4
0

Liberal crybabies offended when public goes after them if they lie


 invite response                
2021 Mar 10, 2:45pm   367 views  5 comments

by Bd6r   ➕follow (2)   💰tip   ignore  

Another excellent article by Glenn Greenwald: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/criticizing-public-figures-including

In the paradigm peddled by Maddow, Elizabeth Warren was instantly transformed from an outspoken, intrepid Harvard Law Professor, consumer advocate, and influential lawmaker into a vulnerable abuse victim. Anonymous Sanders supporters were the ones wielding the real power and strength in this warped and self-serving framework. In order to shield themselves from the same scrutiny and accountability every other powerful public figure receives, they’re resuscitating the most discredited and antiquated myths about who is strong and weak, who requires protection and special considerations and who does not.

No discussion of this tactic would be complete without noting its strong ideological component: its weaponization for partisan aims. Say whatever you’d like about journalists like Laura Ingraham or Mollie Hemingway or Briahna Joy Gray or political figures such as Kellyanne Conway, Susan Collins or Kirstjen Nielsen. Have at it: the sky’s the limit. Let it all fly without the slightest concern for accusations of misogyny, which, rest easy, will not be forthcoming no matter how crude or misogynistic the attacks are.

This transparent tactic is part-and-parcel of the increasingly ideological exploitation of identity politics to shield the neoliberal order and its guardians from popular critique. Step lightly if you want to criticize the bombing of Syria because the Pentagon is now led by an African-American Defense Secretary and Biden just promoted two female generals. No objecting to the closeness between the Treasury Secretary and Wall Street banks because doing so is a misogynistic attempt to limit how women can be paid. Transportation policy should be questioned only in the most polite tones lest one stand accused of harboring anti-gay animus for the department’s Secretary.

Whenever this tactic is hauled out in defense of neoliberal leaders — to claim that Sanders supporters are uniquely abusive, or that Corbyn supporters are, or that Trump supporters are: basically that everyone is guilty of abusive behavior except neoliberals and their loyal followers — the real purpose of it becomes clear. It is a crowd-control technique, one designed to build a gigantic moat and drawbridge to protect those inside the royal court from the angry hordes outside of it.

Comments 1 - 5 of 5        Search these comments

1   EBGuy   2021 Mar 10, 3:49pm  

On Friday, Greenwald will be testifying before a House Committee on Antitrust about Big Tech and journalism. Should be interesting.
2   MisdemeanorRebel   2021 Mar 10, 9:18pm  

Elizabeth is LESS Native American than typical inhabitant of Manchester, UK.
3   MisdemeanorRebel   2021 Mar 10, 9:37pm  

Back to the OP, another Brilliant Post by Greenwald.
4   MisdemeanorRebel   2021 Mar 10, 9:43pm  

(Link to some Censorius Leftist who admits that they should not endure criticism from the little People while being free to opine themselves so long as the only critics are fellow upper Castes)

Precisely. “It’s not like it used to be.” The problem is that “this is not civilized discourse” to them because “it’s often coming from some of the least educated and most angry.” That’s why online censorship is needed. That’s why media figures need to unite to demonize and discredit their critics. It is because people like Taylor Lorenz — raised in Greenwich, Connecticut, educated in a Swiss boarding school, writing on the front page of The New York Times — now hears from “the least educated and most angry.” This is the societal crisis — one of caste — that they are determined to stop.

Taylor Lorenz and her media allies know that she is more privileged and influential than you are. That is precisely why they feel justified in creating paradigms that make it illegitimate to criticize her. They think only themselves and those like them deserve to participate in the public discourse. Since they cannot fully control the technology that allows everyone to be heard (they partially control it by pressuring tech monopolies to censor their adversaries), they need to create storylines and scripts designed to coerce their critics into silence.
5   Patrick   2021 Mar 14, 5:02pm  

Specifically, she and her media allies constantly conflate criticisms of people like them with “harassment,” “abuse” and even “violence.”


Wow, is that projection or what!

She's perhaps the top harasser and abuser on the internet.

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions