John considers himself too smart to have "TDS" - I actually agree with that and am surprised that he cannot see beyond his own emotional reactions. I honestly expect more from John!
I know. Maybe it's all an act. If it's an act, it has gotten tedious.
You'd think a person might temper his disdain with recognition that under Trump the border was not the mess it is now. That we didn't have two serious wars underway. Maybe show a curiosity about the 51 former intelligence officials who lied about the laptop being "Russian disinformation." Maybe notice some oddities in the lawfare launched against Trump. You don't have to wave a Trump flag, but maybe just sit down and take deep breath.
Snopes, after nearly seven years, is finally acknowledging that the Fine People Hoax was and always has been a hoax. A journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. I wish John -- or the character he is playing if that is the case -- would take that step.
I have been following Glenn and John for about 5 years now. IMHO, at some level they are both playing us. It was amusing for a while but as you note is becoming more tedious as time passes. I've wondered why they would do this. Can one make enough money from a successful Substack to make this worthwhile? Maybe you can if you through in hawking your latest book.
Giving both Glenn and John the benefit of the doubt as rigorous scholars in their respective fields, I have been disappointed at their lack of rigor when venturing into areas that they are not expert in.
Now THAT is an intelligent comment (and how refreshing). Congratulations! In over 3 years of writing extensively on that concern and so much more, you're only the 2nd person I've seen who started wondering in such ways. Now, if you wanna do something about it -- hear me out. Below is the comment I wrote for this topic today, but there's a ton more where that came from:
******************
First time I ever heard of John McWhorter was in a 2017 interview, in which he said about Trump: “He has a rather narcotic joy in dismissal and belittlement.” As The Donald is a symptom of the cancer that America has become, chances are — so do you. 20 years ago, it would have been impossible for him to be seriously considered, let alone win. If you’re not lookin’ into that, you’re not lookin’. But why bother when it’s so much easier to cry foul over “TDS”?
Do you know where the term “Trump Derangement Syndrome” originates from? I didn’t ask you what it is — I asked if you know the origin of the term. You’ve probably heard of yellowcake — how about uranium hexafluoride? Does calling someone a “Bush hater” strike you as a valid counter to that question? And yet that’s exactly what Bush apologists did when systematic self-delusion was in its infancy in the “Information” Age. Your kind has been playing that hate-card crap for decades. “Bush hater, Bush basher, Bush Derangement Syndrome, Plamegate” & plenty more. Adding to the arsenal of childish crap to continue the tradition: “Snowflake, Libtard, Libturd, Cupcake, TDS, Demon-crat, Democrat Party.”
Stirring defense!
And about that uranium hexafluoride (on a matter of world-altering consequence that shaped everything you see today): That story goes straight to the top with who’s in the White House right now — on very specific culpability to boot (which means your “whataboutism” bullshit goes right out the window with me). I’m well aware of the Left’s ludicrous ways of woke, rigging race-related incidents, and how they play the hate card when it comes to protecting their own. “Trump Derangement Syndrome” is not an argument any more than “Bush hater” — just as “everybody believed Iraq had WMD” is not an argument any more than “armed only with Skittles.”
“God can’t make square circles” but you think you can. Even the Almighty can’t make something it is not. But thanks to the internet and the cable clans paving the way for the onslaught of the utterly absurd — you can shapeshift anything or anyone into what you want to see: Even making saints out of people with a patently obvious history of hypocrisy and lies.
“A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on.” That quote’s been around in various forms for over 300 years (evidently the original being from 1710): “Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it; so that when Men come to be undeceiv’d, it is too late; the Jest is over, and the Tale has had its Effect.” I know the feeling, all too well! Just as I know the futility of coming here in the hope of having a larger conversation with people primarily interested in entertaining themselves. Social media (a.k.a. Safe-Space Central) — is gluttony under the guise of concern. It’s a sham and it always has been.
“Until the rise of podcasts, twitter, and the various forms of independent media / journalism, people weren’t really aware how legacy media was influencing their thinking. I think people are finally waking up and may surprise you here, especially if more talk about it.”
New formats for funneling information that caters to your cravings is not what I’d call enlightened. And those who couldn’t spot clearly dishonest actors before — think they’re wide awake now? The Twitter bio behind that quote begins with “Groupthink averse.” It would never occur to him that everything in that Tweet is Groupthink 101. “Substack Is a Scam in the Same Way That All Media Is”:
Just as outrage industries crying foul over McWhorter’s implication about “assignation” — while you flagrantly ignore WHY he said it (writing off any and all criticism as “TDS” — like your kin who came before you). To be clear, questioning McWhorter's "overture" is fair game — I'm simply saying it's part of a larger game (one in which you're all being played — Left & Right).
The following quote captures far more than the source of it comprehends. It would never dawn on him that he helped create the ugliness he so beautifully articulated:
“The thing that is most disturbing to me, in a sea of disturbing things — is that there is no opportunity in all of humanity, to observe the world we live in, and to see all the scope of life in the world, like being President of the United States. You sit there, and for 4 years, or for 8 years — the crème de la crème of society is presented to you. ‘Here’s the bravest man and woman in the military. Here’s the smart scientists. Here’s the most dedicated children in their learning.’ You get to see the ugliest . . . what are terrorists doing in torture camps. You see the world from a vista that only a man, or one day a woman, can have that outlook.
And I thought to myself: “Surely, when he won . . . he would change as a result of that.” Every day, you’re having meetings and talking to serious people. And then you come into the Oval Office to “Here’s the winners of the Spelling Bee of San Diego.” . . . And you meet these people, and life just comes washing over you. Your heart and your mind open up. What a learning experience — how much you learn about the world. And I thought, “It’s gonna change him.” . . . He didn’t change one f#%@g gram!”
That says a helluva lot more about America than it does about Trump. Who said it? Does it matter? To defenders of the indefensible — oh yeah! Because the source is what you’d seize on to deflect and deny the obvious: Then go right back to bitching about the opposition doing the same. I’m not saying you’re necessarily wrong: I’m saying your staggering hypocrisy is sickening and so is the other side’s.
Which is why this conversation’s going nowhere — and I just wasted $6 on an exercise in futility. Lemme save you some time. The first word that doesn’t reflect someone seeking in-depth discussion, will be the last word I read.
“The crude, dirty ‘brutes’ of the land of the Houyhnhnms in Gulliver’s Travels. The Yahoos are irrational people and represent the worst side of humanity. By contrast, the wise and gentle Houyhnhnms, their masters, are rational horses and represent humanity at its best.”
I'm going to cut Glenn a little more slack, especially about the book. Hawking a book kind of comes with the territory. I think it's more about getting the book in front of people than in making money off of sales. That said...
I've been following them about the same period of time. There seems less of an edge. Maybe people are more willing to cover the same territory now. Maybe we've built up immunity. Whatever the case, it definitely seems softer to me.
Seems to me, they used to cover more current events. There was some outrage or other to discuss every month. Maybe that has grown stale. Maybe the MSM doesn't pump out those stories like they once did. Or maybe three conversations a month is too many.
Here's hoping there will be a post-book second wind. Just in time for the election.
John disputes initially being labeled as having Trump Derangement Syndrome and then proceeds to display it. Pretty funny.
John considers himself too smart to have "TDS" - I actually agree with that and am surprised that he cannot see beyond his own emotional reactions. I honestly expect more from John!
I know. Maybe it's all an act. If it's an act, it has gotten tedious.
You'd think a person might temper his disdain with recognition that under Trump the border was not the mess it is now. That we didn't have two serious wars underway. Maybe show a curiosity about the 51 former intelligence officials who lied about the laptop being "Russian disinformation." Maybe notice some oddities in the lawfare launched against Trump. You don't have to wave a Trump flag, but maybe just sit down and take deep breath.
Snopes, after nearly seven years, is finally acknowledging that the Fine People Hoax was and always has been a hoax. A journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. I wish John -- or the character he is playing if that is the case -- would take that step.
I have been following Glenn and John for about 5 years now. IMHO, at some level they are both playing us. It was amusing for a while but as you note is becoming more tedious as time passes. I've wondered why they would do this. Can one make enough money from a successful Substack to make this worthwhile? Maybe you can if you through in hawking your latest book.
Giving both Glenn and John the benefit of the doubt as rigorous scholars in their respective fields, I have been disappointed at their lack of rigor when venturing into areas that they are not expert in.
Now THAT is an intelligent comment (and how refreshing). Congratulations! In over 3 years of writing extensively on that concern and so much more, you're only the 2nd person I've seen who started wondering in such ways. Now, if you wanna do something about it -- hear me out. Below is the comment I wrote for this topic today, but there's a ton more where that came from:
******************
First time I ever heard of John McWhorter was in a 2017 interview, in which he said about Trump: “He has a rather narcotic joy in dismissal and belittlement.” As The Donald is a symptom of the cancer that America has become, chances are — so do you. 20 years ago, it would have been impossible for him to be seriously considered, let alone win. If you’re not lookin’ into that, you’re not lookin’. But why bother when it’s so much easier to cry foul over “TDS”?
Do you know where the term “Trump Derangement Syndrome” originates from? I didn’t ask you what it is — I asked if you know the origin of the term. You’ve probably heard of yellowcake — how about uranium hexafluoride? Does calling someone a “Bush hater” strike you as a valid counter to that question? And yet that’s exactly what Bush apologists did when systematic self-delusion was in its infancy in the “Information” Age. Your kind has been playing that hate-card crap for decades. “Bush hater, Bush basher, Bush Derangement Syndrome, Plamegate” & plenty more. Adding to the arsenal of childish crap to continue the tradition: “Snowflake, Libtard, Libturd, Cupcake, TDS, Demon-crat, Democrat Party.”
Stirring defense!
And about that uranium hexafluoride (on a matter of world-altering consequence that shaped everything you see today): That story goes straight to the top with who’s in the White House right now — on very specific culpability to boot (which means your “whataboutism” bullshit goes right out the window with me). I’m well aware of the Left’s ludicrous ways of woke, rigging race-related incidents, and how they play the hate card when it comes to protecting their own. “Trump Derangement Syndrome” is not an argument any more than “Bush hater” — just as “everybody believed Iraq had WMD” is not an argument any more than “armed only with Skittles.”
“God can’t make square circles” but you think you can. Even the Almighty can’t make something it is not. But thanks to the internet and the cable clans paving the way for the onslaught of the utterly absurd — you can shapeshift anything or anyone into what you want to see: Even making saints out of people with a patently obvious history of hypocrisy and lies.
“A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on.” That quote’s been around in various forms for over 300 years (evidently the original being from 1710): “Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it; so that when Men come to be undeceiv’d, it is too late; the Jest is over, and the Tale has had its Effect.” I know the feeling, all too well! Just as I know the futility of coming here in the hope of having a larger conversation with people primarily interested in entertaining themselves. Social media (a.k.a. Safe-Space Central) — is gluttony under the guise of concern. It’s a sham and it always has been.
“Until the rise of podcasts, twitter, and the various forms of independent media / journalism, people weren’t really aware how legacy media was influencing their thinking. I think people are finally waking up and may surprise you here, especially if more talk about it.”
New formats for funneling information that caters to your cravings is not what I’d call enlightened. And those who couldn’t spot clearly dishonest actors before — think they’re wide awake now? The Twitter bio behind that quote begins with “Groupthink averse.” It would never occur to him that everything in that Tweet is Groupthink 101. “Substack Is a Scam in the Same Way That All Media Is”:
https://onevoicebecametwo.life/2023/12/02/substack-is-a-scam-in-the-same-way-that-all-media-is-2/
Just as outrage industries crying foul over McWhorter’s implication about “assignation” — while you flagrantly ignore WHY he said it (writing off any and all criticism as “TDS” — like your kin who came before you). To be clear, questioning McWhorter's "overture" is fair game — I'm simply saying it's part of a larger game (one in which you're all being played — Left & Right).
The following quote captures far more than the source of it comprehends. It would never dawn on him that he helped create the ugliness he so beautifully articulated:
“The thing that is most disturbing to me, in a sea of disturbing things — is that there is no opportunity in all of humanity, to observe the world we live in, and to see all the scope of life in the world, like being President of the United States. You sit there, and for 4 years, or for 8 years — the crème de la crème of society is presented to you. ‘Here’s the bravest man and woman in the military. Here’s the smart scientists. Here’s the most dedicated children in their learning.’ You get to see the ugliest . . . what are terrorists doing in torture camps. You see the world from a vista that only a man, or one day a woman, can have that outlook.
And I thought to myself: “Surely, when he won . . . he would change as a result of that.” Every day, you’re having meetings and talking to serious people. And then you come into the Oval Office to “Here’s the winners of the Spelling Bee of San Diego.” . . . And you meet these people, and life just comes washing over you. Your heart and your mind open up. What a learning experience — how much you learn about the world. And I thought, “It’s gonna change him.” . . . He didn’t change one f#%@g gram!”
That says a helluva lot more about America than it does about Trump. Who said it? Does it matter? To defenders of the indefensible — oh yeah! Because the source is what you’d seize on to deflect and deny the obvious: Then go right back to bitching about the opposition doing the same. I’m not saying you’re necessarily wrong: I’m saying your staggering hypocrisy is sickening and so is the other side’s.
Which is why this conversation’s going nowhere — and I just wasted $6 on an exercise in futility. Lemme save you some time. The first word that doesn’t reflect someone seeking in-depth discussion, will be the last word I read.
“The crude, dirty ‘brutes’ of the land of the Houyhnhnms in Gulliver’s Travels. The Yahoos are irrational people and represent the worst side of humanity. By contrast, the wise and gentle Houyhnhnms, their masters, are rational horses and represent humanity at its best.”
Just Where Do I Go to Find In-Depth Discussion in a World of Yahoos Who Think They’re Houyhnhnms? https://onevoicebecametwo.life/2024/05/25/just-where-do-i-go-to-find-in-depth-discussion-in-a-world-of-yahoos-who-think-theyre-houyhnhnms/
I'm going to cut Glenn a little more slack, especially about the book. Hawking a book kind of comes with the territory. I think it's more about getting the book in front of people than in making money off of sales. That said...
I've been following them about the same period of time. There seems less of an edge. Maybe people are more willing to cover the same territory now. Maybe we've built up immunity. Whatever the case, it definitely seems softer to me.
Seems to me, they used to cover more current events. There was some outrage or other to discuss every month. Maybe that has grown stale. Maybe the MSM doesn't pump out those stories like they once did. Or maybe three conversations a month is too many.
Here's hoping there will be a post-book second wind. Just in time for the election.