General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRight-Wing Backlash Against 'Smartypants' Like Neil deGrasse Tyson
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/right-wing-backlash-against-smartypants-neil-degrasse-tysonIf theres one belief that binds the disparate factions of the American right together, its the belief in American exceptionalism, both for the nation and for individuals. The mythology that conservatism is about promoting excellence and encouraging strivers is found throughout conservative media and literature, from the story of John Galt in Ayn Rands Atlas Shrugged to Reagans description of America as a shining city on a hill. While it often manifests as contempt for the poor and the vulnerable, in the abstract this conservative enthusiasm for doing better could, in theory, be channeled productively toward actually pushing people to achieve.
So why are so many conservatives abandoning this enthusiasm for the exceptional in favor of what can only be described as jealous sniping aimed at people who are actually trying to expand the world creatively and scientifically? Theres a lot of high-falutin talk on the right about supporting the strivers, but in practice, the conservative response to someone who tries to stick his head above the crowd is to beat it down with a hammer. Conservatives may think of themselves as lovers of excellence, but in reality, Who do you think you are? is swiftly becoming an unofficial right-wing motto.
Its easy to see why, despite their supposed enthusiasm for excellence, conservative pundits would offer up liberal scientists, journalists, and artists as hate objects for their base. This is a time of economic instability and ordinary people are seeing their fortunes declining. Its easy to turn that anxiety into rage at people conservative audiences think have easy, charmed lives as coastal elites.
But in doing so, conservative pundits are exploiting their audiences, turning their class-based anger away from the people who are actually causing their economic problems, such as the Wall Street elite, and toward people who may be successful but who are not doing any harm to other Americans and are often trying to help them. If you can get your audiences to hate journalists and scientists, they won't hate the wealthy bankers who actually screwed them over.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)Last edited Thu Jul 31, 2014, 08:20 AM - Edit history (1)
eom
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)It's part of their control strategy. It was the same in the Third Reich; ramp up and focus the hatred through intense propaganda.
IDemo
(16,926 posts)nxylas
(6,440 posts)When in fact, it is the entire point of the exercise.
Dustlawyer
(10,495 posts)DetlefK
(16,423 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)K&R
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Buns_of_Fire
(17,173 posts)It's getting harder to pick out the new and improved dog whistles without a Frank Luntz-approved phrase book.
saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)There are names unworthy of any mention. They always pontificate and vote for the Rs. They may call themselves teapublicans, libertarians, john birchers, or goldwater conservatives.
Every time the MSM, or bloggers, give any time to wingnuts, I'm upset. We democrats know the names of the media pundits who are paid shills. Why do we give them any print time?
Dr. Tyson is remarkable. Of course his disdain for creationism in favour of science is a concern for those living on a flat earth.
TNNurse
(6,926 posts)sound smarter and more educated than them? How dare he use facts and book learning to try to challenge them?
I swear soon they are going to be against schools. I think they need to stop Sunday school, they might be teaching facts in addition to brain washing.
Cosmocat
(14,561 posts)in the 90s they berated President Clinton for "country building" then they spent the 2000s screaming about the need to do it to justify Iraq.
in the 90s they screamed about the deficit until there was a balanced budget, then they screamed you can't trust government with a surplus, then off course spent the 2000s ignoring the debt before screaming bloody murder about it starting in January of 2009.
They USED to have this well worn, well crafted bullshit they called "principles" that generally provided SOME weak intellectual basis for rationalizing what they were doing (working for the ultra rich). But, they turned away from it to support the disaster that was Bush II and now are all over the place just wildly waking up in the morning, reading the papers and figuring out what they are going to go all apocalyptic about with President Obama.
They have been just making up as they go along since 9-11, honestly.
But, the media has no care to bring their contradictions to light and the people of this country have no care to remember.
It is red team vs blue team and the red team is the Dallas Cowboys as far as the media is concerned.
Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)How else can one make sense of the popularity of the likes of Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann for those on the right?
BTW, Charles C. W. Cooke, the author of the National Review article, is a graduate of Oxford University.
BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)There's this nasty, ego crushing thought that "What if this person is actually correct in his/her assessment of reality"
"It will mean that I've been wrong and incorrect in my thoughts for most of my life"
"I...I...just can't have these thoughts and these thoughts anger me and prove I'm not the super-duper person I assumed I was"
A Democrat will think "Oh..well...I was wrong about those subjects but that's cool...I can accept that"
"What's for supper ??"
We lefties don't make a big deal about being wrong...we just accept it and move on.
To this poster, A much healthier way of life.
mettamega
(81 posts)mainer
(12,022 posts)and having smarty-pants scientists challenge them conflicts with that fantasy.
eppur_se_muova
(36,257 posts)eggheads don't qualify. Only ruthless robber barons are sufficiently legitimized as "strivers", because they have striven to enrich themselves, regardless of the cost to others. This was Ayn Rand's ideal man: "Other people do not exist for him, and he does not see why they should," she wrote ... "no regard whatsoever for all that society holds sacred, and with a consciousness all his own. He has the true, innate psychology of a Superman. He can never realize and feel 'other people.'" (The guy she's writing about committed a sadistic kidnapping and murder of a 12-year old girl; AR filled her private notebooks with gushing praise for this "genuinely beautiful soul" and modeled one of her characters after him -- http://www.alternet.org/story/145819/ayn_rand%2C_hugely_popular_author_and_inspiration_to_right-wing_leaders%2C_was_a_big_admirer_of_serial_killer ; http://michaelprescott.freeservers.com/romancing-the-stone-cold.html )
Johonny
(20,828 posts)ever since he has done Cosmos he has taken his elevated position in society to really bring it on science issues. My respect for him has really grown.
phantom power
(25,966 posts)This is just the latest incarnation.
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)Paladin
(28,246 posts)The racist card is being played, over and over again. You have to be hopelessly naïve or stupid to believe otherwise.