Tucker Carlson's recent "monologue" is related to this.....
Ciaervo (Humour Impaired; 13600)
Posted on: 01-11-2019 11:29.
Client: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/71.0.3578.98 Safari/537.36
Message views: 11 (Score: 0)
This analysis from Vox puts it pretty plainly. It seems like conservatives would indeed favor a welfare state if it were restricted to Whites Only (and that does sound familiar...), if only because they assume people from that demographic to be "hard-workin' Real Americans". But also, here are a few things that I can agree with, such as: poverty is not necessarily a reflection of character; there is an elite class that sucks the life out of society (but I call them the 1%); and that those guys should be fucked over in favor of the rest of us.
The criticism of Carlson’s monologue has largely focused on how he deviates from the free market capitalism that conservatives believe is the solution to poverty, not the creator of poverty. To orthodox conservatives, poverty is the result of poor decision making or a lack of virtue that can’t be solved by government programs or an anti-elite political platform — and they say Carlson’s argument that elites are in some way responsible for dwindling marriage rates doesn’t make sense.
But in French’s response to Carlson, he goes deeper, writing that to embrace Carlson’s brand of populism is to support “victimhood populism,” one that makes white working-class Americans into the victims of an undefined “they:
Carlson is advancing a form of victim-politics populism that takes a series of tectonic cultural changes — civil rights, women’s rights, a technological revolution as significant as the industrial revolution, the mass-scale loss of religious faith, the sexual revolution, etc. — and turns the negative or challenging aspects of those changes into an angry tale of what they are doing to you.
And that was my biggest question about Carlson’s monologue, and the flurry of responses to it, and support for it: When other groups (say, black Americans) have pointed to systemic inequities within the economic system that have resulted in poverty and family dysfunction, the response from many on the right has been, shall we say, less than enthusiastic.
Yet white working-class poverty receives, from Carlson and others, far more sympathy. And conservatives are far more likely to identify with a criticism of “elites” when they believe those elites are responsible for the expansion of trans rights or creeping secularism than the wealthy and powerful people who are investing in private prisons or an expansion of the militarization of police. Carlson’s network, Fox News, and Carlson himself have frequently blasted leftist critics of market capitalism and efforts to fight inequality.
I asked Carlson about this, as his show is frequently centered on the turmoils caused by “demographic change.” He said that for decades, “conservatives just wrote [black economic struggles] off as a culture of poverty,” a line he includes in his monologue.
He added that regarding black poverty, “it’s pretty easy when you’ve got 12 percent of the population going through something to feel like, ‘Well, there must be ... there’s something wrong with that culture.’ Which is actually a tricky thing to say because it’s in part true, but what you’re missing, what I missed, what I think a lot of people missed, was that the economic system you’re living under affects your culture.”
So, he only started to believe that poor people might not deserve poverty once he recognized that white Americans can also be poor in spite of hard work and good intentions. How can a man be so naive?
Edited by Ciaervo at 1/11/2019 11:38:58 AM
You do not have the required security level to post to this thread.
Report a Bug!