so let's talk about a subject near and dear to @mtaibbi's heart: betraying the United States.
now I have to be honest here: I myself feel no great loyalty to the United States. I am the child of a Chilean exile, and I grew up with multinational friends. I'm no patriot.
(1/x)
in this life, anyway, I've regarded myself almost from the first as a citizen of the world, who happens to be a citizen of the United States. @mtaibbi and lots of other globetrotting propagandists probably like to think of themselves as somehow "international", too.
(2/x)
I've never *pretended* to be patriotic, though—I even once got myself in trouble for refusing to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance in a grade-school biology class, because I saw the Pledge as basically equivalent to a fascıst oath of loyalty. it is! the Pledge is scary.
(3/x)
which brings me to a great irony of the modern American political scene: the whole American right-wing, the @mtaibbi / @bariweiss / @GOP wing of politics, *hates the United States*, while at the same time they claim to be the greatest patriots. it's marvellous doublethink.
(4/x)
@GOP politicians haven't felt any compunctions about betraying the interests of the United States since 1980, when they treasonously interfered with Pres. Carter's hostage negotiations with Iran in order to manufacture an embarrassment, putting @RonaldReagan into office.
(5/x)
politicians from both @GOP and @TheDemocrats have their secretive back-channel connections with foreign governments and foreign businesses—in today's world of global #capitalism and corporate misrule, #CEOs often have more power than governments and diplomats, even armies.
(6/x)
the @GOP is the fascıst party, so they're willing to dare a LOT more—as their hidden _coup d'etat_ in 1980 proved. doing crimes to put the witless @RonaldReagan in office must have felt *freeing* to the Republicans; if they cheated like that again, they could do anything!
(7/x)
ever since then the @GOP has freely interfered with and weakened the foreign posture of the United States as long as they felt that weakness could be pinned on @TheDemocrats. the @elonmusk / @mtaibbi#Twitter conspiracy is merely part of this long tradition of treachery.
(8/x)
the @GOP is a Christofascist party, which makes *Russia* especially appealing to the right-wing Christian crowd (and to @mtaibbi, who may or may not be Christian—it's hard to tell what such an oily man ever believes.) Putin is their idea of a strong, Christian leader.
(9/x)
the Russian Orthodox Church has always been profoundly corrupt and deeply invested in maintaining iron-fisted authoritarian tyranny over Russia—if fascıst dweebs like @MattWalshBlog and @JackPosobiec now adore @RonDeSantisFL it's because he promises *similar* leadership.
(10/x)
right-wing Christians of that sort feel no great loyalty to the United States—@MattWalshBlog doublethinkfully believes the U.S. to be both God's chosen land and also a stinking sinkhole that needs to be replaced by something *holier*, where he can rape children in peace.
(11/x)
@mtaibbi probably has his own murky personal reasons for preferring to do business with someone other than the United States—he's got his *own* crimes that will be easier to conceal in a rigid authoritarian society, in which crimes and corruption more easily flourish.
(12/x)
there's an obvious candidate right in sight for where the true loyalties of @mtaibbi and his @GOP bosses are truly aligned.
can you guess who it might be?
~Chara of Pnictogen
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
argh! I forgot the most important bit! because it's about Baldr and Hoðr and Loki—and a very *particular* version of their story, the one that most people know, which comes from Snorri Sturluson and the "Prose Edda" and which then got picked up by English poets.
#CSLewis cites Matthew Arnold's "Balder Dead", a retelling of the story of Baldr's death from the "Prose Edda", as one of his early influences in his semi-autobiographical work "Surprised by Joy".
now I speculate: Jack Lewis probably had Baldr in mind when he converted.
(2/x)
for it's been *noted* that the narrative about Baldr's death from Sturluson's "Prose Edda" is *almost* like the Christian narrative. Baldr is impossibly beautiful and impossibly pure, with amazing powers, then treachery lays him low—but he'll be coming back after Ragnarok!
we still love @JRRTolkien, which is why we detest Peter Jackson so very much—we think he turned one our favorite childhood works of art into coarse crass (and racist) action trash, and for some reason hardly anyone's noticed. I suppose it's a sign we're in the Bad Place™.
(1/x)
it's one of the ill-kept secrets of the modern-day fascıst movement, by the way, that they *adore* the Peter Jackson #LOTR films—people like @MattWalshBlog and @Timcast and @benshapiro have probably watched those trashy movies a thousand times. they're big hits, after all.
(2/x)
and if someone like @benshapiro adores your movie, then you've done something dreadfully wrong—and I earnestly hope that Peter Jackson's treatment of #Tolkien one day gets a very thorough critical laceration. Jackson's a hacky director, and he made polished hackwork.
it suddenly occurred to me: the amusing realization that the mere existence of *Caligula* confers a teensy bit of credibility to the Christian idea of the Incarnation. it's more credible that a human being might have claimed to have fully divine nature, that is to say.
(1/x)
we can guess that someone *like* Jesus may have existed, because a historical figure with much better attestation—namely Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, also known as "Little Boots" or _Caligula_ because as a child he dressed as a soldier—thought he was a god.
(2/x)
hence *that* much of the Jesus story is plausible anyway: it's plausible to imagine, at least, someone _claiming_ to be the one and only Son of God, authorized to tell us all how wonderful Heaven was and drive out "demons" and all that. questionable activities, perhaps.
I'm going to talk about something very painful now, but it must be discussed. it's a specific antisemitic trope. let these words serve as a content warning for the material I'm about to discuss:
I won't discuss this painful subject in too much detail—if you want to learn about the origins of the antisemitic trope of the Jewish Problem™ in Western culture, read up on the NSDAP and the Third Reich—but take care that you read *good* books about the Third Reich.
(2/x)
that's the problem, isn't it? people like @NateSilver538 and @mtaibbi don't read the *good* books about the Third Reich, but you can be pretty certain they've read a lot of bad ones. that's especially likely if they're the sort of people who think "history" means battles.
that's not some simple *insult*. it's in the nature of bigotry—it's the universal psychological defence mechanism, the escape-valve from any social awkwardness or personal failure. @charlesmurray is a bigot, and therefore he's a loser.
(1/x)
he's a mediocre, muddled man who feels like he's entitled to a permanent position in American scholarship even though he's muddled and mediocre. @AEI gave @charlesmurray some *illusion* of success but Murray dreamed bigger than an AEI propaganda job—you can bank on that.
(2/x)
a genuine biologist, a man who made fundamental contributions to evolutionary theory—Stephen Jay Gould—took @charlesmurray to pieces, and his response was to swallow his humiliation and double and treble down on bigotry, because that's how bigots deal with being failures.
*bigotry* is a subject that right-wing (and "independent") bigots—@NateSilver538, @DavidAFrench, @DKThomp, whoever, there's so many of these clowns—have attempted to keep as confused as possible. they want to pretend "bigot" is merely a slur, not a meaningful word.
(1/x)
but as I've pointed out before, bigotry is really just overdeveloped snobbery. the snob—the person who has very definite ideas about their personal superiority, and the superiority of their own intellect and tastes and everything else—is already showing "bigoted" behavior.
(2/x)
just as one may exhibit abusive behaviors from time to time without necessarily being "an abuser" (i.e. someone whose whole personality is abusive behavior), a snobbish person may say bigoted things without necessarily being "a bigot", i.e. someone who does nothing else.