PDA

View Full Version : The Lucrative Right-wing Grift is Blowing Up in the World's Face



Boba Fett v2
04-07-17, 16:40
Source: http://fusion.net/the-long-lucrative-right-wing-grift-is-blowing-up-in-t-1793944216

https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--AyvgpKI8--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/ia1rskhfdybvrrnaqgtm.png


If you want to understand intra-GOP warfare, the decision-making process of our president, the implosion of the Republican healthcare plan, and the rest of the politics of the Trump era, you don’t need to know about Russian espionage tactics, the state of the white working class, or even the beliefs of the “alt-right.” You pretty much just need to be in semi-regular contact with a white, reasonably comfortable, male retiree. We are now ruled by men who think and act very much like that ordinary man you might know, and if you want to know why they believe so many strange and terrible things, you can basically blame the fact that a large and lucrative industry is dedicated to lying to them.

Because there was a lot of money in it for various hucksters and moguls and authors and politicians, the conservative movement spent decades building up an entire sector of the economy dedicated to scaring and lying to older white men. For millions of members of that demographic, this parallel media dedicated to lying to them has totally supplanted the “mainstream” media. Now they, and we, are at the mercy of the results of that project. The inmates are running the asylum, if there is a kind of asylum that takes in many mostly sane people and then gradually, over many years, drives one subset of its inmates insane, and also this asylum has the largest military in the world.

For years, the conservative movement peddled one set of talking points to the rabble, while its elites consumed a more grounded and reality-based media. The rubes listened to talk radio, read right-wing blogs, watched Fox News. They were fed apocalyptic paranoia about threats to their liberty, racial hysteria about the generalized menace posed by various groups of brown people, and hysterical lies about the criminal misdeeds of various Democratic politicians. The people in charge, meanwhile, read The Wall Street Journal and The Weekly Standard, and they tended to have a better grasp of political reality, as when those sources deceived their readers, it was mostly unintentionally, with comforting fantasies about the efficacy of conservative policies. From the Reagan era through the Bush administration, the system seemed to be performing as designed.

But if this was a reasonably useful arrangement for Republicans, who won a couple close elections with the help of their army of riled-up kooks, it was a fantastic deal for the real engine of the right-wing propaganda machine: companies selling newly patented drugs designed to treat the various conditions of old age, authors of dubious investing newsletters, sellers of survival seeds, hawkers of poorly written conservative books, and a whole array of similar con artists and ethically compromised corporations and financial institutions. The original strategy behind demonizing the “mainstream media” may have purely political, to steer voters away from outlets that tended to present information damaging to the conservative cause, but the creation of the conservative media was also a revenue opportunity for shameless grifters from the very start, as Rick Perlstein showed in his classic Baffler piece on the snake oil-salesmen of the right.

The bottom-feeding amorality of the sorts of people who sponsored the right-wing press, and the crummy nature of the products and services sold, shows exactly who was supposed to be consuming it: suckers. Or, more specifically, trusting retirees, with a bit of disposable income, and a natural inclination to hate modernity and change—an inclination that could be heightened, radicalized, and exploited.

The grown-up Republicans in Washington, meanwhile, still existed in their own genteel bubble of misinformation—they convinced themselves that the occupation of Iraq would be over and done with in a few easy months—but the major figures in the Bush administration, and its allies in Congress, were not men who got the majority of their news from “Free Republic” and Alex Jones. They put their faith in a fairly traditional conservative orthodoxy: That you can use the levers of power to quietly enrich your friends and their firms, while pleasing the masses with some combination of tax cuts, loud proclamations of religiosity, and a modest, popular war or two.

But the complete and inarguable disaster of the Bush administration—a failure of the conservative movement itself, one undeniable even to many consumers of the parallel conservative media—and his abrupt replacement by a black man, caused a national nervous breakdown among the people who’d been told, for many years, that conservatism could not fail, and that all Real Americans agreed with them.

Rather rapidly, two things happened: First, Republicans realized they’d radicalized their base to a point where nothing they did in power could satisfy their most fervent constituents. Then—in a much more consequential development—a large portion of the Republican Congressional caucus became people who themselves consume garbage conservative media, and nothing else.

That, broadly, explains the dysfunction of the Obama era, post-Tea Party freakout. Congressional Republicans went from people who were able to turn their bullshit-hose on their constituents, in order to rile them up, to people who pointed it directly at themselves, mouths open.

Now, we have a president whose media diet defines his worldview, interests, and priorities. He is not one of the men, like most of those Tea Party members of Congress, whose existing worldview determined his media diet—who sealed himself off from disagreeable media sources. He is, in fact, something far more dangerous: a confused old man who believes what the TV tells him.

Donald Trump is 70 years old. He has always, clearly, been an incoherent thinker, contradictory and prone to self-gratifying delusions. But if, for much of his life, he was able to pass as an intelligent and well-informed man, it was probably just because he religiously read newspapers, especially the New York Times. That was and is a decent way to sound like a smart person, at least for a few minutes, which is long enough to impress most rich people. Now, though, Trump is older, his thinking more rigid, his favored media outlets less trustworthy and more likely to reinforce reactionary tendencies. Cable news has largely replaced newspapers as his primary source of information about the world. He has also taken to reading conspiratorial websites run by kooks and con artists. Perhaps, if you have a white parent or grandparent over 60, this sounds familiar?

Trump was always venal, dishonest, genuinely deluded about his financial acumen and business success, and, you know, a wildly misogynistic accused rapist and sexual harasser. But for most of his public life, he also clearly knew the right sorts of things to say to sound like a reasonable person, albeit a mostly ridiculous one. Donald Trump the deranged believer of bizarre untruths about the world at large is actually a fairly recent development. This is why, when he flirted with presidential runs in the past, he spoke positively of universal healthcare. This is why, when he planned to win the nomination of the Reform Party in 2000, he attacked Pat Buchanan as a right-wing extremist. This is why he spent many years claiming to have opposed the Iraq War—which he did, albeit after it was too late, and not before. Trump learned what to think about the world at large from the media, and for most of his life, he was a consumer of the mainstream media.

Donald Trump today is a cruel dolt turned into a raving madman by cable news and Breitbart.com. You could see the descent happen during the Obama era, in concert with the broader maddening of the GOP. The major difference between Trump and the other old white men who’ve been radicalized by the conservative press is that his was a strangely self-directed conversion, based on his desire to make himself known as a plausible Republican presidential candidate.

If, at first, Trump’s 2011-2012 embrace of birtherism was a ham-fisted attempt at winning a political constituency for himself on the far right, at a certain point the distinction between cynical appropriation of the right-wing fever swamp and actual immersion in it dissolved. Whatever his original level of sincerity, Trump became a man who extensively reads conspiracy-obsessed right-wing blogs, and then a president who is closely advised by the dude in charge of Breitbart. And now, all you need to know to understand the president’s entire world view is that he is an old man who religiously watches “Fox & Friends.”

Just to be clear, the president has spent the last 3 hours watching TV.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8fd0xBXUAQsi9e.jpg

A media apparatus that was built to fleece gullible, generally older people now holds sway over much of Congress and the president himself. It turns out gerontocracy is an even bigger disaster in a nation with a giant media industry dedicated to scaring and lying to old people.

Here’s the real, non-ideological difference between Republicans and Democrats:

Democrats by and large are convinced that no one actually supports their agenda, and they devote a not insignificant amount of time and political capital to explaining to their own constituents why they cannot pursue goals that a majority of them support. (“I supported single payer since before you were born,” says Nancy Pelosi, who has the legislative and leadership record of someone who may support single payer but clearly doesn’t actually expect it to happen in our lifetimes.)

Conservatives, especially those who came up during the Obama era, have, more or less, the opposite problem: They’ve convinced themselves that their agenda is hugely popular and that everyone supports them.

There’s actually been some research on this: Politicians—both liberal ones and conservative ones—believe that the electorate is more conservative than it actually is. Conservative politicians believe the electorate is much more conservative than it actually is. Once you learn this, suddenly a lot of things about how elected officials act make more sense.

The most important major divide among Congressional Republicans isn’t between moderates and conservatives, or establishment and anti-establishment politicians, but between those who know that their agenda is hugely unpopular and that they have to force it through under cover of darkness, and the louder, dumber ones who believe their own bullshit. And for those loud, dumb members, egged on by a media apparatus that has trained its audience to demand the impossible and punish the sell-outs who can’t deliver, those more tactical members are cowards and RINOs.

This is how Mitch McConnell ended up so hugely unpopular and despised in his own party that he attracted a high-profile primary challenger during the period when he was doing more than any other person in Washington to thwart the Democratic Party. This is how and why a deal to cut social insurance benefits with support from a Democratic president repeatedly failed to happen despite President Obama’s best efforts. And this is why Republicans couldn’t repeal Obamacare. The marginally cannier guys thought up a plausible legislative strategy for forcing through an unpopular proposal with minimum oversight, and the House Freedom Caucus guys played a key role in blowing it up because it didn’t repeal Obamacare enough.

The Freedom Caucus, a group of 30-odd true-believers (all men, of those publicly identified as caucus members, and mostly men over the age of 50), rejected the deal because it was hugely unpopular, but what they can’t grasp, or admit to themselves, is that it was hugely unpopular mainly because of the ways in which it did resemble their preferred set of policies, not because of how it diverged from them. It does not compute that a bill that follows their stated priorities—a stingier government that is crueler to its citizens of modest means—would be unpopular even among their own constituents.

And because the right-wing media machine has no incentive to actually help Republicans govern—it thrives on conflict, not consensus—it did nothing to help sell the deal. And the Republican president, who doesn’t care about or understand policy, and who acts only based on what he thinks will play well on TV, got bored with the negotiation and thought he could just bluster his way to a deal that would make him look like he got something done. This is the blueprint for the next four years, if Trump manages to last that long before giving up. The president won’t have the patience for the legislative process, and the legislators will be dealing with the cognitive dissonance of learning repeatedly that the real-world version of their fantasy politics is massively unpopular.

Being the head sucker of the party of suckers is in some sense an appropriate fate for a veteran purveyor of substandard garbage like Donald Trump. Slapping his name on shoddy products marketed to people who—like Trump himself!—buy into the myth of Trump as a man of class, intelligence, and distinction kept him afloat after real estate and casinos nearly ruined him. Trump Steaks, Trump University, Trump Wine, “Trump”-branded developments he had no part in building or managing; Trump sold bullshit for so long that he seemed to begin to believe in the bullshit himself. And once the product was literally him, how could he not believe in it?

As always, the people who’ll truly be burned are the ones who bought into the sales pitch, from voters in opioid-ravaged post-industrial shitholes (Chris Christie’s on the way!) to Trump-supporting right-wingers in Congress, who will find their president mostly uninterested in their agenda (and unable to help them implement it even if he did care). The operators will still get something out of it, because they usually do. Paul Ryan won’t get to completely dismantle the welfare state, but he’ll still probably get a friendly Supreme Court justice or two out of him.

Steve Bannon and Reince Priebus both probably think they can “manage” Trump, the same way a coterie of movement conservatives “managed” the elderly and checked-out Reagan, putting him out in front of the cameras to deliver his patter while they went about the business of running the country. You can see this in how apparently warring factions within the White House are attempting to control what intelligence Trump sees and who is responsible for analyzing it before it reaches his desk. But no matter what his handlers put in his briefing book, the president is getting his actual briefings from “Fox & Friends”—as if Reagan had listened only to Paul Harvey to determine his agenda and strategy.

There’s plenty Trump’s minders can accomplish despite how distractible and unmanageable he is. They’ve already planted right-wing shock troops in all the federal agencies. They’ll fill the judiciary with extremists. They can do a lot of damage simply because the boss doesn’t care about the actual details and responsibilities of his gig. But on the major legacy-building (or other side’s legacy-destroying) stuff, really anything involving Congress or extensive public debate, there’s no coherent path toward anything that looks like victory. If the bullshit-peddlers who attached themselves to Trump truly want to remake the nation—beyond making it meaner in the areas in which it is already pretty persistently mean, or beyond simply raining death down upon foreigners with even less regard for casualties or consequences than evinced by prior administrations—they’re screwed. They’re screwed because they and their predecessors engineered a perpetual misinformation machine, and then a bunch of people addicted to their product took over the government.

Now, and for the foreseeable future, the grifter-in-chief sits alone in the White House residence every night, watching cable news tell him comforting lies—that he’s a hugely popular president, that responsibility for his myriad setbacks and failures lies with the many powerful enemies aligned against him a grand conspiracy—in between the ads for reverse mortgages and “all-natural male enhancement.” There’s an image of America in the age of the complete triumph of bullshit. You spend a few years selling lousy steaks to suckers, then one morning you wake up and you’re the sucker—and the steak.

SteyrAUG
04-07-17, 17:13
White men are stupid rubes who fell for a huckster, got it.

I think I liked it better when they were calling us racists.

RetroRevolver77
04-07-17, 18:01
Show me the birth certificate.

Eurodriver
04-07-17, 19:07
There is an awful lot of truth in that article.

Firefly
04-07-17, 19:18
It was Herpes or HIV, Folks, and Valtrex is a half step from being over the counter.

Yeah....I'm not getting my free CMP M16A1, Duran Duran won't magically top the charts anymore, and I doubt them Estonian sex girls are going to be dropped off in a limo with Journey blaring.

Oh well.....screw it.

SSDD is the mantra for me

SteyrAUG
04-07-17, 19:34
There is an awful lot of truth in that article.

Seriously?

They actually said the media was key in helping Trump. Even if they meant just Fox, they've obviously forgotten Megyn Kelly. There is so much simplistic and blatant propaganda in that article it's stunning.

Wonder if I wrote a similar article about how black folks got bamboozled into voting for Obama by pandering to racial issues how that would go over.

You want the real story? People HOPED Obama would CHANGE things for the better, for some reason everyone thought he'd be another Kennedy. But he never seemed capable of fixing anything and he actually fuxored a lot of things.

So after 8 years when Hillary thought "First Woman President" was the only novelty device she needed to secure a victory, and Wasserman and the DNC put all their eggs in that basket the vast majority of the country, even those who voted for Obama had zero confidence she could fix anything and most people had a pretty accurate understanding of what kind of person was and what kind of President she would make and they decided they'd rather take their chances on a reality TV show real estate investor.

Nobody got duped by the media, even though they tried very hard, stupid old white people didn't go "Yeah....make America great again dammit" and vote for a wall. People just didn't want Hillary.

This article is just another example of how much the left just doesn't get it and is in search of what went wrong, and in this case the "old white guy" is once again the problem, how very predictable.

Even with all of the incredible socialist luggage he had dragging behind him, despite the fact that ideas like college tuition absolvement for those in debt would have been disasterous, if Sanders got the nomination it might have been a very different story. And of course some idiot would come along and talk about how entitlement millennials got suckered into voting for a guy who never worked a real job a day in his life and you'd probably be here criticizing the article.

MegademiC
04-07-17, 21:31
That same article could have been written about liberals.
President with mental instability, living in a bubble, media lies, industry money influence...

JC5188
04-08-17, 10:32
https://youtu.be/HcLERK4xZ14

Also, blacks voted for Obama at a rate of 97%.

If women are so against republicans, why isn't Hillary president? They are more than 51% of the electorate.

This "white men" narrative is becoming tiresome. There are plenty of non-white men available to change an election, if that is the only "problem".

Since Obamas election, there have been over 1000 state and federal senate/congressional seats gained by republicans. What we're seeing is an across the board rebuke of far-left policies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Averageman
04-08-17, 10:58
There is no "Right Wing Media Machine" so why pull punches?
There is the left wing MSM and there is Fox News. For a certain part of the election, nearly most of it prior to the primaries Fox was not "pulling" for Trump, they were pretty much about 65% "Never Trump".
If someone wants to place some blame for Trump being elected lay it at the feet of the DNC. Their shenanigans forcing Hillary on Americans were exactly why they lost. When they knew they had a bad candidate, they doubled down.
Jim Webb could have won this one for them, but then, they wanted a Socialist Progressive not a Democrat.

SteyrAUG
04-08-17, 16:43
This "white men" narrative is becoming tiresome. There are plenty of non-white men available to change an election, if that is the only "problem".


Yep, before the election it was we need to not discuss "illegals" because we can't afford to alienate the hispanic vote. Then it was we need to listen to both side of "unarmed violent black criminal vs. law enforcement" shooting debate because we can't afford to alienate the minority vote.

But now somebody says something isn't right, it's "old white guys" once again who screwed up everything.

Bubba FAL
04-09-17, 14:20
Really? Who comes up with this crap? These assclowns are really gonna regret it when the angry white men decide they've had enough and start taking out their anger on them.

williejc
04-09-17, 15:03
The article should have stated that every group has its own reality or bubble. Common sense dictates that the bubble with the most money will play a major role in determining the nation's world view. Sometimes bubbles overlap, and that part is called a subset.

Today I heard a couple black commentators moaning about "the concern of working white men", but nobody mentioned that this group pays the taxes that supports other agendas.

scooter22
04-09-17, 15:16
Deleted.

FromMyColdDeadHand
04-09-17, 15:18
Really? Who comes up with this crap? These assclowns are really gonna regret it when the angry white men decide they've had enough and start taking out their anger on them.

We are at 'annoyed', you don't want to see 'angry'.

WillBrink
04-09-17, 15:52
So after 8 years when Hillary thought "First Woman President" was the only novelty device she needed to secure a victory, and Wasserman and the DNC put all their eggs in that basket the vast majority of the country, even those who voted for Obama had zero confidence she could fix anything and most people had a pretty accurate understanding of what kind of person was and what kind of President she would make and they decided they'd rather take their chances on a reality TV show real estate investor.


And their eggs were all dried up.

26 Inf
04-09-17, 20:50
I just know if I was President Trump I'd get the original of that picture signed by the artist and hang it someplace where I could see it.

Bulletdog
04-10-17, 00:41
So we've got another liberal that's pissed about losing the election that they had a 98% chance of winning, and he writes a piece about how old white men have been duped. Right. Moving on now...

Moose-Knuckle
04-10-17, 05:11
Really? Who comes up with this crap?

Liberals, progressives, millennials, Democrats, leftists, misandrists, the mainstream media, most of academia, Whites who suffer from White guilt, ageists, non-Whites who are racists towards Whites, et al.

Trump is the 44th White male to be elected POTUS and he is the oldest to ever assume the office so yeah, the above mentioned factions have been shitting kittens since election night LOL.

glocktogo
04-10-17, 10:41
There is no "Right Wing Media Machine" so why pull punches?
There is the left wing MSM and there is Fox News. For a certain part of the election, nearly most of it prior to the primaries Fox was not "pulling" for Trump, they were pretty much about 65% "Never Trump".
If someone wants to place some blame for Trump being elected lay it at the feet of the DNC. Their shenanigans forcing Hillary on Americans were exactly why they lost. When they knew they had a bad candidate, they doubled down.
Jim Webb could have won this one for them, but then, they wanted a Socialist Progressive not a Democrat.

This. Anyone who's watched any amout of FOX can tell you that there's the left media, then there's RINO FOX. It's all bullshat. :(

KalashniKEV
04-11-17, 12:01
There is an awful lot of truth in that article.


Seriously?

The author makes all correct observations, then struggles to fit them into his liberal progressive box.

In the process of regurgitating, his message picks up a good deal of partisan vitriol on the way back out, and the resulting product is the same flavor of munkey piss that Americans from both political poles seem to be swilling on these days.

Was this a High School paper?

The real story here is the rise of fringe radicalism, and the role played by the partisan hate machine in modern American society.

Not-only-just oldsters are being taught to switch-off, plug-in to the bullshit, and accept no moderate ideology...

SteyrAUG
04-11-17, 15:23
The real story here is the rise of fringe radicalism, and the role played by the partisan hate machine in modern American society.


And even that is really nothing new, I just haven't seen it quite this bad for awhile. With the exception of the post Bush/Gore election, I think you'd have to go all the way back to the late 60s.

Moose-Knuckle
04-12-17, 02:45
And even that is really nothing new, I just haven't seen it quite this bad for awhile. With the exception of the post Bush/Gore election, I think you'd have to go all the way back to the late 60s.

During the Bush/Kerry election there were articles published by political science types that showed we hadn't been that politically divided since the Civil War.

I have to agree with that observation and the gap has only widen under eight years of Barry O.

Eurodriver
04-12-17, 07:30
The author makes all correct observations, then struggles to fit them into his liberal progressive box.

In the process of regurgitating, his message picks up a good deal of partisan vitriol on the way back out, and the resulting product is the same flavor of munkey piss that Americans from both political poles seem to be swilling on these days.

Was this a High School paper?

The real story here is the rise of fringe radicalism, and the role played by the partisan hate machine in modern American society.

Not-only-just oldsters are being taught to switch-off, plug-in to the bullshit, and accept no moderate ideology...

Correct.

I'm not agreeing with the authors point. I'm merely saying a lot of what he said is true.

I.E. the Earth is the 3rd planet from the sun (true). It orbits the sun (true)

That does mean we are the center of the universe.

Similarly, Trump did campaign to angry old white guys. Angry old white guys tend to act in the manner described in the OP. That does not mean that angry old white guys are evil.

Does this make sense?