Post by millring on Dec 8, 2020 8:02:56 GMT -5
Too some degree I'm surprised the Douthat, of all people, thinks it adds up to belief in conspiracy theories.
On the other hand, Douthat, of all people, is the kind made most intimidated and insecure by a Trump presidency. The Douthats of the media world operate under the delusion that they can somehow hold conservative views and still be respected by their leftist peers. Part of the delusion is that estimation that they are more intellectual than the others and to the degree they are rejected in their ivory tower world of media, it is by those of lesser intellect. They think highly enough of themselves to at least be in the game.
But it forces the Douthats, Wills, and Brooks of the world to distance themselves from the commoners who do not adequately express a conservatism they can get behind. Frankly, they are quite easily embarrassed and threatened by the commoners like those who voted for Trump. On some level they understand that democracies -- especially oversized ones like ours -- require coalitions. And those coalitions require that we vote alongside people we might even find repulsive. But for the Douthats, Wills, and Brooks of the world, the association is just too much.
It's like the world of high school cliques. There are the popular folk and then there are all the social climbers (and, thankfully, there are those who really don't play the game, but they are few and far between). And in this social climbing dynamic it usually isn't the most popular who are threatened by the peer jostling to get to the top. The truly top of the heap are quite often willing to condescend to the bottom rung people and even be friendly on occasion.
No, the ones most cruel in the popularity game are the middle range jostlers who cannot afford to associate with anyone they perceive as below them. Such associations drag them down. And they think they can curry favor with those on the rungs above them by putting down those on the rungs below them. The irony, of course, is that that strategy does neither. It doesn't curry the favor they seek...
....oh, in Douthat's and Brook's case they are often quoted by the left because they willingly savage their own. And I'm sure that on that basis, they believe that the strategy is working. But the reality is that the left ONLY quotes them when they savage their own. The rest of the time they are perceived of as deplorable as the rest of us. They never once change any minds among their peers. They are not influential...
...and it doesn't spare them the association with the wrong kind of people. They are the wrong kind of people.
But Douthat and Will and Brooks will forever be perceived as pathetic mid-pack jostlers, willing to savage their own for one more failed step up the ladder.
On the other hand, Douthat, of all people, is the kind made most intimidated and insecure by a Trump presidency. The Douthats of the media world operate under the delusion that they can somehow hold conservative views and still be respected by their leftist peers. Part of the delusion is that estimation that they are more intellectual than the others and to the degree they are rejected in their ivory tower world of media, it is by those of lesser intellect. They think highly enough of themselves to at least be in the game.
But it forces the Douthats, Wills, and Brooks of the world to distance themselves from the commoners who do not adequately express a conservatism they can get behind. Frankly, they are quite easily embarrassed and threatened by the commoners like those who voted for Trump. On some level they understand that democracies -- especially oversized ones like ours -- require coalitions. And those coalitions require that we vote alongside people we might even find repulsive. But for the Douthats, Wills, and Brooks of the world, the association is just too much.
It's like the world of high school cliques. There are the popular folk and then there are all the social climbers (and, thankfully, there are those who really don't play the game, but they are few and far between). And in this social climbing dynamic it usually isn't the most popular who are threatened by the peer jostling to get to the top. The truly top of the heap are quite often willing to condescend to the bottom rung people and even be friendly on occasion.
No, the ones most cruel in the popularity game are the middle range jostlers who cannot afford to associate with anyone they perceive as below them. Such associations drag them down. And they think they can curry favor with those on the rungs above them by putting down those on the rungs below them. The irony, of course, is that that strategy does neither. It doesn't curry the favor they seek...
....oh, in Douthat's and Brook's case they are often quoted by the left because they willingly savage their own. And I'm sure that on that basis, they believe that the strategy is working. But the reality is that the left ONLY quotes them when they savage their own. The rest of the time they are perceived of as deplorable as the rest of us. They never once change any minds among their peers. They are not influential...
...and it doesn't spare them the association with the wrong kind of people. They are the wrong kind of people.
But Douthat and Will and Brooks will forever be perceived as pathetic mid-pack jostlers, willing to savage their own for one more failed step up the ladder.