Category: Political Apostasy

Tucker Carlson’s Ten-Point Manifesto

From Axios. My comments are intercalated and signaled by ‘BV.’

[Tucker] Carlson said any successor to America’s faltering political system should begin with a shared understanding of what the country “should be,” which he distilled into 10 points.

Fair: The same rules should apply to presidents, federal agents and elites such as Jeffrey Epstein, whose impunity Carlson cast as emblematic of an “Epstein class” enriching itself through a corrupt system.

BV: Of course!

Sovereign: Carlson claimed Israel pushed the U.S. into the Iran war through “bribery or threat or both,” while describing foreign lobbying, corporate control of government and high-interest debt as forms of “slavery.”

BV: As for the claim about Israel, I don’t understand why Carlson makes it. What’s his evidence?  Of course, Israel would be the first nation to be nuked into oblivion should the Islamo-theocrats in control of Iran acquire nuclear weapons.  So Israel, among all the nations of the world, ought to be, and presumably is, the most concerned about the Iranian threat, and is of course pleased that the USA, under Trump’s leadership, is doing something about it.   But the Big Satan (USA) is also in the cross-hairs, as are the nations of Europe.  The IRGC is a threat to civilization tout court.  Tucker should praise Trump for his fearless leadership.

As for “corporate control of government,” Carlson may have a point that ought to concern conservatives. I understand that our government has a 10% stake in Intel Corp.  This deserves discussion and not Hannity-style dismissal.

Productive: America should rebuild farming, manufacturing and craftsmanship while rejecting an economy dominated by finance, real estate speculation, surveillance systems and weapons.

BV: The things mentioned in the initial clause are  taking place under Trump.  As for the second clause, it is impossible that our economy not be devoted in large part to surveillance systems and weaponry given the external and internal threats we face from our adversaries:  The Chi-Coms, NOKO, radical Islam, imperial Russia, and the commie takeover of the Dems by the DSA.

Beautiful: Carlson alleged that urban planners deliberately “uglified” American cities, and portrayed brutalist architecture, graffiti, public drug use and violent crime as deliberate attacks on the public.

BV:  Deliberately?  Attacks by whom?

Healthy: Carlson embraced RFK Jr.’s food agenda, called for universal sobriety and said widespread use of drugs such as Xanax, Adderall and SSRIs had left Americans “half-addled.”

BV: I agree completely.

Honest: Government officials should be punished for lying to citizens, and most classified records — including on the JFK assassination and 9/11 — should be opened.

BV: Yes!  And Trump is doing just that.  The transparency of the Trump administration is in stark contrast to the lack thereof in previous administrations. Example: UFOs/UAPs.  Tucker should thank Trump.

Optimistic: Carlson argued that having children is a biological imperative and the foundation of long-term thinking, while blaming aging and childless elites for policies that disregard future generations.

BV: OK, but if one cares about future generations, then a terror-state such as Iran under the IRGC cannot be allowed to develop nuclear weapons and the ICBMs to deliver them.

Wise: Schools should teach how the physical world actually works and what he called unchanging facts about human nature — including innate differences between men and women — rather than credentials, screens and technological fads.

BV: Bad writing, but I agree.

Decent: The U.S. should apologize and pay restitution for killing noncombatants, reverse Trump’s “Department of War” rebrand and stop funding allies that commit what Carlson called genocide, citing Israel.

BV: This is the unhinged Carlson 2.0.  (I suspect that his being cashiered by FOX played a major role in his unhinging.) What noncombatants?  The DOD rebrand is just honesty. War is not just defense: it is attack and defense.  By the way, ‘DOD’ was itself an obfuscatory rebrand; Trump restored the original name.  Finally, to refer to Israel as ‘genocidal’ is an Orwellian inversion of the truth.

United: Carlson called for halting immigration until the effects of AI become clearer, ending benefits for undocumented immigrants and making English the sole language of federal documents and ballots.

BV: I agree entirely re: the second and third points.  The first point obviously needs qualification.

In conclusion, this manifesto is deeply flawed, but does make some good points. I used to think highly of Tucker Carlson,  It is too bad he lost his way.

Ronald Radosh on David Horowitz: A Critical Appreciation

On very rare occasions, something surfaces at The Bulwark worth reading.

Radosh, who is well worth reading, gives his take on Horowitz's flipping of his ideological script, and takes him to task for his late extremism. But how is this judgment by Radosh not itself extreme:

What David is being celebrated for is the opposite of the introspective and empathetic writer, a thoughtful and moderate conservative, evident in his personal books. And his supporters give him credit for helping to create the most repulsive and nasty of the Trump entourage, Stephen Miller, who of course, added his own tribute to David. Another right-wing extremist protégé, Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, wrote to single out David’s responsibility for Miller’s career in these words . . . .

What hatreds politics sires! I am reminded of something I wrote in From Democrat to Dissident:

We were friends for a time, but friendship is fragile among those for whom ideas matter. Unlike the ordinary nonintellectual person, the intellectual lives for and sometimes from ideas. They are his oxygen and sometimes his bread and butter. He takes them very seriously indeed and with them differences in ideas. So the tendency is for one intellectual to view another whose ideas differ as not merely holding incorrect views but as being morally defective in so doing. Why? Because ideas matter to the intellectual. They matter in the way doctrines and dogmas mattered to old-time religionists. If one’s eternal happiness is at stake, it matters infinitely whether one “gets it right” doctrinally. If there is no salvation outside the church, you had better belong to the right church. It matters so much that one may feel entirely justified in forcing the heterodox to recant “for their own good.”

Addendum (5/9)

Here is Stephen Miller in action. Trenchant, but wholly on target, and the reprobates who are the recipients of the trenchancy richly deserve it. Miller is neither repulsive nor nasty by any sane measure.  Perhaps someone should ask Radosh which side he is on these days.

Would that the extremity of the political polarization of the present could be avoided, including the polarization over polarization itself, its nature, causes, effects, and who is responsible for it. I say they are responsible for it.   Our positions are moderate; theirs are extreme. 

For example, James Carville, the "ragin' Cajun," is poles apart from the sane and reasonable Victor Davis Hanson.  Bang on the links and see for yourself.  But 'see' is not the right word inasmuch as leftists are blind and can't see 'jack.' How explain such blindness, such intransigence, such praeter-natural feculence of brain, perversity of will, foulness of heart?

I find it endlessly fascinating. Polarization, I mean. Why this depth of disagreement? But it's all grist for the mill, blog-fodder for the Bill.

For another example, compare Newt Gingrich's sanity to its lack in one  who is "terrified" at Trump's judicial picks.

Addendum (5/10): polarization update 

TDS at TNR:

Living under a far-right authoritarian regime that is gutting every American institution that keeps people safe, alive, and connected to a thriving civilization, we have to keep asking ourselves how we got here—and how we can get out. And the most important factor in Donald Trump’s win was that Kamala Harris lost.

Trump has run for president three times and Harris is the only person to have lost the popular vote to him. In 2024, he had no special magic; if anything, he was marred as a felon and a failed coup leader. A major part of the problem was Harris, who embodies the change-nothing politics of Hillary Clinton without the latter’s political savvy; and the cautiousness of Joe Biden without his populist instincts.

Political Apostasy: Like Islamists, Leftists Hate Apostates

David Horowitz, Left Illusions: An Intellectual Odyssey (Spence Publishing, 2003), pp. 274-276:

The radical commitment is less a political than a moral choice. Leaving the faith is a traumatic experience because it involves an involuntary severing of communal ties. That is why "political correctness" is a habit of the progressive mind – it is the line of fear that holds the flock in check.

No greater caution exists for those tempted to leave the faith than the charge of "selling out." Prior to the temptation, leaving the faith is inconceivable, a sign that one is no longer a good person. Only pathological behavior – a lust for money or some other benefit – could explain to a leftist the decision to join the opposition. To the progressive mind, no decent person could ever freely make such a choice. Even in the post-communist world, the most untheoretical progressive remains in this way a vulgar Marxist despite all that has historically transpired. The fact that Peter [Collier] and I actually lost opportunities for personal gain as a result of our change of heart made no impression on our former comrades, who labeled us "renegades" and accused us of selling out just the same.

And so it is inconceivable to leftists that Elon Musk could be motivated by a sincere desire to rid the Federal government of waste, fraud, and abuse and return it to fiscal responsibility. No! The richest man in the world is out to enrich himself further!