Recently Michael Wilbon, sports journalist, caused a stir with his reaction to Bruce Pearl stepping down as Auburn's basketball head coach. Wilbon said he was glad and he hoped the school pressured him to leave. Why did Wilbon say this? Because Pearl became more vocal about his conservative Christian beliefs. Wilbon called that divisive.
This response caused some more conservative sport reporters to challenge Wilbon's take. They claim that Wilbon isn't saying keep politics out of sport, as he constantly cheers for pushed liberal politics.
I've seen a great many leftist respond calling the right leaning reporters hypocritical for cheering on Pearl's positions, while saying keep politics out of sports. This seems like a tactic of the left. Shift the Overton sharply to the left, the right responds can't we leave politics out of things, they are mocked and accussed of privilege. Eventually some righty will push back a little and the left will cry, see you said keep politics out of things but hear you are supporting politics.
And it usually works.
this is the core of it right here. any pushback is considered "divisive", as if pushback is fringe.
It has been the tactic since since the dawn of liberalism, of the Rousseau variety. The liberal elites decide what the 'general will' is and what defines the new normal for society. Any deviation from that makes you a wrong thinker and enemy of the people. In marxist rhetoric this is called being reactionary even if you're just calling for a return to the previous normal.
They may even call you a counterrevolutionary wrecker and saboteur.
“Reactionary” is the most comically self-serving political label in existence because it implies that people are somehow automatically wrong for reacting to aggression. Marxism is deliberately subversive. It is an incursion. It demands reaction.
I'm reading Rousseau at the moment and it seems his idea of the general will is something like whatever gets unanimous agreement. Not very practical in the real world, but it certainly doesn't sound like something a subgroup of the population get to determine.
In 'unanimous' decisions, often the majority kicks out the minority who voted the wrong way until they get a unanimous decision. This happens in academia. Consensus is reached when we kick out the quacks.
In practice, in national politics, how could it ever be decided? Only 10% ever do anything. Naturally I subscribe to elite theory. People don't revolt. The elites rally the population to do what they want. Don't forget that Rosseau is writing to convince the people of his generation.
Is there any evidence Rousseau intended such a state of affairs?
The reactions to the killing of Charlie Kirk hopefully woke up normies to the fact that these people generally do not argue in good faith. Words are magic spells to them etc etc.
The only way to win is to fight fire with fire. Leftoids will constantly work to undermine anyone in any position of power or authority, even if it is as trivial as a basketball coach, if they are known to espouse traditional or conservative values. The same must be done in reverse.
I recently saw a clip of Destiny on Pierce Morgan. Andrew Wilson was holding Destiny’s feet to the fire regarding leftist political violence, and Destiny implied that Trump was somehow responsible for the (paraphrasing) greatest civil unrest in American history.
Because the George Floyd riots occurred during Trump’s presidency.
So in the minds of leftists, the right is still responsible for leftist violence even if it’s by din of winning elections and implementing conservative policy. When leftists lose elections and chimp out, that violence is still essentially “right wing” because it was “caused” by conservatives legally attaining political and cultural power.
Literally nothing is ever leftists’ fault. They are metaphysically good, so anything they do wrong is actually the fault of their enemies somehow.
These are the strategies of children. Such people are not capable of governance. Only tyranny.
It's just bad faith. It's as simple as that.
🌎🧑🚀🔫🧑🚀
Happening en masse since Kirk was murdered. All of a sudden leftoid cockroaches don't like cancelling people and getting them fired for their shit opinions.
Who gives a fuck what they think. Continue fucking them over until it all comes to a head and lead starts getting launched.
Your metaphorical options are:
you burn while leftists celebrate
everyone burns while leftists cry
Gee, tough choice.
they set the rules of engagement, they just thought the enemy would never get into their bunker.
It is amazing, to me, that this tactic still works today, as progressives have been running this program for at least 3 decades now, and nominal right wing people still fall for it, again and again.
This is exactly what they did in video games as well.
"My beliefs aren't politics, my beliefs are just being a decent human being. YOU are the one being divisive when you respond to my political diatribes."
The Distributist said something similar on his last livestream, on the subject of the accusations of hypocrisy over the cancellations. Something like "When the left wins, they get cancel culture, but when the right is in control, we're supposed to get nothing?" I think it's a useful way to frame it, focusing on the consequences rather than the dishonest accusations of hypocrisy.
Besides, it's not hypocrisy to hit bullies back.
Leftists are mad that the right is “weaponizing” Charlie Kirk’s assassination in order to advance the right wing agenda. Apparently, when one of our most effective people is murdered by them in cold blood, we’re not supposed to benefit from it in any way. It’s supposed to be an utter defeat and total loss on our part. Anything more than that is “gross”.
There was a leftist college student who gave away the game on video during an informal debate. She said that her greatest fear was that people would react “incorrectly” to Charlie’s murder by promoting his beliefs. She was admitting that she thinks his beliefs should have been defeated by his assassination. This is nothing short of a full-throated endorsement of political violence with maybe 1-2 extra steps.
They can't seem to grasp that using cancelation against them is the peaceful option and there are only 2 options at the moment
Shitlibs only ever say and do that which is most expedient to further their aims in the current moment. Never forget this.
True Christianity and Progressivism are two separate religions. Stop treating them like they are your people and everything will make more sense. Treat them instead like they are a rival faith and people, an enemy, and it makes more sense.
Correct. Leftists are as morally and politically alien as Muslims.
Leftism is an atheistic religion. They are one and the same
Nah, we're past the point of keeping politics out of culture. Culture is the battleground and we need to start fighting back