one concrete policy example. The prison system in the United States disproportionately incarcerates Black men. Reasons for this include laws around sentencing, such as three-strike rules, or the possession of certain drugs being punished more harshly than others. This is an area of policy where the left and the right disagree, fundamentally, about the role race has played in the creation of the current carceral system.

So I guess the question is, in your vision of America, is this a problem? And is it a problem caused by racism?

Williams: It would depend on what is driving the disparate results. We would have to separate out the extent to which sentencing is truly discriminatory—and it ought not to be, if it is—and the extent to which the high incarceration rate of Black Americans is due to their much higher propensity to commit violent crime.

Until we can talk about that—if we can acknowledge that on the left and the right—it would be a wonderful starting point to try to dig into some of the issues you’re talking about, like the different classification of drugs being more associated with one group or another. ...
Motherfucker can't even acknowledge that it is discriminatory.

I used to HATE the phrase DIAF. I thought it was just so horrid, mostly because it was used by kids in trivial situations, and they weren't actually thinking through what a horrific death it would be. But this asshole and everyone like him can DIAF.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
49,051
10,560
136
What I always find weird about these types is how completely unaware they are of how far their heads are up their asses. He's against the "elites," but he's president of a powerful and wealthy thinktank. He sees identity politics as a threat, while asserting that only his identity is capable of being a real American. And discrimination should absolutely be rooted out, if it exists, which he doubts, now let's go back to how he wants to discriminate against people.
It's easy to see people like him as evil, especially when the logical result of their ideas is certainly harmful (if not violent, with veiled threats), but I've come to realize that they're just blind idiots. Often very intelligent blind idiots, but idiots nonetheless.
And no, that doesn't make it better than being evil, it's actually worse.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
49,051
10,560
136
Let's see, how about this gem:
"I would say the leading edge of progressivism now is this kind of woke, social-justice anti-racism. It’s a threat to limited government because it seems to take its lead from scholars like Ibram Kendi ..."

Which politician at the federal level is taking their lead from Kendi?

Or saying this same thing several times in a pretty short article:
"... definition of racism is any policy that results in disparate outcomes for different groups."

Classic straw man.

Or this exchange which you touched on:


Motherfucker can't even acknowledge that it is discriminatory.

I used to HATE the phrase DIAF. I thought it was just so horrid, mostly because it was used by kids in trivial situations, and they weren't actually thinking through what a horrific death it would be. But this asshole and everyone like him can DIAF.
I enjoyed how the interviewer fired right back with, "But certain crimes are more likely to be seen by the state, right?" (the actual reason for the disparity), and the douchebag fell back on his straw man that equal rights was the same as expecting equal outcomes.
It is so much BS. Clowns like him are more communist than any leftist. And the reason why is that because while a far-leftist might expect equal outcomes for everyone, he expects a superior outcome for himself and those like him, regardless of merit. Equal opportunity for everyone is the last thing he wants, because then it would be equally probable for non-white non-Christians to have power in this country as white Christians.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
18,499
5,633
136
The interviewer did a very good job of uncovering the dishonesty and irrationality of his positions.
Which are that America is divided, worse so than during the Civil War (objectively false), that the division is because only white Christians are capable of understanding the Founders' true intentions for the Constitution (objectively false), that the people who disagree with him and oppose him are all authoritarians (childish), that he's "ambivalent" to the questions of race and religion, but that blacks are inherently violent and non-christians are incapable of understanding the Constitution (both objectively false), these non-white and/or non-christian Americans are not "real Americans" (objectively false), and thus it would not be unconstitutional to forcibly deny them of voice and power in govt (objectively false). And finally, that he is in no way responsible for or accountable to the rising radicalism and extremism on the right (straight up Pinnochio), but here's some veiled threats of violent civil war.
Let me know if I missed anything.
Nicely captured.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vic

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
18,499
5,633
136
Wow that was quite a read. That guy is completely insane, and unfortunately has many others like him. There is no good faith dialog when dealing with someone in this mindset. Their egos and beliefs have merged into one, so you can't change one without destroying the other. Their minds can't handle that.

At this point conservatives have more in common with the Taliban than they do with other Americans.
They continue to believe a mythology of what America really is. And in the process doom it to overthrow since we can never change anything.
 

WelshBloke

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
28,313
5,372
126
On a slightly different but related note.

I totally don't understand the almost religious reliance on the constitution as the arbitrator of all that's immutably right. It's like people don't understand what the word "amendment" means in all the important bits they shout about.
 
  • Love
Reactions: DarthKyrie

ASK THE COMMUNITY