I should by now know better than to click on one of Roy's links...
Josh Trevino is an ass, and reads this silly piece from the NYTimes Fashion & Style section (!) about how Democrats and Republicans just can't be friends anymore as confirmation of his thesis that Democrats are incivil cultists. What he misses is the fact that the American Right, which we'll posit here as synonymous with Republicans, and also "assholes," has this stupid habit of pretending that its knee-jerk bigotry has something to do with "rational thought that is deserving of sober consideration, as opposed to utter contempt." Take this bit of tortured Tac logic, please:
A core leftist tenet may be expressed in the old feminist cliché, "the
personal is political." This gets muddied a bit by the left's
predilection for espousing "privacy," as found in some metaphysical
emanation or penumbra of the Constitution; but the net -- and discrete
-- effect of this espousal is not a depoliticizing of the "private"
sphere. Precisely the opposite: where "privacy" is invoked, it is
toward a definite politicized end, be it the legitimization of
arbitrary couplings under the rubric of marriage, or the breaking-down
of the social structures necessary for the maintenance of a
conservative order. In this context, it becomes extraordinarily
difficult to maintain relationships with people with whom one disagrees
on political or ideological grounds.
What he means is that gays don't deserve the same marriage rights as straights because they haven't had these rights before, and this upsets him because... well, no reason, aside from the made-up bullshit. That's our Tac: take a cliche, add a strawman, and you get a stirring defense of Western Civilization that would otherwise just come across as "I hate fags." When gays couple, you see, that is "arbitrary." When straights do it, that is because the Hand of the Almighty told Kevin Federline to taketh of the Holy Stoli and mount Britney Spears, and thus produce the Fruit of Jehovah.
The reason I can't stand anyone nowadays who still believes George W Bush is a Great Man, or that Republicans have not totally gone off the deep end in this brave new century, is that they are absolute lunatics. The gay rights issue is a good example. Take this gem from the retarded NYTimes article that caused Josh to clamber once more atop his plaster Internets plinth:
Stephen Viscusi, 46, of Manhattan, said the divide has made dating even
more fraught. Mr. Viscusi, who is gay and a Republican, said he has
been rejected by Democratic suitors once they learn his political views.
No shit. "Darling, I love you, and I want to spend the rest of my life in your arms, together forever, as second-class citizens! Ours after all is merely an arbitrary coupling, and we are therefore not justified in breaking down the metaphysical basis of the conservative social order, much as I love your hot throbbing... missile defense system!"
If Tac and all the distressed Republicans described by Anne Kornblut in her fatuous slice of spontaneous sociology want to be taken seriously, they can always stop, you know, advocating for bigotry. For openers. They're called "convictions," you know, and you have them because they're right. Today's GOP has made gay-baiting a centerpiece of its electoral strategy. I'm supposed to find this an acceptable, a legitimate subject of dinnertime conversation? I'm supposed to be OK with crass, cynical prejudice? Fuck that shit.
The Iraq war is another lovely example. What a goddamn stupid idea that was, and is. The 107 rationales offered to support it were all utterly demented, either because they were immoral, unachievable in any real universe, based on fever dreams, or all of these together. The administration decided to pretend that the irrational was rational, and the Wise pundits nodded sagely, and the nation's foreign policy was duly and with great pomp & solemnity flushed straight into the shitter under a banner reading "Mission Accomplished." And we're supposed to pretend that this was all just some "oopsie," that the willing propagandists of this debacle were and are just doing the equivalent of debating the relative merits of differing proposals for the motherfucking capital gains tax? People are fucking dead. A lot of people.
There is no more dangerous myth in America today than that people like Josh Trevino are even halfway rational, no matter how badly they write.
Oh, and this bit from the NYTimes article floored me, and I'd thought I was immune to being surprised this sort of nonsense:
In the wake of hostile debates during the last few election cycles, P. M. Forni, the director of the Civility Initiative at Johns Hopkins University,
compiled a tip sheet of how to avoid angry confrontations with
participants across the aisle. (His top three pointers: don’t assume
anyone shares your views; don’t point out another person’s politics in
public; don’t ask people to share their political affiliations.)
But
Dr. Forni, who is the author of “Choosing Civility: The Twenty-Five
Rules of Considerate Conduct,” and whose institute assesses the
importance of manners in society, said the dialogue has grown muted,
and not necessarily for the better.
The DIRECTOR OF THE CIVILITY INITIATIVE AT THE JOHNS MOTHERFUCKING HOPKINS UNIVERSITY?
CIVILITY STUDIES?
Dr. Forni has my congratulations on having the most thoroughly ridiculous job in America today, and I quite sincerely hope that tomorrow he gets hit by a bus.
UPDATE: All right, I'm sorry, I don't hope he gets hit by a bus. But I still think civility is way overrated; truth is a higher virtue, for one thing, and that's always a casualty when civility is invoked by the mendacious, a category that encompasses the totality of the "conservative movement" in this depressing age.