I spent the entirety of Wednesday when I was supposed to be doing super important things responding to white men on the NYTimes thread on this story! They kept saying that he was showing depth and consideration and being reflective.
My brain was literally shrieking! These men were accusing people of being "too hard on him." Of "cancelling him." It was extraordinary. So I wrote a whole bunch of responses. It freaked me out. The number of people missing the myriad things wrong with that email. That line sure. But the whole thing including the closing line. The "no better than" line.
Tucker is whitewashing his own depravity with the pretense of reflection and a healthy marbeling of white supremacy. “White men don’t fight this way.” Did he miss a few hundred years of laws and lynchings?
Tucker is whipped into fevered bloodlust against someone who has the temerity to exercise his first amendment right to protest fascism. Does he engage in this self-reflection because he realizes it is horrifically wrong to get excited by watching your political opponents be beat to death at the hands of an out-of-control mob? No. He engages in this shallow reflection in order to restore his own superior moral worth over the person with whom he disagrees politically.
His concern isn't for the humanity and life of the person who is being brutalized at the hands of a mob for exercising his first amendment rights. He doesn't say that he's stopped having such fantasies. Merely that the "gloating" about such atrocities might demonstrate that Tucker is "not better than he is."
Because Tucker assumes that the person is so inferior that he is worthy of being beaten to death for opposing fascism. But Tucker is just concerned that he is decreasing his certain superiority by gloating about it. Not about wishing it. Not about the disdain of “even though I despise who he is for opposing fascism someone might care about this creep.” What makes him a “creep” again? He is not being reminded of this young person’s humanity. This is about Tucker’s own sense of self-importance and moral superiority. His question is about his need to be superior to those he views as his “enemies” and “inferiors.” Not to have the superior argument. Not to demonstrate the efficacy of one’s recommendations. But to de facto be deemed superior.
Who needs to be reminded that their political opponents shouldn't be beaten to death?
He wishes his political opponents violent deaths at the hands of a mob. Shouldn’t we frown on journalists who advocate for the killing of people solely for their political views? Tucker has the power to drive people to this sort of behavior. He has spent the last two years continuing to whip up fervor against “those people.”
He continues to show depraved indifference, whipping up hate against those of us who have been pushed to the margins via the laws, public policies and social customs he supports and from which he benefits. Now we all know he fantasizes our gruesome deaths if only such behavior didn't make him as bad as he perceives us for just living in our bodies and disagreeing with him on policy.
Tucker is not experiencing a flash of insight.
The only reason he is even twinging about his bloodlust at all is evident. He believes this impulse makes him “no better than” the person with whom he disagrees politically. He equates his desire to see someone beaten to death for no reason other than their opposing political beliefs makes him morally equal to someone who disagrees with him politically. In Tuckland, if he didn’t have this pesky murderous impulse to desire strangers who disagree with him politically to die brutal deaths, it is clear he is morally and in every way superior to that guy. Oh. And white men don’t fight that way. Except for Red Summer 1919. Except for Rodney King. Except for Amaud Arbury.
This is a shocking document. That so many didn’t see it as wrong was more than a little startling.
Should journalists have platforms who desire that their political opponents die at the hands of mobs? Do we want to inflame his already enhanced sense of superiority?
feel a need again to say this. The “kid” that he admits to wishing death upon. Dehumanizing him as both a “creep” and someone that Tucker knows he would despise if he ever had to meet him. Please stop and reflect Tucker wishes him beaten to death over his political views of being opposed to fascism. Tucker isn't thinking it's wrong because you shouldn't want your political opponents to die by the hands of violent mobs.
BTW the defense of Tucker is what white supremacy looks like. Give him another chance. He didn’t mean nothing by it. Don’t make him feel bad. Don’t “cancel” a guy that made $20 million per year? He literally is saying he was enjoying watching a human he didn’t know being beaten to death and thought it was great.
One shouldn't need to have "self-reflection" about that. it should sort of be "top of mind" for someone who covers politics.