In some correspondence recently I was told by a camp follower of the alt-right that the c---servative word, so beloved of the alt-right, really has nothing to do with p*rnographic ideas or imagery. That's just a slur perpetrated by critics of the alt-right. Really?
Then I guess the vileness of exactly that type sent to David French is just a coincidence.
Just a coincidence, folks. Move along, nothing to see here.
All but the willfully blind know: This is the alt-right.
In the words of Gildor Inglorion to Frodo: They are servants of the Enemy. Flee them. Speak no word to them.
If you are looking for a role model of consistent, courageous, conservative culture warring, you couldn't do much better than David French himself. And guess what? He does it without needing any pointers from the vicious alt-right. All he gets from them is abuse.
God bless French and his family and keep them safe.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
12 comments:
I have a feeling that, if Trump was proved to be a mass murderer, his sycophants would spin that as "proof" that he "has what it takes to make America great again."
And here is a putrid response by Vox Day.
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/10/tears-of-cuck.html
Summary: David French's feelings are hurt? Harass him more!
The alt-rightists who pretend that they don't *personally* engage in this harassment are vile enablers, for they do not keep their hands clean of encouraging and excusing it. Vox Day is a prime example. Indeed, I'd say that Vox Day has gotten more and more open about it, this being one of his most open columns yet. Send them swastikas. Swastikas are "powerful rhetoric" and white nationalism is the "future for whites." I guess images of his little adopted daughter in a gas chamber are also "powerful rhetoric."
Despicable.
Let no one pretend that this isn't the alt-right. This *is* the alt-right.
Lydia,
This behavior would be despicable from anyone, but lest your readers forget, Vox considers himself Christian! How he reconciles his behavior and/or encouraging folks to engage in this kind of behavior with Biblical wisdom is a mystery.
"The mouth of the righteous is a fountain of life, But the mouth of the wicked conceals violence."
- Proverbs 10:11
"The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart."
- Luke 6:45
"Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear."
- Ephesians 4:29
It's a very good question how anyone could reconcile such behavior with claimed Christianity. I'm not sure I *want* to know what VD would say about that question.
My best guess is that he and/or his readers would say that they are *merely* recommending not being "limp-wristed" and being "combative," which are permitted by Christianity.
Judging by the alt-right camp followers who have argued with me both at W4 and in personal e-mail, I realize too that there is an enormous willingness to excuse vileness and not to admit that it is vileness. So swastikas presumably don't *really* mean "Kill the Jews!" They are just "powerful rhetoric." Being "combative," I guess.
In essence, they are postmoderns. They believe that they get to define what anything means. The vilest abuse, coming from them or those they deem "on their side," against those they deem their enemies (like French and his family), gets defined by their Overarching Will to mean "something-or-other that isn't wrong to say."
This post by VD is unusually forthright as compared with alt-right camp followers. The more common version of enablement from the camp followers is to issue some disclaimer like, "Well, I don't do that kind of thing *myself*, but..." and what follows the "but" is a boatload of misdirection, downplaying, excuse-making, subject-changing, and consequentialism.
I'm struck too by the blatant partisanship of all of this. What did David French *do* that makes him one of (VD's exact words) the "999 lying mouths of the Devil," that meant that French and his family deserve the "gift of fear"? Why, he _criticized the alt-right_!!! Did he send them death threats? Nope. Did he say that VD and Milo should be sent to the gas chambers? Nope. Did he gloat over the idea of some disgusting physical harm coming to Ann Coulter? Not a chance. Nope. Did he even tell some despicable lie? Nope, not that either. So what terrible thing did he do? He said that Ann Coulter's rhetoric was courting the racialist and anti-semitic views of the alt-right. And that this was a bad thing.
Yep, that's what makes you a traitor, one of the 999 lying mouths of the devil, deserving of everything that has come to David French. That's what means you should be "given the gift of fear." How *dare* French commit the lese majeste of criticizing the views of the alt-right and Ann Coulter for catering to them???
If we're going to make fun of people for being unable to handle things, for going over the top, for saying "the horror, the horror," how about that?? Doesn't that deserve to be made fun of? These alt-rightists are literally incapable of handling a little criticism without going postal. They freak out and become psychopathic at the least breath of criticism of one of their icons and of their movement. They think anyone who disagrees with them deserves death threats. *These* are the manly leaders who will lead Western civilization to rise from the ashes? You've gotta be kidding me.
Jeffrey, maybe those verses have been excised from the Arian version of Holy Writ.
Or maybe from the Aryan version...?
I plugged the Vox Day response at Zippy's here (commenting as Aethelfrith). I won't hold Zippy's response against him since I respect him immensely, but everyone else? *sigh*
I don't respect the hatred of French (what the *heck* has he done that is so terrible and deserving of punishment, for God's sake???) no matter from whom it is coming. Indeed, that sort of whackadoodle hatred of French (even if, wanna medal?, it exempts his family and gives some kind of lip service to condemning the behavior) should cause one to reconsider one's respect for anyone from whom it comes.
Anyone who reads the way that these people write about French could be pardoned for thinking that there is some back story that he simply doesn't know--some deep tale of French's betrayal of someone or French's perfidy.
But nothing of the kind. French is a *pure* ideological enemy. His crimes, for which he should "own" all of this, for which he doesn't deserve any sympathy, etc., etc., are merely the crimes of ideological wrongthink from the neo-reactionary and/or alt-right perspective. That's it. Never mind that he has defended specific, individual conservatives in court and helped them, working for the pro bono ADF. Never mind that he is staunchly socially conservative and has worked to those ends. Never mind any of that. He's a "liberal" or an "establishment Republican." He's a c----. He writes for (God forbid) National Review. He even dared to name the alt-right and criticize it! These things mark him out as an Enemy and prompt all of this trash-talking, so that his horror at what has been done and threatened to himself and his family is "whining."
And yet the alt-right and neoreactionaries whine about the lack of male role models.
They don't have any kind of special knowledge of David French that I'm lacking, and from where I'm standing, any young man would be doing quite well to take David French as a conservative male role model.
Thank you very much for this post. My impression of the guy years ago was mainly of sexist arrogance and apparently that was generous. I can't fathom how he calls himself Christian.
Post a Comment