Donald Trump

Donald Trump and the Sad Triumph of Right-Wing Political Correctness

The president isn't attacking P.C., as he once promised. He's sanctioned its use among his followers.

|

Time.com

Back at the 2015 event at which Donald Trump announced his bid for the presidency, his daughter Ivanka introduced her father as, first and foremost, an implacable foe of political correctness. "My father is the opposite of politically correct. He says what he means and he means what he says," she said, shortly before Trump characterized Mexican immigrants as disease-ridden, drug-smuggling rapists ("Some, I assume, are good people," he granted). In the first Republican primary debate, held in August of 2015, Trump himself reiterated that being anti-P.C. would be the hallmark of his political life, declaring, "I don't frankly have time for total political correctness."

It's ironic, then, that perhaps Trump's greatest accomplishment so far as president is to make it OK—or maybe even mandatory—for his followers to engage in the worst excesses of political correctness, especially its attempts to shut down debate and heterodox opinions through bullying, appeals to ad hominem attacks, and unthinking "whataboutism."

Among the Trump faithful, there are never legitimate grounds upon which to disagree with anything the billionaire says or does. If Barack Obama's most strident defenders were sometimes quick to claim any criticism of him was racist, thereby delegitimating honest disagreement, Trump's supporters are equally quick to denounce any dissent as proof positive of secret membership in Antifa, a pro-Hillary voting record, or a desperate attempt to look good among the communists who run the much-discussed-yet-little-seen Washington, D.C. cocktail party circuit.

And thus it has come to pass that the president of these United States, who hates political correctness at his very core, didn't "frankly have time" to immediately and unambiguously denounce by name violent right-wing protesters in Charlottesville, Virginia who last week carried torches and Nazi flags (complete with swastikas) around town while chanting "Jews will not replace us" and the Hitlerian slogan of "blood and soil." Sure, Trump had time to talk to the public. But even after a car ran into a crowd of counter-protesters, killing one and injuring 19 others, the president only issued a statement vaguely condemning "this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides, on many sides." Reportedly pushed by advisers, including his daughter Ivanka, he eventually called out the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, and white supremacists specifically and boldly averred that "racism is evil, and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs." Within a few hours of delivering those remarks to generally poor reviews, even among his fellow Republicans and conservatives, the president whined via Twitter that "once again the #Fake News Media will never be satisfied…truly bad people!"

But the president wasn't finished with disquisitions on Charlottesville. He called a press conference on August 15 at which he rendered his second, explicitly anti-Nazi statement inoperative by stressing the presence and violence of left-wing protesters, the bias of the media, and the pressing need to preserve statues commemorating Confederate war heroes (a cause that was not mentioned in the posters recruiting protesters for the Unite the Right rally).

IMGFLIP.com

As Allahpundit of the conservative site Hot Air summarized:

Short of [Trump] overtly endorsing the alt-right, which he can't do (I think?), I don't know what more he could have said here to make them happy. He stressed that not everyone who was at the demonstration in front of the Robert E. Lee statue on Friday night was a white nationalist, that some perfectly decent people were part of the group. This group? The one carrying torches and chanting things like "blood and soil" and "Jews will not replace us"?

Trump's last comments on the matter drew praise from former KKK leader David Duke, who tweeted "Thank you President Trump for your honesty & courage to tell the truth about #Charlottesville & condemn the leftist terrorists in BLM/Antifa," and ethno-nationalist Richard Spencer, who texted The Atlantic's Rosie Gray to gush, "Really proud of him."

Is it politically correct to expect the president of the United States to unequivocally denounce the racial theories and violence of neo-Nazis and white supremacists? For Donald Trump and his supporters, the answer is unambiguously yes and so even libertarian critics of the president who are unsurpassed in their contempt for collectivist racial theories and their defense of free speech (something Trump himself is not so good on) must be attacked for calling out Nazis as stupid, bigoted, and, well, definitionally un-American (didn't we fight a war against Nazism?). Don't you understand, Trump's supporters insist, that we need to fight progressives with the same tactics they use? If you hold him to basic standards of decency, competence, or comportment, they continue, you're as bad as the left (typically defined as libertarian-leaning Republican Sen. Jeff Flake and anyone to his left).

That sort of thinking may keep Trump happy and insulated in the Oval Office and his fans energized and ill-tempered online, but it also means there will over time be fewer and fewer of them. In fact, Trump's approval ratings, never good to begin with, continue to set negative records. According to Marist, just 35 percent of Americans approve of the job he is doing and his support among Republicans has dropped 12 percentage points since June, to a new low of 79 percent. It seems unlikely that Republicans, who voted overwhelmingly for him, would be bamboozled by media bias, doesn't it? Perhaps Trump's falling approval rating has less to do with President Obama, the press, or the supposed power of Black Lives Matter to somehow cloud our minds and more to do with his inability to get much of anything done, to turn around the economy (the recent claim that he created an "unprecedented" number of jobs in the first six months of his presidency is flatly wrong), or to speak bluntly and honestly to the American people. On that last score, a recent poll for CNN found that just "36% of respondents said Trump was honest and trustworthy, while 60% answered that the description 'does not apply.'"

Yeah, yeah, I hear you already, Trump's P.C. loyalists: CNN is biased, what about all the people killed by Black Lives Matter at its rallies (zero, in truth), your gal HILLARY CLINTON would have been worse, why aren't you condemning Antifa and left-wing violence (been there, done that, and will continue to do so)!?!?

You are playing not a dangerous game so much as a losing one (as Trump's adviser Steve Bannon says, the alt-right is filled with "losers" and "clowns"). "The Left" is hardly ascendant in American life, especially if you use the imprecise measure of the number of Democrats who hold office in the United States; certainly Democrats in Congress aren't the reason why the GOP and the president can't produce balanced budgets, entitlement reform, or market-oriented health-care legislation. (Of course, from a libertarian viewpoint, we've got plenty of statists around, but they hail from all points on the conventional political spectrum, and that's a different argument altogether.)

Confidence in major American institutions (including the presidency and Congress, held by the GOP) are at or near historic lows and Trump's brain farts on Twitter and at press conferences aren't the tonic needed to change any of that. You're forgetting that most Americans actively despise left-wing political correctness for all the ways that it chokes off even the possibility of meaningful debate about all sorts of issues that matter to us all. Far from wanting a right-wing variant that squelches discussions before they can even get going, we want a social sphere we can talk honestly, work toward common ground, and agree to disagree.

You're not offering any of that, which helps explain why your man in the White House's numbers are sinking. Nor are you offering a positive vision of the future. Instead, you're merely standing athwart over Confederate statues, free trade, and economic innovation, and continuing ethnic diversification yelling Stop! Good luck with all that, but when you fail, please remember not to blame anyone but yourselves. For a change.

Related Video: "Trump Denounces Racism in Charlottesville. Too Little, Too Late."

Advertisement

NEXT: Ultra-Orthodox Judaism, a wife concluding that she is lesbian, and child custody

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Uh-oh.

    Does this mean Nick really does read the comments and just pretends to be too cool?

    1. Trump’s supporters are equally quick to denounce any dissent as proof positive of secret membership in Antifa, a pro-Hillary voting record, or a desperate attempt to look good among the communists who run the much-discussed-yet-little-seen Washington, D.C. cocktail party circuit.

      I know, right.

      1. That circuit involves actual cocks and real tails.

    2. He is on Twitter. And probably has to look at the facebook page from time to time.

  2. “The president isn’t attacking P.C., as he once promised. He’s sanctioned its use among his followers.”

    I for one am sickened by Trump’s P.C.
    Why doesn’t he just say what he really thinks?

    1. The thing is, Trump is constantly shifting on positions or pandering to people. What in the past would have been called “flip flopping” is now “4D chess.”

      1. Is anyone worth listening to calling it 4d chess?

        I ask because only the true sycophants called Obama’s plays 4d chess, and they were roundly ridiculed.

        1. It’s routinely called that (or something to that effect) by his followers online.

          It’s not so much the title, it’s the fact that his supporters often justify him being contradictory and/or vague by saying it’s ok because it’s some part of a masterplan to piss off the media and the left, or distract from something else.

          1. The underlying problem being that his politics, which is the politics of the Republican party even if other members are less vulgar and insane, contains no actual policy ideas, but is entirely an exercise in blowing raspberries at perceived enemies, usually liberals.

            I am not one who thinks there ever was a great tradition of conservatism in this country (it’s always been racist and reactionary), but it’s not even pretending anymore.

          2. “It’s routinely called that (or something to that effect) by his followers online.”

            And they qualify as people worth listening to in your world?

            1. No, they don’t. I wasn’t arguing they were, sorry if that was confusing.

              1. Then my original question stands.

                1. I just answered your original question. What are you referring to?

                  1. “Is anyone worth listening to calling it 4d chess?”

                    I don’t believe you did answer that.

                    And it was my original question.

                    1. Ok I looked at a post lower down, and you kinf of addressed it and ageeed that no, no one worth listening to is saying it.

        2. Is anyone worth listening to calling it 4d chess?

          Plenty of his sycophants, but they’re not worth listening to, so no.

          I ask because only the true sycophants called Obama’s plays 4d chess, and they were roundly ridiculed.

          The irony is that many of the people who ridiculed Obama’s sycophants for doing it are now the ones claiming that Trump’s the 4d chess master. I also find it ironic that a lot of Trump’s most slavishly devoted cultists also used to rip on Obama’s cultists as “brain dead Obamatons” yet they unthinkingly soak up everything Trump spews at them every bit as much as those “brain dead Obamtons” slurped up Obama’s. Even as cynical as I am, I find myself surprised by the rank hypocrisy and total lack of self awareness put on display daily by partisan mouth breathers of all stripes.

        3. Is anyone worth listening to calling it 4d chess?

          I ask because only the true sycophants called Obama’s plays 4d chess, and they were roundly ridiculed.

          No. No one worth listening to is saying it. It’s said by journalists and others on the left to try to equate Trump supporters with Obama fanatics actually.

          Occasionally it is used facetiously to antagonize journalists and others on the left in much the same way that most words are used these days.

      2. I thought it was less flip-flopping then that Trump has the attention span of a goldfish and cannot always remember what his last thought was on a particular issue.

        1. It’s probably a little of column A and a little of column B. I just find the hypocrisy from his followers who insist he always means what he says to be obvious.

          I’ve also seen this defense (he’s just saying that to get attention, distract, piss off, etc.) for some of his more outrageous comments that some of his followers don’t want to defend.

          1. Why are you spending so much time on people you already agreed aren’t worth listening to.

            There are reasons they aren’t worth listening to, and the things you mentioned are among them.

            1. They’re not worth listening to, but considering they form the base of support for the current President of the United States, they aren’t irrelevant.

              1. But you keep bringing up WHAT THEY SAY and the ARGUMENTS THEY MAKE, as though they have ANY credibility.

                No one said they were irrelevant. Just not worth trying to have a conversation with.

                1. Ok? What is your point? Because they aren’t worthy of a conversation, I can’t bring up their hypocrisy?

  3. “the recent claim that he created an “unprecedented” number of jobs in the first six months of his presidency is flatly wrong”

    How can something undefined be flatly wrong.

    1. microaggressions?

      /I’m just spitballing

      1. I guess what I’m saying is, what metric is Leatherskin using, and, why does he think that’s the metric Trump would use.

        Because Trump could easily just say “has anyone ever done what Obama did” or something similar, and be technically correct.

  4. “Is it politically correct to expect the president of the United States to unequivocally denounce the racial theories and violence of neo-Nazis and white supremacists?”

    No, it’s not.

    At the same time, completely separate from Trump’s own checkered history on race, there are some ‘libertarians’ who have indeed fully embraced identity politics and I think a lot of people do find that to be hypocritical. This is not to distract from Nick’s point which is generally correct.

    1. Is it politically correct to expect that everyone in government to respect the First Amendment and let people judge what constitutes repulsive beliefs?

      I can make my own judgement and don’t really need the President or any politician to tell me what to think. I’m far more concerned about a large-scale movement of people with a mission of shutting down free-speech than I am about a couple hundred neo-nazi types who actually played by the rules and got themselves a permit.

      1. This is the first comment I vehemently agree with. I thought Reason was a Libertarian publication, but I’m starting to see too much left versus right in both the articles and the comments. After reading this article, I’m not sure that Nick knows what politically correct even means. Political correctness is anti-free speech since it tells people they have to speak in a manner that is unoffensive rather than speaking their minds (which may be offensive). By standing up for free speech for anyone, regardless of whether he agrees or not, the President has condemned political correctness.

    1. barf

  5. That’s a whole lotta words to VIRTUE SIGNAL.

    1. Way to make Nick’s point. Do you have an actual argument to make to the contrary (essentially, do you have a theory of the case where Trump ISN’T doing these things?), or do you just have – as Nick said – “bullying, appeals to ad hominem attacks, and unthinking “whataboutism”?

      Argue the point at hand. Don’t turn this in to an argument about the argument.

      1. Here’s my point, I refuse to get outraged over Trump’s words or lack there of.

        1. Will you get outraged (or maybe just mildly putout) by the objectively shitty job he’s doing?

          1. I’m no longer outraged by shitty presidents, I’ve become numb to it.

            1. Yep. All of these idiots on here acting like there’s a snow balls chance in hell we’re going to have a president who obeys the constitution in our life times.

          2. Prove to me that he’s doing a shitty job without once using value judgments or any reference to moral arguments, and I will entertain the possibility that maybe you are not virtue signalling. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not defending Trump or what he’s done, but if you want to convince me that he’s done anything bad it better be so Rational and objective that Mr. Spock would blush. I have a nose for TDS poppycock.

            1. I will graciously accept your deft turn of the tables: this was supposed to be you making your case. If you indeed think Nick’s article is wrong, I’d like to hear your case for Trump and his followers NOT engaging in their own version of sycophantic “political correctness” afterwards.

              In any case, it’s more about what he hasn’t done than what he has:
              – He failed to achieve, or even begin to achieve, any of his policy proposals (such as they were). In some cases he has made it even more difficult to achieve what he said he wanted to achieve (see: Muslim Ban, healthcare)
              – Despite not having done anything of substance, he continues to bleed popularity. It is common for a president to trade “political capital” for legislative achievements. Trump is pissing away whatever political capital he may have had while NOT getting anything passed. This is strongly indicative of serious PR missteps.
              – The well-documented and very public spats and firings with his various advisers has led to Trump relying on a quickly shrinking amount of people, several of which are notably related to him and incidentally completely ill-equipped. This should be concerning to anyone who wishes for a functional Executive Branch.

              I agree that a lot of the breathless coverage of Trump is noisy (even if I wish we had a POTUS with the propriety to not do this shit), but I find it increasingly difficult to see why anyone with an interest beyond pissing off liberals would still support this guy.

              1. Counterpoint i/r/t his achievements via the Atlantic

                High level: border crossings continue to decline despite no wall, Gorsuch on SCOTUS, placing young, consevatives on lower courts in record numbers, and other executive actions, often rollbacks of Obama’s

                http://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/535458/

      2. MJ is parodying what the Trump apologists say (because he’s a regular here). Of course it’s telling that what should be an over-the-top satire of what these knuckledraggers say is indistinguishable from the real thing.

        1. THAT is an over the top satire to you?

          JFC…

      3. He made Gillespie’s point, but Gillespie’s point is also kind of stupid and self-serving

  6. Among the Trump faithful, there are never legitimate grounds upon which to disagree with anything the billionaire says or does.

    Tautology is tautological.

    1. The same holds true for those who worship Obama (or the left wing ideology to be exact) as well. It’s like comparing alligators to crocodiles when you don’t want either in your swimming pool!

  7. Uh-oh – riling up the fart-sniffers brigade. The comments section will be a bloody free-for-all today.

  8. “or a desperate attempt to look good among the communists who run the much-discussed-yet-little-seen Washington, D.C. cocktail party circuit.”

    *giggles into his cocktail

    1. I just assumed Nick was distinctly not notified about the change of ownership!

      1. Now, that’s over-the-top satire.

        I hope.

  9. There’s a lot of good points here – except for the fact that it’s Nazis on all sides and this is what “burn it all down” looks like. For somebody who believes there’s no longer anything worth saving, that only a small handful of people still believe in the principles this nation was founded on, all you can do is laugh to keep from crying over these rats fighting over a corpse. They all want power, they all want to be in charge of the machinery of government but the machinery is broken and rusted and the wheels are falling off. $20 trillion in debt that’s never going to be paid and the fools still want more spending. A police state that goes after the petty criminals because it can’t do shit about the big ones, and they want more laws and more criminals. Massive government programs to order our lives and not a damn one of them works and they want more programs. Endless military meddling that makes bad situations worse, and they want more interventions. Cities and states teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, its over-taxed citizens fleeing because the government’s top priority is to feed itself and there’s still this fantasy that government exists to serve the people rather than the other way around.

    1. I’ve about given up hope that any appreciable number of people are going to come to their senses and realize that government is the source of many of their problems, that government is power and power has its own agenda, that our founding fathers were wiser than you know when they sought to limit the power of government. Trying to fix things inevitably makes things worse, go do your own thing and leave everybody else alone. Except for the people who keep trying to fix things by dragooning you into helping fix things – those people need a severe beating. And unfortunately at this point, that’s just about everybody. Everybody can go to hell as far as I’m concerned, have fun on the trip, motherfuckers.

      1. Kinda sums up my thoughts. I find it amusing how outraged people are over Trump’s responses/equivocation. They certainly seem more outraged over words than the actual murder of the woman.

      2. Trump is not the cause of all this shit, all this shit is what caused Trump. Try to wrap your head around the fact that Donald Fucking Trump is president. A crazy-ass retarded baboon got himself elected president of this place, proof positive this is the sort of place that will elect a crazy-ass retarded baboon president. And you know why we elected a crazy-ass retarded baboon president? It’s because a crazy-ass retarded baboon was the best option we had. You really think there’s anything worth saving?

        1. Actually he was by far the worst option of all available in 2016 and probably the worst option of all candidates who’ve ever run (but who’s counting at that point?).

          It’s just that Hillary had a (D) after her name, cankles, and a private email account, you know.

          1. And the Ds in Mich, Wisc, PA etc decided not to show up for her. Weird.

          2. If you ignore her long history of incompetence and corruption, then yes, that was all.

            1. Out of the two of them, only one had a former KKK member as a mentor.

              1. Trump’s father was arrested at a KKK rally bro. That little disingenuous dumbass talking point just got awkward.

                1. Based on an article from 1927, with no available police records. And wasn’t charged, nor was there proof he was a member or even necessarily part of the riot.

                  http://www.snopes.com/donald-t…..-kkk-1927/

                  1. Well OK then only Hillary is the one with secret ties to the KKK then, since you brought it up. That’s a totally plausible and reasonable accusation to make considering especially that Trump is all over the news giving cover to Nazis.

                    1. Give cover: “Racism is evil and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to all that we hold dear as Americans.”

                    2. An under-duress statement that he later totally bitched about having to make.

                      You’re the one accusing HRC of being a secret KKK member so why don’t you shut the fuck up with your parsing?

                    3. So where’s the cover again?

                    4. “There was violence on both sides. Also the statue defender side had some really terrific people.”

          3. Tony|8.18.17 @ 1:25PM|#

            Actually he was by far the worst option of all available in 2016 and probably the worst option of all candidates who’ve ever run (but who’s counting at that point?).

            It’s just that Hillary had a (D) after her name, cankles, and a private email account, you know.

            Fuck you Tony and fuck your gun grabbing commie queen Hillary Clinton.

            Your socialist god FDR appointed Hugo Black, a klan member to the supreme court. When will you disavow FDR, your racist socialist god?

            No, I did not vote for Trump. Fuck you leftist scum bags and your fucking centralized socialist state. YOU fucking leftists fucked up the USA. Fuck all of you!

        2. Nick’s just upset that Trump’s tweets are the only thing standing between us and The Libertarian Moment.

        3. ^This ( and your comments above and below, thank you).

          1. aimed at Jerryskids (not sure if that got lost)

      3. IDK. I think Trump has done a near masterful job of diminishing the office of the Prez itself – and that has for a century (prob since Teddy R) been the biggest obstacle to effecting the sort of change you’re talking about. Now it might take a few more elected halfwits before all the many sides of stupid stop looking for the pony of charisma hidden in the pile of manure. But at least the way forward is there now.

        1. I’m not getting my hopes up. I’d like to be more optimistic, but I bet that a “normal” president will be elected in 2020 and we’ll get back to the same old shit.

    2. Actually there were real Nazis on one side and the other side was protesting the Nazis. But WHATEVER.

      1. Real Nazis had better equipment than tiki torches and bike helmets.

        1. Not at first.

          1. No, even at first.

            1. Well do I look worried? Our fascism is supposed to come bearing a bible and flag, and Trump is not only not a Christian and is a Russian stooge, he doesn’t seem to care all that much about pretending otherwise.

      2. There was no “other” side. Fascists vs. Communists is just a single group of jack-booted thugs arguing amongst themselves over whether you stomp people in the face with the left foot or the right.

        1. socialist on all sides to be clear….
          national socialists, international socialists it’s socialist all the way down

        2. There were two sides. It’s just that both are worthless.

          It’s just “everyone who doesn’t agree with me about everything is a goddamn communist” thinking. Both sides are stupid, identity politics collectivists. But they differ.

          Too much binary thinking all around. It’s not us and them. It’s us and them and them and them…

          1. It’s you and me against the world, Zebby.

        3. Except for the fact that one side wanted those in charge to be of a particular skin color and the other didn’t care what color that was, they both have the same ideology – totalitarian socialism.

      3. Tony|8.18.17 @ 1:11PM|#

        Actually there were real Nazis on one side and the other side was protesting the Nazis. But WHATEVER.

        Fuck you Tony, you fucking commie scum. And fuck your Karl Marx and your Che t-shirt.

      4. The difference between Nazis and Anarcho-Communists is a matter of rhetoric.

    3. $20 trillion in debt, yet fools still want more military spending, and to give away even more to the rich in tax cuts and corporate welfare, to ensure that the debt can never be paid. To make our government solvent, restore the tax rates on the rich we had in the 1950s, stop bombing countries that have not bombed us, stop trying to install governments in other countries, and legalize drugs (drastically cutting government expenditures, increasing personal freedom, and providing a strong new source of revenue).

  10. “There are no racists, Donald Trump is basically Jesus, and black people just need to stop being lazy. I’m not sure what the deal is with the Jews.”

    –practically every commenter at your website

    1. ….C’mon man. Is that necessary?

      1. Absolutely not.

      2. It is not. But he can’t help himself.

    2. Right. HR, Stormfront, no difference. None at all.

      1. “No difference.” Hmm, where have I heard that before ad nauseum? Oh yeah, nearly every commenter here discussing the two sides of the protest in Charlottesville.

        1. So you spend an inordinate amount if your time at a site that is essentially no different than Stormfront?

          1. He doesn’t understand.

          2. I am the neoconfederate fairy. I attempt to cleanse libertarianism of its neoconfederates, and they leave me a dollar.

        2. They should be ashamed of themselves for such complex thinking.

    3. I’m curious to know if you honestly don’t understand what you read here or if you do understand but refuse to engage. Could you possibly clear that up?

      1. Pretty sure he just wants cake.

      2. It’s what I don’t read, namely, swift and multiple condemnations of the right-wing racist freaks much in the way you’re so quick to condemn me for not wanting poor children to die from easily curable diseases.

        1. If you’re talking about condemning them for their racist ideology, it’s been done ad nauseum. Stop lying.

          If you’re talking about condemning them for the temerity to speak, you can find that, but probably not at a libertarian hangout.

        2. Tony, we can’t argue with the trolls we want; we argue with the trolls we have.

    4. If Donald Trump is Jesus, then the Jews are all right, I guess? Since they share Donald?s ethnicity.

    5. Yet the other side goes “There are no non-white racists, Donald Trump is basically Hitler, and white people just need to stop using this 500-page list of words we don’t approve of.”

      Also, you sure you’re describing this site and not Breitfart?

  11. That meme is pretty funny.

  12. Do we WANT confidence in government institutions to be high?

    1. Depends. If you’re going to emphasize “rule of law,” then I think you would want confidence in institutions to be somewhat high.

  13. “Trump’s supporters are equally quick to denounce any dissent as proof positive of (1)secret membership in Antifa, (2)a pro-Hillary voting record, or (3)a desperate attempt to look good among the communists who run the much-discussed-yet-little-seen Washington, D.C. cocktail party circuit.”

    (1) Not secret membership. But there is lots of “simpatico” there. How else can you explain the deafening silence re Antifa?

    (2) It cannot be denied that the seismic shock of Hillary losing is yuuge. There is plenty to criticize Trump for, but the hyperbole is TDS via Hillary’s fail.

    (3) Yes, 95% of the HnR commentariat are all hallucinating the same observation that Reason has pivoted and pivoted hard.

    1. (3) Yes, 95% of the HnR commentariat are all hallucinating the same observation that Reason has pivoted and pivoted hard.

      The large pool of long-time regulars who defected were a very cosmopolitan bunch who regularly defended the editors from criticism. Then they finally realized the simmering statist frog pot of a website was rising to full boil.

      1. That’s weird. I took them to be the opposite. They all ran off to Galt’s Gulch because they got fed up first.

        1. It was a lot more complicated than either that or what SIV said. But SIV is right that they (the ones who departed pretty much en masse) are quite a diverse and cosmopolitan group.

          1. And their site is a cesspool of suckitude.

            1. Cosmopolitan =/= Cosmotarian.

  14. Strangely relevant again…
    This one’s for you, Nick!

  15. If Barack Obama’s most strident defenders were sometimes quick to claim any criticism of him was racist, thereby delegitimating honest disagreement, Trump’s supporters are equally quick to denounce any dissent as proof positive of secret membership in Antifa, a pro-Hillary voting record, or a desperate attempt to look good among the communists who run the much-discussed-yet-little-seen Washington, D.C. cocktail party circuit.

    Thank God we don’t have to worry about any that bullshit here. /sarc

  16. a desperate attempt to look good among the communists who run the much-discussed-yet-little-seen Washington, D.C. cocktail party circuit.

    Thanks for admitting it Nick.

  17. Bannon is an extremely shrewd businessman. He was ahead of many others who realized the marketing potential to a huge cross section that was already there to target: a loose collection of isolated internet conspiracy theorists, garden variety tribalists and white nationalists. He knew that to market to one, you had to market to them all. And so he took that group that was already in place and growing on the internet since Bush and 9/11 (Alex Jones watchers etc) and saw a great investment in media. A very high monetary return potential.

    It certainly wasn’t surprising to learn that Bannon thinks of this loose assemblage as a “collection of clowns” and “losers”, because his point wasn’t to be one of them, but rather leverage their potential as a consumer target, and eventually, a voting bloc.

    1. Well nobody’s ever consulted the far right because of their sparkling insights.

  18. Trump acolytes and the white nationalist subset of them never apply to themselves the rhetorical standards they impose on others.

    They view any criticism of Trump, no matter how level-headed and reasoned, as betrayal. Any opinion that disagrees with theirs is “virtue signaling”. Only they’re allowed to signal their virtues.

    I mean, what the hell is a Nazi flag if not a giant virtue signal? They feel that they are virtuous, and they signal it. But to call them out on supporting an ideology of obligate racial purity by force — that’s the TRUE oppression, apparently.

    They simply can’t handle criticism. They got their talking points from their down-the-rabbit-hole propaganda of choice, and if you try to induce an original thought, they only know how to reply with “libtard/cuck/globalist/traitor/SJW”, etc.

    Many of them seem to think that freedom of speech means a guarantee of a platform, or to not be disagreed with. If you counter their free speech with your free speech, they claim to be victims.

    And yet, it’s the liberals who are supposed to be “snowflakes”…

    1. “You took the blue pill.”

    2. No truer words were ever spoken my good sir. Bless you.

    3. Not sure who you think you’re arguing with here. It’s not really in dispute that Neo-Nazis are at least as bad as antifa and SJWs (which is the crux of Trump’s supposedly pro-Nazi statement).

  19. A lot longer than 2 minutes hate. Inflation?

    certainly Democrats in Congress aren’t the reason why the GOP and the president can’t produce balanced budgets, entitlement reform, or market-oriented health-care legislation.

    Looks like someone forgot his schoolhouse rock and senate rules of order.

    I’ll just leave this here.

  20. why aren’t you condemning Antifa and left-wing violence (been there, done that, and will continue to do so)!?!?

    and he links to a soave piece

    … which was actually a bit of ass-covering only a few days after having written a piece praising the whole “Bash the Fash” fad:

    To Thwart Fascism, Leftist Students Start Self-Defense ‘Fight Club,’ Which Actually Sounds Awesome

    To guard against Trump-inspired hate crimes, a socialist student club at the University of Central Florida has started a “Leftist Fight Club”?an ode to the well-known Chuck Palahniuk book and fim?to practice hand-to-hand combat and self-defense.

    This ought to be applauded.

    not exactly unimpeachable bona fides

    1. Nick stands by his unquestionable claim of FACT that there were NO ANTIFA IN CHARLOTTESVILLE, just peaceful counter-protestors,who were just slightly to the left of libertarian Jeff Flake, who were minding their own counter-protesting business when they were run down as part of a coordinated Nazi Dodge Challenger terror attack by Fields and the ghosts of Nathan Bedford Forrest, Robert E. Lee and Stonewall “CHRISTFAG” Jackson.

      1. You seem to be equating the mere presence of Antifa with the presence of Nazis who not only behaved just like Nazis but one of whom drove a car into a crowd.

        Why are you siding with Nazis at all?

        1. Both groups committed acts of violence against each other. Antifa actually has a much more violent recent history than any right-wing group.

          I really don’t give a shit about what their philosophies are beyond that.

      2. there were NO ANTIFA IN CHARLOTTESVILLE,

        True Antifa has never been tried!

        The people in C-ville were just “counter -protestors” and they were fighting with LOVE! TAKE THAT LOVE IN YOUR FACE, NAZI!!

        (source)

        1. Why are you sympathizing with Nazis?

          1. It is not sympathizing to say someone has a right to exist.
            And along with that right to exist, goes Constitutional rights, among them the right to assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. They don’t lose those rights because of what they believe.
            The counter protesters – antifa, or not – weren’t there to peacefully protest but to stop the Nazi’s from exercising their rights.
            If you believe that America has the right to declare certain groups, or sets of beliefs, as not having a right to exist, you should think carefully of what might happen if yours becomes out of favor and what the remedy should be for disfavored beliefs.

  21. In his own clumsy way Trump was stating the truth. First in condemning the murder, and second in observing that both sides were guilty of violent, incendiary behavior.

    Note how far we have come from the days when the alt-right demonstration would be condemned as highly unsavory but recognized as a protected form of expression. And note the 1200-lb gorilla in the room, the one who is about to take over the store, namely that it’s OK to punch, club, publicly incite, and douse with raw sewage anyone you proclaim to be a “Nazi.”

    Murders happen in the US at a rate of 12,000 give or take per year. It’s not every day that events occur that require the President to don sackcloth and ashes and whip himself into a bloody mess because someone got run over by an asshole.

    It’s equally sad what has happened to so-called libertarians, as exemplified by Reason’s constant editorial attacks on Trump. You perennial losers are the biggest crybabies of all, constantly virtue-signaling your absolutist dogmas at every attempt to inject sanity into a sick, dysfunctional, and increasingly oppressive US political system. You would be lucky, under even a parliamentary system, to hold three seats in the U.S. Congress.

    And if you were sincere you’d get on your knees and thank the God you don’t believe in that that awful woman is not our President.

  22. Citing Allapundit as your conservative voice is like citing Nick Gillespie as a libertarian.

  23. Given the Left’s choke-hold on the media, what was Trump supposed to say? If he had immediately and exclusively condemned those Nazis and white supremacists (which would have been wrong), the media would have said the same thing that stupid idiot singer Lorde just said: “All white people are responsible for creating racism.”

  24. I am a Trump supporter, and I do not agree with all he says or does …and I call such things out to others whether in conversation or on line. Not all of us are sycophants. Not all us paint with a broad brush as this article seems to be doing.

  25. Nick needs to chill, maybe quit Twitter for a bit. Trump is our president, for better or worse, and deserves a break. The man has been president, for what, 215 days? I voted for him but don’t blindly support his every act or utterance. And I believe most Trump voters are with me. Kooks and freaks are everywhere on both sides, but their numbers are small relative to the totals.

  26. Nick writes“Of course, from a libertarian viewpoint, we’ve got plenty of statists around, but they hail from all points on the conventional political spectrum, and that’s a different argument altogether.”

    So, we can safely ignore those nasty ‘ole libertarians right Nick? Just sweep ’em under the rug? Ignore the idea that “sticks and stones” etc. really don’t matter? That free speech is, well, free? That we can put up with neo-Nazis and even publicly support their right to speak?

    I’m not talking about assault and murder Nick, just speech. So exactly what would you have your President or elected representative say about a group of people who used their rights to say things you didn’t like?

  27. What all libertarians need to remember is as Samuel Jackson’s character in Pulp Fiction said “personality goes a long way”.
    If we are going to have any success, we MUST have candidates with personality. Love Rand Paul but he got his clock cleaned in the debates as he came off like a dead fish a don’t get me started on Gary Johnson. Great message, as a messenger not so much! Thanks

  28. As Allahpundit of the conservative site Hot Air summarized:

    Sorry, but Hotair really isn’t conservative anymore (most of their readership/commentators fled once they around the, beginning of the 2016 campaign season) and Analpundit, as he’s called, has packed himself squarely into the #nevertrump column, spending every second of every day of every month crying over Trump’s victory and lamenting the fact that Hillary didn’t win. This after, of course, he spent the year prior to the election being a smug asshole who all but had his “I told you so!” typed up the morning of the election.

    He knows nothing, and even less than you do.

  29. As much as I hate to admit this this, was actually a pretty good article. Perhaps in my hatred of political correctness I became a trump supporter. I was so sick of the usual, everything is racist, everything is sexist and, everything is homophobic rhetoric coming from the left. I can’t do this anymore Trump and a LOT of his supporters have become even bigger snowflakes than the ones they criticize. Don’t worry I’m still going to call out whiny cry babies when I see them, but on both sides.

    Donald Trump is my president but he’s not my guy.

  30. Great post , thanks for sharing

  31. Quit feeding the trolls, people.

  32. very nice post. I like it. Thanks for sharing this information.
    Tinder is the best online chatting application. Try it.
    http://www.tinder-pc-download.com/ tinder for pc
    http://www.tinder-pc-download.com/ tinder download

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.