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.
‘Politics is Downstream of Culture’
The late great Andrew Breitbart said that, and he was absolutely right.
In America, there are two political parties — two parties capable of winning national elections. In local elections, the situation is more fluid and uncertain and party affiliation is less important but at the national level, there are Republicans and Democrats. Efforts to create a third viable party come at the expense of one of those, and essentially assure the victory of the other.
America appears equally divided politically, but it really isn’t. Our national elections are virtual ties because the culture skews strongly to the left. Absent the nearly universal leftward cant of news, entertainment, and education, America would be unambiguously to the right politically.
The culture, in turn, leans left not because Americans lean left, but rather because those institutions that for better or worse represent our cultural touchstones lean left: those institutions of news, entertainment, and education mentioned above.
Those institutions are out of touch with the public. How do we know that? We know that because they are terrified of the possibility that the cultural playing field might be leveled — as recent stories about a threatened shift toward free speech at Twitter reveal. People secure in their command of the culture wouldn’t be horrified by the thought that their ability to censor dissent might be compromised. That isn’t how secure people think. That isn’t how power thinks.
One institution that understands the cultural reality is The Babylon Bee. Another is The Daily Wire. Both of these get it. They know that the way to win the culture war is to speak to America around the filters of Google and Twitter and George Washington Middle School and MSNBC — and not to give a damn what those erstwhile guardians of the public information trust have to say.
Ricochet is doing its part as well, providing a platform for a growing number of right-of-center podcasts that appeal to normal Americans tired of the left’s strident and humorless and terrified talking heads.
We don’t have to “win back the culture.” We haven’t lost the culture. We’ve merely allowed a minority of counter-cultural nutjobs to cow us into silence.
The left is stupid: it dominates through intimidation and volume, rather than facts and substance. That’s why the left demands that contrary thoughts be censored. That’s weakness. That’s an implicit admission that they live in a fantasy world that can’t survive sober scrutiny.
I’m a man. If someone calls me a woman, I don’t care: I’m a man. And that’s the difference: I can’t be “misgendered” because my sexual identity isn’t a tenuous fiction. That’s the advantage we on the right have: truth.
Normal Americans know that. They know you shouldn’t talk about sex to six-year-olds. They know purple hair looks silly. They know boys can’t have babies.
Political reality is that there is a party on the left and a party on the right, and that they’re roughly equally balanced. Cultural reality is that the left acts in secret and requires censorship because it knows America doesn’t like what the left is pushing.
Our job is to speak up. So speak up. Use your own voice. Use your own name. Say the things the left wants you to think nice people don’t — can’t — say.
Give the real culture its voice. Be that voice. Say the things the left is afraid to hear. And offend people, if you have to.
Published in Culture
I think Western Chauvinist (WC) and Henry Racette (HR) are both right.
With respect to attitudes regarding homosexuality, American culture is more “lefty” than it was when I was in high school, in the early 1980s. My Trigonometry teacher talked, in a disapproving way, about the fact that some high schools were allowing homosexuals to bring their same-sex dates to the prom, instead of restricting the prom to heterosexual dating. Still, one student voiced her support for homosexual students and the prom allowing for homosexuals to bring someone of the same sex as a date.
Now? We have same-sex marriage in all 50 states. During the 2016 Republican convention, Trump at one point praised the GOP delegates for applauding when Trump said he would protect “LGBTQ citizens.”
By 2016 a large majority of Americans supported same-sex marriage. Remember in 2004 when President George W. Bush was running for re-election while supporting a constitutional amendment that would make marriage a union of one man and one woman nationwide.
Of course, when I was growing up in the 1980s, the issue of “is marriage a union of a man and a woman?” wasn’t even a question. No one on the left, center or right of the political spectrum talked about. It wasn’t debated. So, that’s a huge change.
When it comes to religious belief, it is true that people are more willing to hold religious ideas up to scrutiny than in the past. That can be a good thing, not a bad thing, depending on the religious belief in question.
When a young girl raised in a Muslim family in Texas decides while in high school to reject Islam and embrace either agnosticism or atheism, this might not demonstrate moral decay, but rather sound critical thinking skills. This woman I am describing, Sarah Haider, co-president of Ex-Muslims of North America, no longer believed that a man who lived in the 7th century heard the voice of an angel in a cave and no longer believed we should receive our moral principles from a man who married young girls.
I agree with HR that this November, a majority of Americans are going to reject the party of “defund the police” and “let’s allow men to compete in women’s sports.” The key question, looking ahead to 2024 is this: Is the GOP going to present itself as sensible or a party that blames “Jewish space lasers” for wildfires (Marjorie Taylor Greene-Republican US House from Georgia)?
I realize that Marjorie Taylor Greene isn’t representative of the views of most Republicans. It’s just that we have to keep the kooks of the GOP as far from center stage as possible or else many voters might think that the GOP is more of a party of nut-jobs than the Democrats.
That’s essentially the battle: Which party can present itself as the less crazy and out of touch.
Hank, how do you think that the Left gained control of the institutions of the news, entertainment, and education?
To me, we seem to have had a reasonably free society during the period when the Left gained such ascendancy. What methods do you think that they used? We’re there laws that favored them and suppressed alternative views? If so, what laws?
As I recall from the time the story came out, the “Jewish space lasers” thing was nonsense, the sort of silly Left-wing propaganda that many Never Trump folks also seem to like when applied to a pro-Trump Republican.
I’ll accept what you say as accurate. But my point is that if the Democrats are putting their “crazy” on full display for everyone to see, it’s better if the Republicans don’t try to present themselves as even more crazy than the Democrats.
Here’s an example. About 9 percent of Republicans have a favorable opinion of Putin. So, it would be an electoral vulnerability for a Republican to be viewed as having a favorable opinion of Putin.
If you want to win elections, you need to win more votes than the other candidate. If the other candidate says, “Putin is a war criminal,” while your own candidate says, “Putin is savvy, a genius,” that could be a problem on election day.
When Democrats say positive things about Fidel Castro, we jump all over them. We can’t be surprised if the Democrats jump all over us for saying positive things about Putin.
Sarcasm
Gotcha.
Jerry, I think it’s largely a matter of the focus of special interests versus the natural tendency of most people to simply live their lives.
Progressives (leftists, liberals, whatever) are, by their very nature, people with axes to grind. They want to change things, and are often passionate about it. Whereas normal people, the majority of Americans (and majority of humans) just want to feel secure and comfortable and live their lives in peace.
So progressives gravitate toward hierarchical and authoritarian institutions where they have the power to push their agenda. Look at where they dominate: the classroom, the newsroom, Hollywood, government — places where they can stand on their soapbox and not have to face questions or challenges.
They couldn’t pull it off with talk radio, because talk radio only works if people can call in and there’s no feasible way to filter the callers and be sure they won’t say something challenging. Unfortunately, they’re managing to turn the inherently open internet into a one-sided conversation; technology and the network advantages of having first-to-market status are making that possible.
But the left is making the same mistake many here do: it’s confusing its narrative of the culture for the actual American culture as lived by most Americans. They shouldn’t make that mistake, because they are aware that they have to be secretive and evasive — dishonest — about their intentions. But they live in their bubbles and, as they become more confident, they become less careful. So we get Lia Thomas crushing women and Disney pushing deviant sex and the new racism of CRT and blatant online censorship and the corrupt Black Lives Matter and the promotion of Kamala Harris to a position of responsibility and obviously stupid things like that, and normal people begin to notice.
It takes a lot to wake people up, because America remains a pretty great place and most people are reasonably happy and secure. But people are taking notice. It took Lia Thomas and BLM and the fool in the White House and the price of a gallon of gasoline and creepy little authoritarians like Fauci and tinpot blue state governors, but people are finally beginning to pay attention.
So . . . if politics is downstream of culture, I’m trying to understand this:
“Politics” says that the most important issues facing the nation are domestic terrorism from the right, climate change and white supremacy/white nationalism.
Yet the “culture” says otherwise.
So why doesn’t “politics” reflect this?
Or does politics carry on with its own agenda regardless of the culture while also trying to shift the culture?
We’ve long accepted the view that politics is downstream from culture, but . . . maybe that’s not true?
Well said.
It depends on who the “we” is in the “We don’t have to ‘win back the culture.'”
If the “we” consists of people who oppose same-sex marriage, well, these days support for same-sex marriage is at 70 percent while opposition is at 27 percent, according to a June 2021 Gallup poll. (I realize that we can’t always trust the polls.)
If you think that the police are generally the “good guys,” I think your view is aligned with American culture. But if you think that homosexuals shouldn’t be allowed to get married, American culture is opposed to your beliefs.
Remember, though, that Trump, in his 2016 acceptance speech at the GOP convention, sounded very supportive of the LGBTQ community. Trump wasn’t trying to resist American culture on the issue of same-sex marriage.
I think the key question is this: To what extent should the GOP resist or embrace the changes that have taken place in American culture?
How about 30 inches above the waist?!
The statistics cited by HW about the change in public views of homosexuality are not consistent with this explanation. This is a real change, as far as I can tell. It’s not just a few nutjobs. The nutjobs seem to have succeeded in changing the views of a majority.
It is possible the a lot of people answering the polls on this issue are not telling the truth, I suppose.
Sorry, I like staying employed. All it takes is some disgruntled leftist to start a storm of crap raining on you.
Who is going to employ a person who brings down the screeching harpies of the Twitter mob on to them? It does not matter if the controversy is over nothing, and will blow over quickly.
Now, there is a market here. If someone could create a combination legal / business / PR consultant skilled in handling outrage mobs. Set up an insurance model, where you pay a premium, and they will come to your aid if the screaming monkeys descend.
Jerry, there has been dramatic change in American culture since the 1940s-1950s. But I think what Henry is driving at is that the Democrats have moved to the Left of American culture even as American culture itself has moved Left.
Americans might be accepting of same-sex marriage and no-fault divorce and sex outside of marriage but they aren’t very approving of “defund the police” or “let’s allow men to compete in women’s sports.”
Now, if you nominate a Republican who says “Putin is great man,” well, then voters might decide that the Democrat nut-job is a safer bet than the Republican nut-job. The key, I think, is to try to keep the Republican nut-jobs on the periphery, not on center stage. The GOP just has to not out-crazy the crazy Democrats and they will win.
At least he isn’t doing it to be cool!
It was the early 1980’s that we began home schooling. We had just moved to Florida: At that time (or within a couple of years) about half the state’s children were either home schooled or in private school. I don’t know the proportion that were taught at home, but I knew a number of educators in the public school system that could and did confirm home schooler’s progress – as required by the state. And I did know a fair number that were either home schooled or in church schools. And a couple that were in private high schools.
When we left Texas it was routine for Justices of the Peace to find home schooling parents guilty: All it took, I understood, was an appeal to get the case overturned, but I sure thought that would be a royal pain.
I don’t think that pandering to people who think in memes is going to work well, in the long run. Not on any issue — Putin or otherwise.
Putin actually is a great man, measured by accomplishment. We used to be able to see such things, and separate out our personal feelings and our conflicting interests. I recall Churchill calling Rommel a great general, and getting criticized by the small-minded. Of course, Churchill couldn’t admit the same thing about Hitler. People used to understand that Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson were great, though I didn’t like the entire agenda of their side. “Great” doesn’t have to mean that I like the guy, or like everything that he does.
Instead, many people seem to insist on turning Putin — and others with whom they disagree — into some sort of boogeyman. Personally, I find it childish. I’m not inclined to pander to such childishness. I’m more inclined to tell people that they need to grow the heck up, and stop living in a fantasy land.
Pandering may be politically necessary. This is not much of a recommendation for our system of government.
Is that a lollipop?
Kinda: An electronic one.
I’ve got to remember that label, it sounds so self-helpy. The Practical Atheist.
I use a 9 volt battery.
Been seeing a lot of articles on this subject. If it makes you squeamish, understand that after we defeat the gender ghouls grooming our children, we can get back to yelling at each other about SSM. But for now, we need some allies.
Transgender Demands Fuel Gay, Conservative Alliance
The Democrat Party is demanding that gay and lesbian people provide lockstep support for transgender activists despite the growing public recognition that transgenderism is hostile to gays, lesbians, and conservatives.
Not in my Name
Reasonable gays ought to disassociate themselves from the queer madness as quickly as possible.
It’s not the meme I am necessarily concerned with, although, obviously memes can be powerful in political campaigns.
I think it would be smart for a Republican to distinguish between Putin being a powerful man, having lots of nuclear weapons targeting American cities for destruction and Putin being a morally great man.
A Republican politician should be capable of communicating that he thinks Putin is morally evil, yet does have nuclear weapons targeted at millions of Americans this very moment and that makes Putin powerful.
Republicans should avoid using words that have so many different meanings in so many different contexts that people get confused as to what the heck the Republican is actually trying to say, especially if that Republican is trying to win an election against a Democrat in a state that isn’t deep-Red or deep-Blue.
Earlier I mentioned that 9 percent of Republicans have a favorable opinion of Putin. I will also mention that about 60 percent have a favorable opinion of Zelensky.
So, if a Republican politician, running in a state that isn’t deep-Red or deep-Blue, says, “Putin is a great man,” don’t be surprised if Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) jump all over this statement and the result is another Democrat victory on election day.
Republican rightfully criticized Bernie Sanders for praising Fidel Castro a few years back. We can’t be surprised if Democrats criticize Republicans if they make statements that can be interpreted as favorable towards Putin.
Nope. Let them hang together. Just because there is a small minority of alphabet people that are not completely moonbat does not mean as a group they are. Let the perversions flock together. They are what they are, let it ride.
I’m not sure if it’s a small minority or a large, silent majority. The internet is not real life, but it amplifies the freaks.
Just because somebody doesn’t attend church doesn’t make them an atheist, or a “practical atheist.” My father, when he was alive, was a zealous born-again Christian who founded and pastored a church that eventually grew into one of those “mega-churches” with musical bands and choirs and giant video screens onstage with Sunday attendance of over 3,000 people. He eventually grew weary of the “church scene” and stopped going to church for about the last 35 years of his life. Around the time that he stopped, me or one of my siblings asked him about the unfaithfulness of ditching church. He pulled out his Bible and read some passage from the New Testament that defined “the church” as the overall group of Christian believers rather than a building.
For those last 35 years, he spent ministering in informal gatherings in people’s houses, and inviting others from out of town doing the same thing. He and my mother were nowhere near being practical atheists. They were “on fire” for Jesus, to use a phrase. I, on the other hand, am an avowed agnostic, yet I attend Jewish Synagogue on semi-regular basis and study Torah on an even less regular basis, and I observe many Jewish Holidays. Go figure!
That’s a good point I hadn’t thought of about why liberal talk radio fails. My usual explanation is that talk radio involves pure words that necessitate thinking and ideas. Television, which is watched much more heavily by liberals, involves pictures which go right to the emotional section of the brain, bypassing the reasoning lobes of the mind.
I’ve noticed over the past few years that most of the left-wing news sites have gotten rid of their comments section. I think they grew tired of all the reasoned counter-opinions that undermined their stories. They don’t like debate, just one-way opinions towards their readers with no feedback.
I don’t get that one either. Trump did make significant inroads with black voters as a percentage, but not in overall numbers.
I don’t think the percentage of companies that fire people for their political beliefs is as high as you think. There was a guest on Dennis Prager’s show that works with large companies in finance, I forget his name. In his opinion, about 75% of CEO’s of large corporations want nothing to do with the woke business or Black Lives Splatter. However, most of them do the outward PR campaigns honoring diversity and all that crap because they are being blackmailed by the world’s largest asset manager, BlackRock.
In my own business I’ve dealt with dozens and dozens of CEO’s of large corporations, and they are mostly conservative or right wingers, with a few here and there who are liberals. At one time I had the CEO of Lincoln Electric Company sending me personal Christmas letters who’s message would start out by attacking Bill Clinton’s latest presidential actions!
This is only anecdotal, but my wife works for a large hospital system, one of the largest employers in Ohio. They advertise about how they support all that woke nonsense. Last year some anonymous employee made accusations against her that she made racist and insensitive remarks in front of a group of people. She was “put up on charges” so to speak and had to defend herself in front of a couple of diversity and inclusion officers or some such title. One of the questions they asked her was “Do you support Black Lives Matter?”
She was alarmed and scared out of her mind, yet she took a stand and said “NO, they support violent actions, Marxism, and are against the nuclear family.” After the interview there were statements forthcoming from the management on possible punishments, and she informed them that she was going to retain a lawyer. After a short time the matter was completely and officially dropped, and did not even go on her record.
Henry is right. We need to stand up. Otherwise it is just the same capitulation that conservatives are constantly accusing the Republican Party of doing.
This is quite a statement. I assume you are aware that Putin is a former KGB agent who now assassinates his political opponents or throws them in jail. Or do you dispute that? And he has just invaded a peaceful country claiming that it is run by and populated by “Nazis.” I am curious, do you think Mao Tse Tung, Stalin, Hitler (we gotta throw him in), Kim Jong Il, and pol Pot are also great men? And does moral character have anything at all to do with being great? Can Ted Bundy be judged favorably by his tremendous accomplishments?
Now I would like to ask about Putin’s supposed accomplishments (thereby your measure of greatness). According to this group’s listing, Russia is the 44th most corrupt country in the world, out of 180 countries, and more corrupt than nearly every single country surrounding it.
https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/corruption-rank
Russia’s economic output is equivalent to Italy’s, despite the fact that Russia is 2.5 times more populous than Italy and has astronomically more natural resources. Italy, by the way is only half as rich per capita as the United States.
Russia has the highest rate of alcoholism in the world, and the ninth highest suicide rate in the world.
Now what is it that Putin has accomplished of which you speak?
Did it ever occur to you that it is not simple “disagreement” that makes people think of Putin as a boogeyman, but the fact that he invaded a peaceful country and killed tens of thousands of innocent people, not to mention more than ten thousand of his own soldiers?