Nothing Is Ever Going Back to Normal

 

National Review — after previously offering that Drag Queen Story Hour was a “blessing of liberty”  and railing against Florida Governor Ron de Santis for modest efforts at pushing back against the left — finds itself shocked… shockedat the metastasizing phenomenon of leftists foisting drag shows (featuring men strutting pretending to be women as if women were clown-prostitutes) on children. “Oh, my heck!” they proclaim. “Who could have foreseen that if we indulged the left in their depravity they would push it even further?

It’s understandable why (Bush) Republicans and (Atlantic) Conservatives would prefer not to fight the culture wars. It’s just not gentlemanly/ladylike to make a big fuss about leftists sexualizing children. It’s icky and Trumpy to confront the left about their cultural ambitions and their use of every lever of Government to promote them.  And because they don’t want to fight, it’s very easy to succumb to denialism. “Yes, sure, there are a few crazies on the fringe of the left, but most of them don’t want to get gay with kids. And if we just calmed down and found some common ground we could get back to normal. Hey, why are those people over there making those kids shove cash in that transvestite’s thong?”

In Defense of Political Escalation,” Abigail Shrier makes the eminently logical point that the left has no intention of ending the culture wars, or even a ceasefire.

Those waiting on the mythical pendulum to “swing back,” should stop holding their breath. The gender activists are True Believers, akin to jihadists: no amount of reasoning diminishes their resolve, no appeal to data brings them pause, no urge to consider the sanctity of American liberties will convince them to cool it.

While conservatives have been waiting for things to calm down and get back to normal, and fretting that “we oughtn’t do things that are at odds with our precious principles,” the left have seized not just Government power, but also academic power, media power, and even corporate power which they eagerly wield against anyone who dissents from Woke ideology.

If the woke continue to gain ground, where will we skeptics go to educate our children, transact commerce, find fair adjudication of our custody disputes? Where will we publish when not only the New York Times has a “gender director”—when every publication does?

That is the worry that likely motivates DeSantis, the first politician to “weaponize” the Florida tax code. He brought its hammer down on Disney to punish that one company for using its immense corporate coffers to lobby against parents’ rights in Florida. In principle, it’s a move I’m leery of. (And in the case of sending CPS after moms and dads who take their kids to drag shows, it’s a move I would oppose.)

But the gist of this stratagem—escalation—may be necessary. Indeed, it already seems to be working. Playing offense, even raising the stakes, may be the only means of achieving a much-needed truce. I’m out of better ideas. How about you?

Yeah, if there is another way to bring the culture back to plumb, I would be interested to hear it. But pundits writing hand-wringing articles in magazines that are only read by other pundits doesn’t seem like an effective solution to me.

And it’s not just the gender bending. The left will never give up on CRT. They will never give up on Climate Totalitarianism. They will never, despite John Cornyn’s delusions,  give up on zero-tolerance gun control.

They don’t want to make a deal; they want our complete submission.

Published in Culture
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 295 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    Can we please stop saying that that what National Review allows one of its writers says in a column is “the position” of the magazine on a topic? It is accurate to say, for example, that David French thinks  that allowing Drag Queen Story Hour was a “blessing of liberty,” or that Charles C. W. Cooke is aghast at DQSH.

    I get the NR allows these columns in its pages, but it has long been the position of the magazine that it allows its writers great latitude in the choices of their subjects and how they want to write about said subjects. Debate among the various column and writers is encouraged and expected. Whatever they write about is not the position of NR. Only a piece published with the byline “The Editors” states the official position/thinking of the magazine.

    This is the position of National Review and pretty much any journal of opinion. Have at NR for allowing the articles/columns, but please don’t say that NR (or any other journal) “endorses” whatever the writers say unless “The Editors” write a piece explicitly saying that.

    I expect to receive blowback for stating this. But we’re adults; we should understand this and encourage it. 

    • #31
  2. Painter Jean Member
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

    Manny (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    You are all forgetting an important fact: There wouldn’t be any Drag Queen Story Hour if there weren’t parents who brought their kids to those events. No one has forced this on anyone. Ditto for the grotesqueries at Pride parades – the parents are bringing kids to these events.

    It’s a symbiotic relationship. Yes there are people who will bring their children to gay grooming events but gay grooming events projected to the public normalizes gay grooming. How the heck do you think something as absurd as gay marriage got normalized? One step at a time until it appeared to be normal. Most people don’t use reason. They go with the cultural flow, even if it’s cultural rot.

    I agree.

    • #32
  3. Painter Jean Member
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Can we please stop saying that that what National Review allows one of its writers says in a column is “the position” of the magazine on a topic? It is accurate to say, for example, that David French thinks that allowing Drag Queen Story Hour was a “blessing of liberty,” or that Charles C. W. Cooke is aghast at DQSH.

    I get the NR allows these columns in its pages, but it has long been the position of the magazine that it allows its writers great latitude in the choices of their subjects and how they want to write about said subjects. Debate among the various column and writers is encouraged and expected. Whatever they write about is not the position of NR. Only a piece published with the byline “The Editors” states the official position/thinking of the magazine.

    This is the position of National Review and pretty much any journal of opinion. Have at NR for allowing the articles/columns, but please don’t say that NR (or any other journal) “endorses” whatever the writers say unless “The Editors” write a piece explicitly saying that.

    I expect to receive blowback for stating this. But we’re adults; we should understand this and encourage it.

    Thank you!! 

    • #33
  4. James Lileks Contributor
    James Lileks
    @jameslileks

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):
    I expect to receive blowback for stating this. But we’re adults; we should understand this and encourage it. 

    It makes for good clicks to yarp about NR Groomers and imagine the entire enterprise as some exercise in sclerotic Beltway GOP capitulation designed to ensure cocktail-party invites. Interesting journals are heterodox. 

    • #34
  5. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):
    NR allows these columns in its pages, but it has long been the position of the magazine that it allows its writers great latitude in the choices of their subjects and how they want to write about said subjects. Debate among the various column and writers is encouraged and expected.

    John Derbyshire and Mark Steyn might beg to differ.

    It makes for good clicks to yarp about NR Groomers and imagine the entire enterprise as some exercise in sclerotic Beltway GOP capitulation designed to ensure cocktail-party invites.

    Actually, the subject of the post was Abigail Shrier’s article in Substack. NR was simply cited as an example of Conservatism Inc’s tendency to write about how “the left is wrong” on any given issue, but then to go all wobbly when someone like Trump or de Santis takes action against the left. “Our principles demand that multibillion dollar global media conglomerates not forfeit their tax breaks for advocating the sexualization of children in the public schools.”

    • #35
  6. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    You are all forgetting an important fact: There wouldn’t be any Drag Queen Story Hour if there weren’t parents who brought their kids to those events. No one has forced this on anyone. Ditto for the grotesqueries at Pride parades – the parents are bringing kids to these events.

     

    If they are school or work related then there is a coercion aspect.  

    • #36
  7. Headedwest Coolidge
    Headedwest
    @Headedwest

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    You are all forgetting an important fact: There wouldn’t be any Drag Queen Story Hour if there weren’t parents who brought their kids to those events. No one has forced this on anyone. Ditto for the grotesqueries at Pride parades – the parents are bringing kids to these events.

    Several officials have stated that drag queen shows should be part of public elementary education, thereby taking the parents out of the decision making.

    • #37
  8. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    If cities and states can pass laws to ban DQSH from public venues, they have the right to do so. The feds do not. 

    I reject David French’s anti-conservative libertarianism. I prefer Sohrab Amari’s conservatism applied locally. Localities have the right to push for the social rules they want to live with. The federal government has no business interfering until it interferes with rights. Drag Queen Story Hour isn’t a right and it isn’t free speech. It is indecent exposure in a public venue to minors.

    Same with teaching kids in public schools about gay marriage and trans issues. That’s not a free speech issue, either.

    States are supposed to have more latitude in their laws. They are the laboratories of governing policy. NOT the federal government.

    • #38
  9. Painter Jean Member
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    You are all forgetting an important fact: There wouldn’t be any Drag Queen Story Hour if there weren’t parents who brought their kids to those events. No one has forced this on anyone. Ditto for the grotesqueries at Pride parades – the parents are bringing kids to these events.

     

    If they are school or work related then there is a coercion 

    The post mentioned the exposure of kids to Pride parades and Drag Queen Story Hour, both of which parents would have had to willingly bring their kids to. No doubt some of this is occurring at schools without parental consent, but the fact remains that there are parents who are quite willing to expose their kids to this.

    • #39
  10. Painter Jean Member
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

    Stina (View Comment):

    If cities and states can pass laws to ban DQSH from public venues, they have the right to do so. The feds do not.

    I reject David French’s anti-conservative libertarianism. I prefer Sohrab Amari’s conservatism applied locally. Localities have the right to push for the social rules they want to live with. The federal government has no business interfering until it interferes with rights. Drag Queen Story Hour isn’t a right and it isn’t free speech. It is indecent exposure in a public venue to minors.

    Same with teaching kids in public schools about gay marriage and trans issues. That’s not a free speech issue, either.

    States are supposed to have more latitude in their laws. They are the laboratories of governing policy. NOT the federal government.

    It appears to me that you have completely misunderstood both French’s and Amari’s positions. French is arguing against federal legislation banning these things, not state and local. French is not an “anti-conservative libertarian “.

    • #40
  11. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):

    If cities and states can pass laws to ban DQSH from public venues, they have the right to do so. The feds do not.

    I reject David French’s anti-conservative libertarianism. I prefer Sohrab Amari’s conservatism applied locally. Localities have the right to push for the social rules they want to live with. The federal government has no business interfering until it interferes with rights. Drag Queen Story Hour isn’t a right and it isn’t free speech. It is indecent exposure in a public venue to minors.

    Same with teaching kids in public schools about gay marriage and trans issues. That’s not a free speech issue, either.

    States are supposed to have more latitude in their laws. They are the laboratories of governing policy. NOT the federal government.

    It appears to me that you have completely misunderstood both French’s and Amari’s positions. French is arguing against federal legislation banning these things, not state and local. French is not an “anti-conservative libertarian “.

    French disagrees with DeSantis’s position towards Disney. Ergo, he is anti-state interference. I do not misunderstand French. I used to read him a lot. I listened to his podcast. You just saying I misunderstand is not an argument.

    • #41
  12. Painter Jean Member
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

    Headedwest (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    You are all forgetting an important fact: There wouldn’t be any Drag Queen Story Hour if there weren’t parents who brought their kids to those events. No one has forced this on anyone. Ditto for the grotesqueries at Pride parades – the parents are bringing kids to these events.

    Several officials have stated that drag queen shows should be part of public elementary education, thereby taking the parents out of the decision making.

    That doesn’t change the reality of what I just stated – parents are willingly and knowingly taking their kids to Drag Queen Story Hours and Pride parades.  

    If there are local moves to put drag queen shows in schools, then parents have the option of getting involved and stopping it, or taking their kids out entirely if they can’t.

    • #42
  13. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Headedwest (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    You are all forgetting an important fact: There wouldn’t be any Drag Queen Story Hour if there weren’t parents who brought their kids to those events. No one has forced this on anyone. Ditto for the grotesqueries at Pride parades – the parents are bringing kids to these events.

    Several officials have stated that drag queen shows should be part of public elementary education, thereby taking the parents out of the decision making.

    That doesn’t change the reality of what I just stated – parents are willingly and knowingly taking their kids to Drag Queen Story Hours and Pride parades.

    If there are local moves to put drag queen shows in schools, then parents have the option of getting involved and stopping it, or taking their kids out entirely if they can’t.

    People have the right to prevent this in their communities.

    For a devout Catholic, you sure are daft when it comes to cultural influence. I get French. He’s a personal God evangelical who things God’s proper place is in the church and in our hearts. But the Catholic Church has a far more comprehensive view of God, redemption, and sanctification. He isn’t just a personal God. And when his people go into the world and fight for what is right, cultures are just as redeemed as hearts are.

    we have a right to participate in the political process WITH our religious beliefs. Banning DQSH doesn’t change the hearts of people who are just going along for the ride. And those people exist. If the culture were shouting how great it is to be Catholic, they’d be showing up to the local cathedral, instead.

    Culture influences people. Not everyone thinks critically about what they are doing. Everyone is doing it. Take off the boundaries, and people meander past the border. That is typical herd mentality.

    • #43
  14. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):
    These parents are exposing their kids to this kind of garbage because they want to expose their kids to this. So – what do you propose to do about that?

    Call in child protective services. Shut down the public library until the people running that library are forcibly removed from their positions.

    And who do you think staffs these child protective service departments? Conservatives? No, social workers do, most of whom are likely favorably inclined to Drag events and are more inclined to take children away from parents who deny “gender-affirming” medical intervention. Dittos for librarians.

    That’s okay. Let them have to explain why it’s okay to expose children to hypersexualized drag queens reading stories about drag kids. Force them into public statements entered into the record.

    It’ll wake up the normies.

    • #44
  15. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Victor Tango Kilo: Yeah, if there is another way to bring the culture back to plumb, I would be interested to hear it. But pundits writing hand-wringing articles in magazines that are only read by other pundits doesn’t seem like an effective solution to me.

    As has been said by others and elsewhere, pundits are in it for the write, not the fight.

    I like it.  They’re really “write” wingers . . .

    • #45
  16. Headedwest Coolidge
    Headedwest
    @Headedwest

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Headedwest (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    You are all forgetting an important fact: There wouldn’t be any Drag Queen Story Hour if there weren’t parents who brought their kids to those events. No one has forced this on anyone. Ditto for the grotesqueries at Pride parades – the parents are bringing kids to these events.

    Several officials have stated that drag queen shows should be part of public elementary education, thereby taking the parents out of the decision making.

    That doesn’t change the reality of what I just stated – parents are willingly and knowingly taking their kids to Drag Queen Story Hours and Pride parades.

    If there are local moves to put drag queen shows in schools, then parents have the option of getting involved and stopping it, or taking their kids out entirely if they can’t.

    Getting labeled a right wing terrorist for opposing school moves is just a bonus.

    • #46
  17. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    Headedwest (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Headedwest (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    You are all forgetting an important fact: There wouldn’t be any Drag Queen Story Hour if there weren’t parents who brought their kids to those events. No one has forced this on anyone. Ditto for the grotesqueries at Pride parades – the parents are bringing kids to these events.

    Several officials have stated that drag queen shows should be part of public elementary education, thereby taking the parents out of the decision making.

    That doesn’t change the reality of what I just stated – parents are willingly and knowingly taking their kids to Drag Queen Story Hours and Pride parades.

    If there are local moves to put drag queen shows in schools, then parents have the option of getting involved and stopping it, or taking their kids out entirely if they can’t.

    Getting labeled a right wing terrorist for opposing school moves is just a bonus.

    • #47
  18. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    Stina (View Comment):
    Banning DQSH doesn’t change the hearts of people who are just going along for the ride.

    Minstrel shows and dog fights were once considered acceptable forms of entertainment. How did that change and how can we apply that to Drag Shows? Bearing in mind, there was never a time when minstrel shows or dog fights were performed in schools as part of “cultural enrichment.”

    It begins when we start drawing equivalences between men putting on make-up to ridicule African-Americans and men putting on make-up to ridicule woman.

    • #48
  19. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):
    Banning DQSH doesn’t change the hearts of people who are just going along for the ride.

    Minstrel shows and dog fights were once considered acceptable forms of entertainment. How did that change and how can we apply that to Drag Shows? Bearing in mind, there was never a time when minstrel shows or dog fights were performed in schools as part of “cultural enrichment.”

    It begins when we start drawing equivalences between men putting on make-up to ridicule African-Americans and men putting on make-up to ridicule woman.

    Activists raised a big stink and petitioned their governments about it. They pushed awareness to the public to vote in officials sympathetic to their cause, and…. PASSED LAWS against them.

    • #49
  20. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):
    Banning DQSH doesn’t change the hearts of people who are just going along for the ride.

    Minstrel shows and dog fights were once considered acceptable forms of entertainment. How did that change and how can we apply that to Drag Shows? Bearing in mind, there was never a time when minstrel shows or dog fights were performed in schools as part of “cultural enrichment.”

    It begins when we start drawing equivalences between men putting on make-up to ridicule African-Americans and men putting on make-up to ridicule woman.

    Unfortunately, that adopts the left’s language of “appropriation.” We need to oppose Drag Shows for Kids without using the left’s framing. We need to oppose Drag Shows for kids based on something a bit more . . . primal. That this is sexual perversion aimed directly at children, breaking down their natural barriers, and forcing a sexual interpretation of the world on them at a very young age. It’s not appreciably different than giving children porn. 

    I recommend exploring whatever local ordinances against such perversion exist and putting them to use. Force local governments to either enforce these laws or go on record explaining why they should be removed so that children can go to drag shows.

    • #50
  21. Justin Other Lawyer Coolidge
    Justin Other Lawyer
    @DouglasMyers

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Can we please stop saying that that what National Review allows one of its writers says in a column is “the position” of the magazine on a topic? It is accurate to say, for example, that David French thinks that allowing Drag Queen Story Hour was a “blessing of liberty,” or that Charles C. W. Cooke is aghast at DQSH.

    I get the NR allows these columns in its pages, but it has long been the position of the magazine that it allows its writers great latitude in the choices of their subjects and how they want to write about said subjects. Debate among the various column and writers is encouraged and expected. Whatever they write about is not the position of NR. Only a piece published with the byline “The Editors” states the official position/thinking of the magazine.

    This is the position of National Review and pretty much any journal of opinion. Have at NR for allowing the articles/columns, but please don’t say that NR (or any other journal) “endorses” whatever the writers say unless “The Editors” write a piece explicitly saying that.

    I expect to receive blowback for stating this. But we’re adults; we should understand this and encourage it.

    Also, they publish articles of their writers who dissent from the official editorial position.  I find that quite commendable.

    • #51
  22. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):
    NR allows these columns in its pages, but it has long been the position of the magazine that it allows its writers great latitude in the choices of their subjects and how they want to write about said subjects. Debate among the various column and writers is encouraged and expected.

    John Derbyshire and Mark Steyn might beg to differ.

    IIRC, Derb was let go because of his “The Talk” essay published in Taki magazine, not anything he published at NR. I would have made a different decision. I also believe that if Derb submitted the essay to NT, the editors would not have published it.

    Steyn left because he an NR disagreed on how to defend the lawsuit brought by Michael Mann. (Again, IIRC.)

    NR gives its writers wide latitude, but such latitude is not infinite. Nor should it be.

    ETA: These were essentially business decisions, not editorial decisions. There is a difference, and I think the point of the OP is the editorial decisions at NR.

    • #52
  23. Painter Jean Member
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

    Stina (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):

    If cities and states can pass laws to ban DQSH from public venues, they have the right to do so. The feds do not.

    I reject David French’s anti-conservative libertarianism. I prefer Sohrab Amari’s conservatism applied locally. Localities have the right to push for the social rules they want to live with. The federal government has no business interfering until it interferes with rights. Drag Queen Story Hour isn’t a right and it isn’t free speech. It is indecent exposure in a public venue to minors.

    Same with teaching kids in public schools about gay marriage and trans issues. That’s not a free speech issue, either.

    States are supposed to have more latitude in their laws. They are the laboratories of governing policy. NOT the federal government.

    It appears to me that you have completely misunderstood both French’s and Amari’s positions. French is arguing against federal legislation banning these things, not state and local. French is not an “anti-conservative libertarian “.

    French disagrees with DeSantis’s position towards Disney. Ergo, he is anti-state interference. I do not misunderstand French. I used to read him a lot. I listened to his podcast. You just saying I misunderstand is not an argument.

    I stated that you misunderstood French’s position because in the article that is linked to in the original post, French is arguing against federal interference in 1st Amendment matters. He is not against local movements per se, as you seem to think he is. His stated positions on Florida’s actions against Disney, 1 – weren’t made when he was with National Review, so in a “let’s all sneer at National Review” post, it seems beside the point; and 2 – his objection isn’t based on the idea that states shouldn’t interfere, but is based on 1st Amendment principles – remember when Chick-Fil-A was banned from having concessions in some airport because of its alleged anti-lgbtq position? Conservatives were outraged, and rightly so. Now it’s OK, because it’s our guys doing the action! I happen to think DeSantis was correct in reacting to Disney, but I don’t think removing the “special district” status was the way to go about it, as the local taxpayers will bear the brunt, not Disney.

    • #53
  24. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):

    If cities and states can pass laws to ban DQSH from public venues, they have the right to do so. The feds do not.

    I reject David French’s anti-conservative libertarianism. I prefer Sohrab Amari’s conservatism applied locally. Localities have the right to push for the social rules they want to live with. The federal government has no business interfering until it interferes with rights. Drag Queen Story Hour isn’t a right and it isn’t free speech. It is indecent exposure in a public venue to minors.

    Same with teaching kids in public schools about gay marriage and trans issues. That’s not a free speech issue, either.

    States are supposed to have more latitude in their laws. They are the laboratories of governing policy. NOT the federal government.

    It appears to me that you have completely misunderstood both French’s and Amari’s positions. French is arguing against federal legislation banning these things, not state and local. French is not an “anti-conservative libertarian “.

    French disagrees with DeSantis’s position towards Disney. Ergo, he is anti-state interference. I do not misunderstand French. I used to read him a lot. I listened to his podcast. You just saying I misunderstand is not an argument.

    I stated that you misunderstood French’s position because in the article that is linked to in the original post, French is arguing against federal interference in 1st Amendment matters. He is not against local movements per se, as you seem to think he is. His stated positions on Florida’s actions against Disney, 1 – weren’t made when he was with National Review, so in a “let’s all sneer at National Review” post, it seems beside the point; and 2 – his objection isn’t based on the idea that states shouldn’t interfere, but is based on 1st Amendment principles – remember when Chick-Fil-A was banned from having concessions in some airport because of its alleged anti-lgbtq position? Conservatives were outraged, and rightly so. Now it’s OK, because it’s our guys doing the action! I happen to think DeSantis was correct in reacting to Disney, but I don’t think removing the “special district” status was the way to go about it, as the local taxpayers will bear the brunt, not Disney.

    Disney isn’t being prevented from doing business here. They were denied special privileges.

    Chick Fil A was being denied equal access to compete for a spot because of their religious views.

    See a difference?

     my original comment was directed towards French libertarianism that you responded to. Don’t tuck tail and run on a technicality.

    NR may have decided not to go as far as French wanted, but they are deserving in criticism for consistently not knowing what is going on amongst voters.

    My issue is French and how far his version of conservatism animates the established right.

    • #54
  25. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    We don’t have to pretend David French is a conservative.

    • #55
  26. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):
    NR gives its writers wide latitude, but such latitude is not infinite. Nor should it be.

    You seem to be saying that the editors limit the content of their magazine/website to points of view they approve. 

    • #56
  27. Painter Jean Member
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):
    Banning DQSH doesn’t change the hearts of people who are just going along for the ride.

    Minstrel shows and dog fights were once considered acceptable forms of entertainment. How did that change and how can we apply that to Drag Shows? Bearing in mind, there was never a time when minstrel shows or dog fights were performed in schools as part of “cultural enrichment.”

    It begins when we start drawing equivalences between men putting on make-up to ridicule African-Americans and men putting on make-up to ridicule woman.

    Unfortunately, that adopts the left’s language of “appropriation.” We need to oppose Drag Shows for Kids without using the left’s framing. We need to oppose Drag Shows for kids based on something a bit more . . . primal. That this is sexual perversion aimed directly at children, breaking down their natural barriers, and forcing a sexual interpretation of the world on them at a very young age. It’s not appreciably different than giving children porn.

    I recommend exploring whatever local ordinances against such perversion exist and putting them to use. Force local governments to either enforce these laws or go on record explaining why they should be removed so that children can go to drag shows.

    For once I agree with you. Local action is the way to go.

    • #57
  28. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    We don’t have to pretend David French is a conservative.

    He’s largely just a short cut to describe a particular set of “principles” and policies. I don’t think he’s the originator, but he’s one of the more prolific that pushes a certain viewpoint and everyone knows what it is when you say French. Ahmari is the same thing – just not as prolific. He made his name on a certain policy position that anyone on these boards instinctively knows just by saying his name.

    French’s views are widely circulated amongst the pundit Right and established politicians. Ahmari’s are still undeveloped but pretty common among the new right.

    • #58
  29. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    Stina (View Comment):
    He’s largely just a short cut to describe a particular set of “principles” and policies.

    Yes, exactly. David French and National Review are a kind of synecdoche for flaccid, ineffectual, Bush-Republicanism and Conservatism, Inc. 

    • #59
  30. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):
    He’s largely just a short cut to describe a particular set of “principles” and policies.

    Yes, exactly. David French and National Review are a kind of synecdoche for flaccid, ineffectual, Bush-Republicanism and Conservatism, Inc.

    Which is why I call them the French Davidians.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.