Your last paragraph confirms my worst suspicions about your point of view. You warn of the dangers both of the authoritarian left and the anti-democratic right. Admit it David, you are a moderate. You express strong opinions, but your heart is in the rational, moral center of political philosophy. Well educated, skilled in writing, a touch of humor and both feet firmly planted in desire for the human good - a soft target you are for the sharpened arrows of narrow-minded ideologues of left and right. That's it: moderates should be seen as those who can moderate dialogue between extremes, using the weak tools of rational and open discussion of conflicting ideas. Well, Quixotic though it may be and doomed to crash in flames, I am glad to have found this substack and feel privileged to support it.
Thank you so much for this. Tucker is a hideous embarrassment. And honestly until his comparing the train station to the US I would have denied the Right had any real sympathy for Putin and Russia. I’m still a bit resistant the to the idea because there’s sane reasons to be a Republican - but you and Konstatin have shined a clear light on these fringey “woke right” guys. I knew about the ones pushing back on the woke left and the Christian Nationalists but man it goes this far? Maybe it’s because it’s where I live but the woke left still scares me more. It’s tiring to fear both sides. And lonely.
There are so many problems with this, I don’t know where to start. First, I’ll concede it wasn’t Tucker’s finest hour. But this idea that somehow he represents an “anti-American” contingent of the Right is gaslighting.
And any defense of American urban blight by barfing a litany of lame statistics is pathetic.
As for Putin’s “lies,” what about his repeated requests to join NATO, to co-operate with the West? What of the violation of the “agreement” not to expand NATO into Ukraine?
Who benefits most from a Cold-War style standoff? Uh-huh.
Regarding civil rights, most here have been trampled to oblivion by a spying, censoring, weaponized DOJ.
There are J6ers behind bars without cause. Your own moral high horse betrays a suspicious political skew.
That was my take as well. It's a giant, giant leap from "Tucker Carlson is off the rails" to "The Right Hates America". Carlson's cachet on the Right isn't zero, but it isn't huge either, and we're not even sure how many of his fans align with his recent turn.
The arguments here also reek of the Left's characteristic reductionism. Pointing out that Putin isn't a senile vegetable in contrast to Joe Biden is not an expression of love for Putin or Russia. In fact, we've been treated to years of this with regard to Donald Trump, who CORRECTLY pointed out that Putin was smarter than European leaders who were castrating their energy production capacity and their militaries, all smugly certain that they didn't have to fear Russia. "Oh, Trump loves Putin!" they said.
No, Trump pointed out that Putin was beating you, and he was right.
This article makes me reconsider my subscription. I thought the author was more sober.
First, Carlson had the largest audience for any program in the history of U.S. cable news as of 2020. His first episode on X was viewed 120 million times and his Putin interview has been seen on X 205 million times. He is arguably the most influential right-wing news pundit in the country and has been for the better part of a decade.
Second, I never claimed Carlson is pro-Putin because he points out serious age concerns regarding Biden. I agree with those concerns and such an argument would be absurd. Carlson is pro-Putin because he presents Russia as a better place to live than the US, which is insane. He is pro-Putin because he has said that Putin, one of our top two enemies in the world, is "not a danger to the United States," which is false. He is pro-Putin because he has said "Russia is not our enemy," which is stupid and wrong. He has said he doesn't hate Putin because Putin never called him racist or tried to get him fired, which is just stupid. He has said "Zelensky has no interest in freedom and democracy ... he is a dictator ... a dangerous authoritarian," which is far more true of Putin, but of course Carlson has never said such things about Putin. At the World Government Summit, days after his Putin interview, he said with a straight face that Moscow is "so much nicer than any city in my country." Sure, if you're only looking at the tiny part of Moscow where billionaires reside. But if you do that, you're doing propaganda. He also said, "There is no evidence that Putin has any interest in expanding his borders," even though Putin has said one of his primary goals is regaining lost Soviet territories and he has waged multiple wars to achieve that goal. When his interviewer pointed out that Putin kills his political opponents, kills journalists, kills activists, and kills students, Carlson did not say, "Yes, and that's horrible and I do not support that." Instead, he said, "Leadership requires killing people." He has also literally said that he supports Putin over Zelensky. He could just as easily say that he supports neither because he thinks they are both abusive dictators. But he doesn't say that. And if you choose to say that you support Putin, then obviously, people can accuse you of being pro-Putin since "pro-Putin" literally means to support Putin.
I'm just going to respond to your first paragraph because that negates the second.
"Largest cable news audience" is a woefully outdated way to measure influence in the US. X views are better, but they still don't necessarily measure alignment. Finally, a person whose previous work has attracted views does not necessarily ensure that his subsequent work will be loved by the same audience (heck, I subscribed to this substack because I liked its previous work, but here I am not liking this article!)
Here's where I've decided the problem is: I like your writing because you have an Eastern European perspective that American writers lack. The thing about perspective, though, is that more of one means less of another, and in this case, this article suffers from a comparatively poor understanding of America. Will you be able to find people who align with the messaging of Carlson's Moscow reporting? Sure. Are they nearly as significant as you imply? Highly unlikely.
Circulation, ratings, and views are perfectly reasonable measures of influence while likes and shares reliably indicate support or alignment. And though I do strive to persuade in every essay I write, I wouldn't want any reader to agree with everything I write, any more than I would want a friend to agree with everything I say.
I am happy that you appreciate my Eastern European perspective, but I must decline the suggestion that I have a poor understanding of America. I understand it better than most Americans. I've studied it more than most. And I'm as American as any. Born in Texas, teenage years in the Appalachia. I grew up wilding in the woods, cowboy boots and overalls, drinking moonshine, reading Faulkner and listening to bluegrass.
I appreciate your continued support. But I hope for your continued pushback.
I really like Tucker Carlson but I think he is a total idiot on the Russia/Ukraine/Putin.
That said, I think you are way off on much of the rest of your comments. The Left is far more dangerous to the cause of our Constitutional Republic. There is no person or group on the right that I am aware of who wants a dictatorship. The Left is the totalitarian, dictatorial force of current day America. The "Far Right" is a very small number in recent times though the media has made it the "Giant" in the minds of the people. The Right (not Far) is laissez-faire economically and culturally (not moral issues of abortion and crime) as in "what an adult does in private is their own business." (Most people on the Right accept homosexuality, etc.) But the Left is not laissez-faire and wants to force and control, in public and in minds, pretty much every area of human behavior. The only things the Left wants to be laissez-faire about is abortion and crime.
Your contention that the Right hates America too is wrong. Wanting less government is not anti-government, it means wanting appropriate amounts of government. Not trusting government is not hating government. Anger and lack of trust are appropriate given the many misdeeds, stupidity, and overreach of our government (on both sides of the aisle.)
Feeling the US is doomed is not hate for America but a judgement made based on the evidence of past and current events and the direction of things. Not sure why you think those things you listed were not real enough for people to see without anyone like Tucker "dopamine tapping." The Left is happy to use all of these things to bring us down. I think you are short-sighted to think that because the Left is supporting Ukraine, that the Right hates America, too. The Right is angry about Ukraine getting the money. The Left is trying to bring us down. You are a patriot for wanting us to survive.
"There is no person or group on the right that I am aware of who wants a dictatorship."
Nick Fuentes said he wants Putin to invade and rule America. Curtis Yarvin says he wants a monarchy. Trump has repeatedly praised various dictators. There are more examples.
"Your contention that the Right hates America too is wrong."
This depends on who you mean by "the Right."
"I think you are short-sighted to think that because the Left is supporting Ukraine, that the Right hates America, too."
That's not my position. But yes, there is anti-American sentiment on the Right, although I wouldn't generalize that to make a claim about the entire Right.
Once again "Giants" have been made out of Nick Fuentes and Curtis Yarvin (who is he?) that almost no one on the Right even knows about. Most of the electorate are not political junkies that are aware at that level of detail. You are blowing this up.
Trump praising various dictators for their ability to get things to happen "easily" is hardly a terrible thing for anyone to say. Trump buttering up people in an attempt to curry favor in the hopes of making deals is hardly unusual. You are blowing this up. I don't love Trump, but please use common sense when observing his methods. Other presidents have used other methods with the world's bad players. I think Reagan is probably the only one in my lifetime to make any real progress with enemies. What about all the shameful kissing up and actual giving in to Castro and other despicable socialist Marxist a-holes? (Biden and Obama are especially guilty - Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, Syria...)
A couple or few people with actually small followings (in the scheme of things) does not support your anti-American Right statement. I'm going to guess that the number is statistically insignificant especially in contrast to the Left.
Your last paragraph confirms my worst suspicions about your point of view. You warn of the dangers both of the authoritarian left and the anti-democratic right. Admit it David, you are a moderate. You express strong opinions, but your heart is in the rational, moral center of political philosophy. Well educated, skilled in writing, a touch of humor and both feet firmly planted in desire for the human good - a soft target you are for the sharpened arrows of narrow-minded ideologues of left and right. That's it: moderates should be seen as those who can moderate dialogue between extremes, using the weak tools of rational and open discussion of conflicting ideas. Well, Quixotic though it may be and doomed to crash in flames, I am glad to have found this substack and feel privileged to support it.
Sobering and excellent.
Thank you so much for this. Tucker is a hideous embarrassment. And honestly until his comparing the train station to the US I would have denied the Right had any real sympathy for Putin and Russia. I’m still a bit resistant the to the idea because there’s sane reasons to be a Republican - but you and Konstatin have shined a clear light on these fringey “woke right” guys. I knew about the ones pushing back on the woke left and the Christian Nationalists but man it goes this far? Maybe it’s because it’s where I live but the woke left still scares me more. It’s tiring to fear both sides. And lonely.
Agree with most of this of course. Except that Tucker Carlson is not fringe. His popularity is immense.
There are so many problems with this, I don’t know where to start. First, I’ll concede it wasn’t Tucker’s finest hour. But this idea that somehow he represents an “anti-American” contingent of the Right is gaslighting.
And any defense of American urban blight by barfing a litany of lame statistics is pathetic.
As for Putin’s “lies,” what about his repeated requests to join NATO, to co-operate with the West? What of the violation of the “agreement” not to expand NATO into Ukraine?
Who benefits most from a Cold-War style standoff? Uh-huh.
Regarding civil rights, most here have been trampled to oblivion by a spying, censoring, weaponized DOJ.
There are J6ers behind bars without cause. Your own moral high horse betrays a suspicious political skew.
That was my take as well. It's a giant, giant leap from "Tucker Carlson is off the rails" to "The Right Hates America". Carlson's cachet on the Right isn't zero, but it isn't huge either, and we're not even sure how many of his fans align with his recent turn.
The arguments here also reek of the Left's characteristic reductionism. Pointing out that Putin isn't a senile vegetable in contrast to Joe Biden is not an expression of love for Putin or Russia. In fact, we've been treated to years of this with regard to Donald Trump, who CORRECTLY pointed out that Putin was smarter than European leaders who were castrating their energy production capacity and their militaries, all smugly certain that they didn't have to fear Russia. "Oh, Trump loves Putin!" they said.
No, Trump pointed out that Putin was beating you, and he was right.
This article makes me reconsider my subscription. I thought the author was more sober.
First, Carlson had the largest audience for any program in the history of U.S. cable news as of 2020. His first episode on X was viewed 120 million times and his Putin interview has been seen on X 205 million times. He is arguably the most influential right-wing news pundit in the country and has been for the better part of a decade.
Second, I never claimed Carlson is pro-Putin because he points out serious age concerns regarding Biden. I agree with those concerns and such an argument would be absurd. Carlson is pro-Putin because he presents Russia as a better place to live than the US, which is insane. He is pro-Putin because he has said that Putin, one of our top two enemies in the world, is "not a danger to the United States," which is false. He is pro-Putin because he has said "Russia is not our enemy," which is stupid and wrong. He has said he doesn't hate Putin because Putin never called him racist or tried to get him fired, which is just stupid. He has said "Zelensky has no interest in freedom and democracy ... he is a dictator ... a dangerous authoritarian," which is far more true of Putin, but of course Carlson has never said such things about Putin. At the World Government Summit, days after his Putin interview, he said with a straight face that Moscow is "so much nicer than any city in my country." Sure, if you're only looking at the tiny part of Moscow where billionaires reside. But if you do that, you're doing propaganda. He also said, "There is no evidence that Putin has any interest in expanding his borders," even though Putin has said one of his primary goals is regaining lost Soviet territories and he has waged multiple wars to achieve that goal. When his interviewer pointed out that Putin kills his political opponents, kills journalists, kills activists, and kills students, Carlson did not say, "Yes, and that's horrible and I do not support that." Instead, he said, "Leadership requires killing people." He has also literally said that he supports Putin over Zelensky. He could just as easily say that he supports neither because he thinks they are both abusive dictators. But he doesn't say that. And if you choose to say that you support Putin, then obviously, people can accuse you of being pro-Putin since "pro-Putin" literally means to support Putin.
I'm just going to respond to your first paragraph because that negates the second.
"Largest cable news audience" is a woefully outdated way to measure influence in the US. X views are better, but they still don't necessarily measure alignment. Finally, a person whose previous work has attracted views does not necessarily ensure that his subsequent work will be loved by the same audience (heck, I subscribed to this substack because I liked its previous work, but here I am not liking this article!)
Here's where I've decided the problem is: I like your writing because you have an Eastern European perspective that American writers lack. The thing about perspective, though, is that more of one means less of another, and in this case, this article suffers from a comparatively poor understanding of America. Will you be able to find people who align with the messaging of Carlson's Moscow reporting? Sure. Are they nearly as significant as you imply? Highly unlikely.
Keep writing, though, and I'll keep subscribing.
Circulation, ratings, and views are perfectly reasonable measures of influence while likes and shares reliably indicate support or alignment. And though I do strive to persuade in every essay I write, I wouldn't want any reader to agree with everything I write, any more than I would want a friend to agree with everything I say.
I am happy that you appreciate my Eastern European perspective, but I must decline the suggestion that I have a poor understanding of America. I understand it better than most Americans. I've studied it more than most. And I'm as American as any. Born in Texas, teenage years in the Appalachia. I grew up wilding in the woods, cowboy boots and overalls, drinking moonshine, reading Faulkner and listening to bluegrass.
I appreciate your continued support. But I hope for your continued pushback.
I really like Tucker Carlson but I think he is a total idiot on the Russia/Ukraine/Putin.
That said, I think you are way off on much of the rest of your comments. The Left is far more dangerous to the cause of our Constitutional Republic. There is no person or group on the right that I am aware of who wants a dictatorship. The Left is the totalitarian, dictatorial force of current day America. The "Far Right" is a very small number in recent times though the media has made it the "Giant" in the minds of the people. The Right (not Far) is laissez-faire economically and culturally (not moral issues of abortion and crime) as in "what an adult does in private is their own business." (Most people on the Right accept homosexuality, etc.) But the Left is not laissez-faire and wants to force and control, in public and in minds, pretty much every area of human behavior. The only things the Left wants to be laissez-faire about is abortion and crime.
Your contention that the Right hates America too is wrong. Wanting less government is not anti-government, it means wanting appropriate amounts of government. Not trusting government is not hating government. Anger and lack of trust are appropriate given the many misdeeds, stupidity, and overreach of our government (on both sides of the aisle.)
Feeling the US is doomed is not hate for America but a judgement made based on the evidence of past and current events and the direction of things. Not sure why you think those things you listed were not real enough for people to see without anyone like Tucker "dopamine tapping." The Left is happy to use all of these things to bring us down. I think you are short-sighted to think that because the Left is supporting Ukraine, that the Right hates America, too. The Right is angry about Ukraine getting the money. The Left is trying to bring us down. You are a patriot for wanting us to survive.
"There is no person or group on the right that I am aware of who wants a dictatorship."
Nick Fuentes said he wants Putin to invade and rule America. Curtis Yarvin says he wants a monarchy. Trump has repeatedly praised various dictators. There are more examples.
"Your contention that the Right hates America too is wrong."
This depends on who you mean by "the Right."
"I think you are short-sighted to think that because the Left is supporting Ukraine, that the Right hates America, too."
That's not my position. But yes, there is anti-American sentiment on the Right, although I wouldn't generalize that to make a claim about the entire Right.
Once again "Giants" have been made out of Nick Fuentes and Curtis Yarvin (who is he?) that almost no one on the Right even knows about. Most of the electorate are not political junkies that are aware at that level of detail. You are blowing this up.
Trump praising various dictators for their ability to get things to happen "easily" is hardly a terrible thing for anyone to say. Trump buttering up people in an attempt to curry favor in the hopes of making deals is hardly unusual. You are blowing this up. I don't love Trump, but please use common sense when observing his methods. Other presidents have used other methods with the world's bad players. I think Reagan is probably the only one in my lifetime to make any real progress with enemies. What about all the shameful kissing up and actual giving in to Castro and other despicable socialist Marxist a-holes? (Biden and Obama are especially guilty - Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, Syria...)
A couple or few people with actually small followings (in the scheme of things) does not support your anti-American Right statement. I'm going to guess that the number is statistically insignificant especially in contrast to the Left.