Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Leftists Leaving the Left
A fresh raft of intellectual refugees is turning from the Left. Maybe they’re not washing up on the shores of conservatism or even Republicanism, but what’s clear is the Left they knew has left them. They are calling it “The Turn,” this experience of waking up to the new reality that the institutions and ideas they believed in, to which they committed their lives, have become utterly corrupted.
Walter Kirn was a huge deal in the rather small, insular, elite New York magazine and publishing world. He strode Manhattan like a colossus. Time Magazine. Vanity Fair. New York Magazine. New York Review of Books. New York Times Sunday Magazine. Hollywood made two of his novels into movies. I have no doubt he had his own table at Elaine’s. Maybe he sat at Woody’s.
Kirn’s essay at Substack last July was called “The Bull****.” Kirn remembered the time when Time Magazine “grounded the American mind in a moderate shared reality.” He said there was a time when “it was still possible to regard our product as unifying and, in its way, definitive.” All that has changed. He says, now, “every morning, there it is waiting for me on my phone. The bull****.”
Kirn’s complaint is the same as yours. Journalists are no longer journalists. Instead, they are propagandists for a political point of view. They have become cozy courtiers and chroniclers of the powerful. They are lap dogs happily kept on a short chain, eager to peddle their master’s lies—like Hunter’s laptop was a Russian plot.
Kirn has lost most of his income and all his old friends. He is unrepentant.
Liel Leibovitz was a fully credentialed denizen of the Upper West Side. Doctorate from Columbia. Professorship at NYU. Mainstream book contracts. Bylines in the smart magazines. Invitations to parties where one might sit next to Susan Sontag or Salman Rushdie.
He published “The Turn” last December at Tablet Magazine. He says “The Turn” is not a Damascene moment but starts as a twitch, then a few more twitches, “stretching into a gnawing discomfort and then, eventually, a sense of panic.” It is what happens when your world turns sideways. The Turn is when you cannot admit to your friends that even bigots ought to have free speech. The Turn is realizing you can’t express your doubts about lockdowns and school closures. The Turn is fearing the label “white supremacist” because you think burning cities is not necessarily “social justice.”
Leibovitz says, “You don’t get to be ‘against the rich’ if the richest people in the country fund your party in order to preserve their government-sponsored monopolies. You are not a ‘supporter of free speech’ if you oppose free speech for people who disagree with you. You are not ‘for the people’ if you pit most of them against each other based on the color of their skin or force them out of jobs because of personal choices related to their bodies.” He says the Left has become the party of the wealthy and state security agencies who preach racial division, state censorship, contempt for ordinary citizens, and for the U.S. Constitution. He has taken The Turn away from all that.
Alana Newhouse went to Barnard College on the Upper West Side of Manhattan and then took a master’s in journalism from Columbia University. She worked for legendary Democrat political consultant David Garth. She founded Tablet Magazine. In 2014, she gave birth to a baby boy, and she swore this boy lived in pain from the moment he was born. No one in the medical profession believed her. Finally, she came across a brain scientist named Norman Doidge, who helped her understand her son’s injury and how to proceed.
She asked Doidge why it took her and her husband “years to figure this out.” After all, both were children of doctors. And she and her husband were writers and researchers, with loads of health insurance. Doidge bluntly told her that the “medical system is broken.” Specifically, Doidge mentioned quotas for admission from emergency rooms, unnecessary operations, the monetization of illness vs. health, peer review run by Big Pharma, and many more maladies that have corrupted the system.
And then Doidge dropped the bomb on Newhouse. He asked, “How come so much of journalism I read seems like garbage?” At that moment, Newhouse realized Doidge was right. Journalism was broken. It had become garbage. And then she had the vertiginous realization that everything is broken.
She says, “For seven decades, the country’s intellectual and cultural life was produced and protected by a set of institutions—universities, newspapers, magazines, record companies, professional associations, cultural venues, publishing houses, Hollywood studios, think tanks, etc.” She says they are all broken. The cohort running these institutions now insist on sameness and purity. They have become “a mutually validating pipeline for conformists with approved viewpoints—who then credential, promote and marry each other.”
Leaving the Left is an old story.
The great novelist John Dos Passos turned on the Left when he realized the Soviets had murdered Spanish poet José Robles and that Fellow Travelers, including his close friend Ernest Hemingway, lied about it.
Arthur Koestler left the Communist Party over his disillusionment with Stalin. His book Darkness at Noon is one of the important books of this oeuvre.
Closer to our own time is the story of the neocons—Norman Podhoretz, Irving Kristol, and others—who moved Right after they were “mugged by reality.”
David Horowitz and his friends had “second thoughts” about their Stalinist youth. They produced “second thoughts” books and hosted “second thoughts” conferences. They still do.
Overreach always opens eyes. Pro-abortion advocate Frances Kissling, former head of Catholics for a Free Choice, said her movement lost “moderate pro-choice Catholics” over the radicalism of partial-birth abortion.
It is quite remarkable news that Kirn, Leibovitz, and Newhouse have opened their eyes. We can expect many more of them, as we are living through desperate times where the Left has the whip hand and are happily using it. Though a longtime man of the Right, even I have taken a bit of a Turn in recent years. The people and institutions I once respected—military leaders, the FBI, even the CIA—I now fear. In some ways, The Turn is liberating.
The good news is that in twenty or thirty years, there will be a plethora of books and articles from Millennials. These former nonbinary-commie-BLM-loving Millennials will have made The Turn.
Published in General
Yes, but I was referring to the “laptop class” that Annefy was describing.
I checked his Wikipedia page and I’m a few years older than Kirn. I was an avid reader of Time growing up. I even went to my local library and looked at their Time archives, looking at issues spanning World War II and the 1950’s. If you grew up in the 1960’s, you were surrounded by people in their 40’s and 50’s, where WWII was their defining era.
Where I got disillusioned was the issue after Nixon resigned the presidency. I’m going by memory, but one thing not generally known today is that Nixon had a lot of support in approval ratings. Polling indicating that a majority of the public thought he shouldn’t have resigned.
Time did a piece “profiling” who those Americans could be. The article was very condescending, much like Hilary Clinton’s deplorable remark about conservatives she disagreed with.
By the time Kirn would have worked for Time, it would have been a decade or more after that. So Kirn was contributing to this existing bias before his “turn.”
I’m glad he woke up about woke, but it’s a little late.
Yes, that is my story too. A college course on ethics (zounds!) changed me from a somewhat dishwater supporter of abortion to a pro-lifer, and for my apostasy, I was cast forth from the Left into the Outer Darkness. Well, actually, into the Libertarian Party for a little while, but some guy in a NORML tee shirt said “letters of marque and reprisal” one time to many and out I went again.
One question I would ask Kirn, Leibovitz, Newhouse, and others who have Turned. How did you come by your opinion of the Right? Was it heavily influenced by the media and other institutions that you now perceive to be broken? Do you plan on maintaining those perceptions going forward? We don’t bite. Well, most of us don’t. I’m trying to cut back.
If these people don’t renounce their vote for Biden, Hillary, Obama , etc . I don’t trust them. I suspect they will all vote for Ziden next go round if he is viable. If they support freedom of speech but vote for tyrants. Well , they are not my friend.
They’re all in for THEIR freedom of speech. Not so much with yours, or mine.
Trust them with what? I don’t trust the Republicans we actually elect now.
Me either . However , the subject was leftist’s who see a speck of truth. Some on the right go ooh, ooh, they are coming around . No they are not if they ignore the donkey in the room with them . We all can find agreeable things about (pick your despot) but they are still depot’s .
If they support freedom of speech, they probably don’t believe they’re voting for tyrants. I can work with that.
Only if you can convince them they’re voting for tyrants. Good luck with that.
Indeed.
I think a lot of the sense of hopelessness some people feel about debating with folks on the left springs from that belief — that you have to be able to convince them that they’re wrong. But I don’t think that’s the case.
If a man or woman of the left, someone who holds ideas I think are deeply misguided, is willing to engage in a discussion about it, that’s a kind of win. Because it’s usually pretty easy to make a sensible counter-argument for leftist positions, and leftists usually don’t make a lot of sense when pressed on issues in a competent way.
Audiences of normal people get that. It’s critically important that normal people hear the conservative case stated plainly, and the leftist case argued against competently. They rarely do, because the left prefers to control the narrative and silence dissenting opinions.
Leftists who are willing to engage in civil discussion are invaluable, and I applaud them.
I read the articles linked, all good reading.
If you’re making the case I’ve also heard others make, that arguing with leftists is useful for convincing the audience, then yes. But it seemed like you were saying that you could convince the leftist that they were wrong, and I think that is far less likely.
Ah. I miscommunicated. (See what I did there, @markcamp?) You will, unless I am clumsy, never find me arguing that we should invest significant effort trying to convert the thinking of a leftist or progressive. As I’ve said countless times: we engage in debate for the sake of the audience.
But we can’t do that unless there are people on the left willing to debate. And that is why I hold people like Ms. Weiss in such high regard.