Conservatives have been complaining for a while about one of the most pressing civil rights crises of our time: the fact that no one wants to bone them.
Some conservatives are so, so troubled by this injustice that they’re willing to throw away their libertarian principles and advocate for some kind of governmental intervention to — I guess — somehow force people to like them.
At least that seems to be the main argument of a very long and very very confusing essay in the National Review with the somewhat unnerving title “Political Discrimination as Civil-Rights Struggle.”
Eric Kaufmann, a professor of politics at the University of London and a fellow at the Manhattan Institute, starts out his screed by citing a poll revealing that most Ivy League women have about as much interest in dating Trump supporters as they do in sticking their head in a bucket of bees.
When a sample of nearly 1,500 female Ivy League students was asked whether they would date a Trump supporter, only 6 percent said yes (after excluding the small minority of the sample who support him).
While Kaufmann notes in passing that “people are free to discriminate however they wish in dating” — how thoughtful of him! — he’s worried that such “discrimination” against Trumpists will lead to various other kinds of social “intolerance.” In his eyes, the survey results reveal what he calls “the predilection among many young elite Americans for progressive authoritarianism.”
And it’s basically a new kind of racism, without that whole racial aspect. He seconds another writer in arguing that “those who politically discriminate are acting in precisely the same manner as those who justify prejudice against Muslims or Jews.”
To fight back against this terrible threat, Kaufmann argues,
conservatives will have to overcome their squeamishness about government to have any chance of holding back the woke domination of American institutions.
Apparently, “woke domination” can only be fought by embracing a new form of governmental “civil rights” activism.
To counteract the rising threat that progressive authoritarianism poses to freedom of expression and conscience, conservative policy-makers will need to lose their 1980s libertarian blinders and embrace government-led, civil-liberties-focused intervention in the elite institutions of society.
While Kaufmann discusses several other supposed social injustices against conservatives, he seems obsessed with the ways in which “Trump supporters get the short end of the dating stick,” citing several other surveys that reveal how much students hate the idea of “making America great again” in bed. Or even in the campus dining halls.
Bobby Duffy shows that those who are liberal on culture-war issues find it much harder to befriend those on the other side than vice versa. Cultural progressivism is increasingly emerging as a status marker, which is one reason why, as Bari Weiss reports, elite private schools are hotbeds of left-modernist (“woke”) intolerance, as are elite universities and liberal-arts colleges such as Smith. …
Wherever the culture of campus, dominated by the young and educated, predominates, progressive intolerance and political discrimination against conservatives are in the ascendant.
Apparently it’s gotten so bad that some conservatives have started keeping their opinions to themselves. (If only.)
As progressive authoritarians become a larger share of the elite workforce, institutions are likely to grow more intolerant … As in authoritarian regimes, dissenters keep their views to themselves through preference falsification.
The only solution? A new “crusade for political civil rights” designed to protect Trumpists’ and other conservatives’ right to offend everyone with their nonsense and still get laid.
The solution is similar to that imposed on segregated universities of the South that were compelled by the federal government to desegregate … It’s not that progressive illiberalism is as bad as segregation, but rather that the underlying principle of institutions violating individual rights, and of the government overruling them to protect such rights, is the same.
So our current situation isn’t as awful as Jim Crow but it kind of is.
To wage this battle, those on the right, along with freedom-minded allies on the left … will need to ditch the deregulatory libertarianism that is paralyzing political action and permitting woke takeover. Unless this battle is joined, the power centers of the country will increasingly move toward campus-style intolerance, further entrenching the system of progressive conformity.
Sorry, National-Review-reading dudes, but none of this is going to make women want to fuck you.
H/T — Wonkette
Follow me on Mastodon.
Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.
We Hunted the Mammoth relies on support from you, its readers, to survive. So please donate here if you can, or at David-Futrelle-1 on Venmo.
@Ox: I think they wrote “flapjack” and the lower case f and l were too close together.
@Elaine the Witch, @Big Titty Demon:
May I suggest a third possible pronunciation?
(Apparently the scriptwriter confirmed years later that yes, he totally did that on purpose, surmising correctly that no one in the censorship office was likely to know what a clitoris was.)
@Ox, UKnian flapjacks are not at all pancake-y; they’re more like a sort of gooey, chewy oat bar (gooey because they have syrup or similar binding the oats together) and can be pretty nice. Very sweet, though. (I would have said they’re a kind of biscuit, and then I remembered that biscuit is Something Quite Different on either side of the pond)
I think I have a vague idea of how those two options sound. I probably won’t ever need to say “clitoris” out loud in English, but in my natural Finnish accent it just comes off kind of flat. Then again, I prefer the Greek-style plural “clitorides” over English-style “clitorises”, so I could always play fancy and pass my accent off as “Greek style pronunciation” 🙂
@Dalilama
Step didn’t explicitly anything.
Listen I don’t agree with her on private political ideology being need to be a protected class, but she didn’t explicitly say what you’re claiming.
You’re inferring.
and not all Trump supporters are fascist and one can support him without actively wanting the exterminate historically oppressed groups.
This isn’t to say there aren’t many Trumpists who are straight up fascists.
Steph said that Trump supporters should not be fired over their fascist politics right there on the screen, mate.
Yes, they are, and no, you can’t. Voting for politicians for whom my death and that of my loved ones is a fundamental part of their platform is actively wanting us to die. Likewise, voting for an unapologetic fascist does, in fact, make someone a fascist, full stop. Incidentally the part where you’re here expecting me to be ok with working next to someone who actively wants me dead, because they’re entitled to their political opinion? That’s a serious asshole move, and pulling it in the same post as fascist apologia and tone policing doesn’t help. Just so you know.
@ full metal ox
People have addressed the flapjack question; but yeah, they’re these things.
https://domesticgothess.com/blog/2018/05/18/vegan-fruit-and-nut-flapjacks/
Very nice. Just ask any kleptomaniac squirrel.
Alan! Here’s a disturbing article about the loss of information on the interwebs, it freaked me out for sure, I wonder if you or other readers have had this impact on their work – it is from the Atlantic, and is called The rotting internet is a collective hallucination.
@Nequam:
I think they wrote “flapjack” and the lower case f and l were too close together.
@opposable thumbs:
Ox, UKnian flapjacks are not at all pancake-y; they’re more like a sort of gooey, chewy oat bar (gooey because they have syrup or similar binding the oats together) and can be pretty nice. Very sweet, though. (I would have said they’re a kind of biscuit, and then I remembered that biscuit is Something Quite Different on either side of the pond)
@Alan Robertshaw:
People have addressed the flapjack question; but yeah, they’re these things.
https://domesticgothess.com/blog/2018/05/18/vegan-fruit-and-nut-flapjacks/
Very nice. Just ask any kleptomaniac squirrel.
Thank you, everyone; so it’s another case of Separation By A Common Language. (I experienced a similar collision in a local cafe run by British immigrants when I ordered Branson Pickle, anticipating some sort of cucumber rather than a sweet onion chutney.)
I once worked in a shop that sold bulk candy, and what the mice (and at least one chipmunk) couldn’t get enough of were Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups and Squirrel Nut Zippers (caramel with embedded chopped peanuts, and presumably the basis for the band name.)
Again it’s pretty evident she was not doing what you’re doing and going Trump supporter with Fascist.
No, they’re not and yes you can. You’re oversimplification of human thought process is really naive. 1/3 Asian Americans, and 1/3 of Hispanic Americans did vote for Trump for reasons other than they want to see themselves dead. You can say bigotries against certain groups simply propelled them to vote for the man. And I could concede that much. After all they’re were Jews who supported Hitler because they wanted him to go after specific Jews.
One can honestly not see the lives and welfare of oppressed groups(anyone’s whose not white in America) as threatened by certain politicians who you see as a danger.
Is Trump a fascist? Yes. But someone can honestly disagree ignore the expressly anti-Democratic, and pay attention to the other stuff of his they like.
Actually point to where I expressly say you should be okay with working with people who want you dead because they’re entitled to political opinions.
Because I think I’ve been quite explicit in my position of how I don’t think political ideology should be treated as a protected class in terms of employment.
Do not just point to me saying not all Trump supporters do want the extermination of oppressed groups.
-A.R. Moxon
-Ohlmann is probably aware what you suggest would be a violation of some or all labor laws. Implying someone pointing out this reality “does not get it” is arrogant and presumptuous.
-Didn’t Steph say earlier “I may just have a feeble lady brain but I am pretty sure I know what I was talking about and it was not about actual fascists in the workforce.”? Do you have a history of ignoring women’s actual words?
It’s been a long time since I peaked in, but this thread seems to be full of regulars and none of them are supporting “hiring/retaining open fascists”. They are however acknowledging it’s a thorny issue to removed people if they haven’t violated the law or company policy. IOW not everyone has the tools to do it without incurring liability.
Should we do it? Hell yes.
Can we do it instantly? In many cases no.(I actually agree we should be able to avoid hiring them, but companies can be caught flatfooted if boilerplate policies are inadequate) And calling anyone who isn’t ready to recklessly act without a plan “supporting fascists” is irrational.
Should we be working on shifting policy? Maybe pressuring companies to adopt better measures? Fuck yeah.
Being upset we often don’t have the tools to act promptly is understandable. Lashing out at allies to blow off steam is unproductive, disrespectful and childish. Get help before you drive away any functional friends in your orbit. Or perhaps you only act like this online. But I doubt it.
Funny, in french, the discussion about clitoris is more on wether you pronounce the final s or not. Depending where you have grown, you will pronounce it or not, like the final s in the word “moins” (less) or “plus” (more) (to add difficulty, for this last word, the pronunciation is also often linked to the meaning of the sentence…).
All those small variations and futile distinctions are why i love languages and the possibilities to play with them.
Dalillama is still in the wrong, even if I don’t expect any acknowledgement of this. And misuse of that quote alway make me roll my eyes.
Sure, the trump supporters are all fascists, just like germans nazis were nazis. They are not all the frothing at the mouth fanatics that Steph talk of, because sometime words have differents meaning and the group of all Trump followers isn’t an uniform group. So when Dali try to equivocate every Trump follower to that subgroup, that’s a sophism. A useless one at that ; it’s not like the less extremist supporters are actually better.
The quote remind that all the people that support a fascist governement *are* bad people and aren’t somehow absolved of their sins because they didn’t kill jews themselves. That quote don’t mean every single of theses nazis were willing to burn peoples ; rather, most were happy to close their eye, allow it to happen, and hope their nazis masters will give them some scrap of what they want.
And that’s important, because the National Review basicaly talk of the active, frothing at the mouth fanatics that the rep’ party need to do a coup, while Steph and a number of other talk of all Trump supporters, which include a lot of people whose sin is just being stupid and not caring. Trying to approach both end of the trump follower group the same way is stupid and will only make things worse.
As a reminder, after the WWII, most of the nazis got away scott free, and didn’t lost their job either. And that’s not a rebuttal of the quote of Dali ; it’s just that it absolutely don’t mean what Dali try to make it say. Germany, sensibly, only judged the guys who actively did stuff, with most of the passive nazis understanding fully well that their governement have lost but otherwise continuing to work and be in the active force.
And if you try to argue it wasn’t the right approach, remember that Germany have less nazis problem than the USA have. Arguably it even have less nazis problem than France, where the denazification* was much harsher.
* technically the removal of collaborators, who in France mostly was done by mob justice, with every single kind of excess you can imagine.
@Dalilama
I think this is called a strawman. I said no such thing.
@Sarity
Oh I am sure he would turn himself into a pretzel arguing why that is different. I suspect he is one of those men who thing only conservatives (specifically conservative men) get to have dating preferences. Women excluding men is absolutely unacceptable.
@Jon
I really can’t comment on whether ALL Trump supporters meet the actual definition of a fascist (and I think that word is tossed around too easily). I have not studied it but I would think it is unlikely but happy to accept I maybe wrong. But I was making the broader point that I disagree that just because a belief is a choice that it is fine to discriminate against it. I think it is a completely valid argument to make that where beliefs cannot be proven to interfere with somebody’s work then employer’s should not be able to remove people just because they dislike their politics. If I am doing my job as intended and am no risk to my fellow colleagues, then how I voted should be my own affair.
I am not a Yank but am a Brit and the closest I can think of is the Brexit vote. Despite people trying to simplify it I know Brexiteers and Remainers from all walks of like. I have some incredibly progressive, liberal friends who wanted to leave the EU and a guy I know who paints himself as “progressive” but is a complete brocialist with a tendency to lean for racism when annoyed. Yet he voted Remain. I am just saying I think discussing whether diversity in the workplace or centres of learning should also include diversity of thought is a very valid argument.
Far more valid than whining about people’s dating choices (because let’s face it – when dating people get to be as discriminatory as they want, no matter what others think of it.)
@Step
Yep wouldn’t be surprised if he explicitly called for government to redistribute the sex.
Every man—mainly conservative whites—gets to have a participation wife for being “nice”
@ opposable thumbs
This being England that’s actually been the subject of litigation.
As far as the courts are concerned flapjacks are cakes. 🙂
https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKVAT/2005/V19389.html
@Alan, TIL that flapjacks too are a legal minefield 🙂 Thought that had only happened with the Great Jaffa Cake Controversy (I s’pose it’s another existential ‘to VAT or not to VAT’ question … :-s)
@opposablethumbs:
Well, here in Canada if you buy a single muffin, it’s a food item and must be taxed. But if you buy half a dozen muffins, that’s a grocery item and must not be taxed. Both of these apply whether you buy the single or half-dozen muffins in a restaurant or grocery store; only the quantity matters. (Which makes sense, given there are establishments that are both.)
@Jenora Feuer that would be a right scunner if you got to the till and found you didn’t have quite enough on you for the half-dozen! Depending on the price and the tax rate, I guess you could potentially be a hairsbreadth short for 6 muffins and find yourself only getting 4 :-s
Why not use the midwestern US designation of “bars” for British flapjacks? It’s always been a handy term for sweets that aren’t cakes (which generally have eggs in them) or cookies/biscuits (which generally are separately baked on a sheet).
Mildly related: Alton Brown (a US foodie guy with a sciency food show) maintains that pancakes and US flapjacks are technically muffins.
@Snowberry, @Ohlman,
I don’t know about how delusional the folks distributing this thing are; only that they very clearly didn’t think that plan through at all. As in, they obviously didn’t consider the idea that all of their steps have at least one more outcome than the one they want. Like, what if no one wants to impeach Biden and Harris and likes them in charge; what then? What’s the plan for that contingency?
A commenter on another blog I visit (and where I first found this story) found someone who actually tracked down the original author of that plan, and read some of how that guy was going to bring down the Democrat Party (aka Step 1 of the plan).
https://www.wonkette.com/captain-americas-dream-has-always-been-the-conservative-nightmare
This plan has now moved from ‘needs a miracle or ten to succeed’ to ‘needs to be implemented by a very powerful reality warper’ to succeed. >.<
@opposablethumbs:
Well, yes, and given a number of places give you a discount if you buy a half-dozen, six muffins can end up costing less than 5 to the customer. The store’s still making more money because less of it is going to taxes.
Ontario taxes get even more fun because there’s a poverty exemption that food items less than $4 total don’t get charged provincial sales tax (though they do still get the federal GST). So if a muffin is $1, you end up paying $1.05 for 1 muffin (GST is 5%), $2.10 for 2, $3.15 for 3, $4.52 for 4 (provincial sales tax kicks in at an extra 8%), $5.65 for 5, and $6 for 6.
The people who have to program cash registers and point-of-sale systems to deal with all this get very grumpy when the rules change again. They’re messy enough as it is.