Yes, because cancel culture is just the inevitable enforcement of mores. Some behavior, speech, etc should be considered unacceptable. Conservatives have simply deluded themselves into believing a morally neutral society is possible or desirable, quitting the field to the left 1/
We should want to cancel people who push woke ideology. We should want to cancel people who teach our children to hate their parents, their country, their ancestors, their religion. Conservatives like Jenna are fundamental useless in this fight 2/
Morally neutral, non cancel culture society is an impossibility, it has never existed in the United States or anywhere and never will, the closest thing would be anarchy 3/
Jenna is another Jared Kushner creature, so there's that too 4/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Pedro L. Gonzalez

Pedro L. Gonzalez Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @emeriticus

10 Feb
To watch sports today is to subsidize a class of ungrateful, often illiterate, often criminal people who get paid millions of dollars to play a game while lecturing you about how awful are you and your country. It also tends to turn men into spectators in the same way porn does
You're also enriching cynical managers who basically think that the more openly they and their team hate America and its people, the more popular the team will become. What is the upside to this, besides dopamine?
The left, to their credit, will boycott effectively to protest things they view as threatening to themselves. The right, on the other hand, finds every reason to not boycott, to watch another game without the national anthem and with players kneeling
Read 8 tweets
10 Feb
TPPF argues government can't pick winners and losers--bailouts bad. Irony: TPPF receives millions from oil and gas industry donors. So, TPPF is funded by a subsidized, bailed-out industry that government chooses as a winner. In other words, they're frauds 1/
"The US oil and gas industry has received more than $10 billion from the federal government to cushion losses during the pandemic, according to a recent report analyzing federal financial data." Will TPPF return bailout donor money? 2/ qz.com/1936859/the-us…
Conservatives actually love subsidies. They love "socialism"! But only when it benefits their donors in gas and oil, in the defense industry, etc. They're actually fine with the government picking winners--so long as those winners donate to their think tanks 3/
Read 5 tweets
24 Jan
1. Trump calling Buchanan a "Hitler-lover" is enlightening because it explains why Trump, who barks a lot about PC culture, is actually terrified of being publicly perceived as a racist, hence him being a much softer leader than his rhetoric suggests
2. So Trump is actually an arch "movement conservative," in the sense that he takes ideas, doesn't credit people, dilutes their ideas, and turns them into a grift
3. National Review opposed Buchanan for the same ideological reasons they opposed Trump (who was an unserious, incompetent version of Buchanan), which merely reinforces the point that NR truly is the home of invertebrates and not so beautiful losers
Read 4 tweets
24 Jan
The Patriot Party will offer what the GOP offers--tax cuts, budget hawking, anti socialism and Democrats-R-the-Real-Racists talking points--but with "patriot" affixed to everything and it will make the the GOP's grift look honest by comparison
Almost everything with "Patriot" in the name is a disaster/grift. See: The Patriot Act
"Patriot Cancer"
Read 4 tweets
20 Jan
The MAGA foundation is already raising money and Trump's team is working on a comms workaround. I've argued that Trump is transitional--but after November, people LARPed about him as Caesar on the Rubicon. When that fell apart, he became a symbol 1/
When I argued that Trump is transitional, the same people who are now all in on this myth stuff got upset and said: "Trump is the guy and there is no alternative and he is totally going to cross the Rubicon." It seems like the myth stuff is a continuation of that 2/
Also, what is he a symbol of? When I argued with Cotto earlier, he had very different views of what is good and bad about Trump. What is that symbol to Greer vs Cotto? Is it tax cuts for Google or releasing drug kingpins or law and order or moving the embassy? 3/
Read 4 tweets
20 Jan
1. The right needs to avoid returning to the GOP/conservative outrage trap, i.e., "support us to stop socialism/Democrat racism!"

2. Trump needs to be separated from the right because all he does is grift

3. The right needs to build parallel networks and institutions
4. "Right" needs to indicate a socially conservative, economically moderate movement that is capable of attracting moderates through economic populism--healthcare and immigration are the two biggest issues, framed as attacking big pharma and labor exploitation
4, 2.0: Yeah there are other reasons to tackle healthcare and immigration, but framing it as a war on vicious, exploitative bugman oligarchs has the broadest appeal
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!