Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Eric's avatar

Interesting commentary here, but I have to push back on one idea. Richard brings up his defense of the New York Times (and liberalish media in general) and Chris seems to imply that the press maybe used to be good but has gotten worse recently; he notes that the Times was actually very hard on Angela Davis and other far left intellectuals in the 1970s but now is apparently controlled by Taylor Lorenz or something. First of all, it's interesting to consider that conservatives have been whining about the Times and the 'liberal media' for more than half a century, and on basically the same terms- so it's weird to sort of shift the goalposts now and acknowledge, well actually the press was used to be good but now it's not. When I hear conservative critiques of the media there's definitely a boy who cried wolf problem.

But more to the point, I think he dramatically overstates this idea that the Times is now being overtaken by modern Angela Davis types. I recently listened to an interview on the New Yorker Radio Hour with AG Sulzberger, the publisher of the Times, and I came away fairly impressed with how seriously he and other leadership take their responsibility to put out a good paper. As Richard noted in his 'why the press is honest and good' essay, they do make a really good faith effort to get things right, even if they are subject to individual biases; it's impossible to imagine, say, an editor at Fox News wrestling seriously with questions of fairness in the way the Sulzberger seems to be.

I also recently listened (out of a kind of morbid curiosity) to a podcast series by some trans activists about how bad the New York Times is, basically because it occasionally runs commentary that the most fringe activists disapprove of. The podcast is basically a profile of a radical activist who worked for the Times for a while and was ultimately pushed out- as miscarriage of justice, in the opinion of the podcast. I of course came away from this impressed with the Times ability to weed out bad actors and stand up to cynical emotional manipulation from junior staffers. The people at the top of the Times are still the grownups, serious people who apparently have an effective system for weeding out lunatics. So overall I think the Times was pretty good in the past, subject to some caveats, and is still pretty good in precisely the same way.

This is why the idea that conservatives are going to fix this problem is sort of fanciful: the conservative movement is just not honest or intellectually serious. Towards the end, they seem to be putting a lot of faith in Ron Desantis. Desantis is currently threatening to use government resources to investigate Bud Light because conservatives are still mad about the Dylan Mulvaney thing. Is this an appropriate or thoughtful use of power? Watching Desantis' presidential campaign implode should tell you what you need to know here. Chris concludes 'If conservative voters are smart and they are thinking long-term...' I'm sorry to tell you that they are not, and if anyone thinks that conservatives are going to be more responsible with power, they're basically committing the same error as leftists who still believed in communism in the 70s.

Sulzberger Interview: https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-new-yorker-interview/a-g-sulzberger-on-the-battles-within-and-against-the-new-york-times

Lunatic trans activists podcast: https://open.spotify.com/embed/show/0NuHlGNjEkgjwAHdoIOcQw?utm_source=generator

Expand full comment
Alvan Hengge's avatar

"they’re using taxpayer money to build robots to castrate people to create trans identities." Well, robotic surgeries have become commonplace with the da Vinci system and other systems. Some of those systems are purchased with taxpayer funding, and among the surgeries they are used for, some are undoubtedly these elective castrations. So, this Rufo statement is technically accurate. Someone could look at the George Floyd episode and conclude "they're using taxpayer money to pay folks to kill Black people." With the same level of technical accuracy, and intellectual honesty.

I was hoping to get thoughtful conservatism, not echo chambered uncritical paranoia like this. Disappointing.

Expand full comment
33 more comments...

No posts