Read on Twitter
There's a common theme that weaves through grievance politics, perpetual victimhood, “cancel culture”, the recent anti-riot laws, and the January 6th insurrection.
A recent example of perpetual victimhood and grievance was this rant by @TuckerCarlson. 1/
A recent example of perpetual victimhood and grievance was this rant by @TuckerCarlson. 1/
In Carlson’s snowflake world, a guy exercising his 2nd Amendment Right to have an AR-15 slung over his shoulder, should “politely, but firmly” ask a 64 year old woman to “take off your mask…...2/
....because your mask is making me uncomfortable”….that it’s “repulsive”, and that it should be illegal, that police, and child protective services should be called. 3/
Apparently, Carlson view kids dying in school shootings as an acceptable cost of doing business so that people can exercise their 2nd Amendment Right to “protect my family/kids”,.....4/
....but if an equally concerned parent makes the decision to protect their kids from a pandemic that has killed almost 600,000 Americans, those parents should be harassed, reported to the police, and have their kids taken away by the state. 5/
Remember, this is coming from the thought leader of the personal freedom, liberty, and anti-socialism, anti-totalitarian crowd. 6/ https://twitter.com/Nick_Carmody/status/1385973247578021889
Although completely on brand w/Carlson’s pettiness, the fallout from this “de-masking” example is most likely an exponential uptick in “Karen-ism” videos on YouTube.
But the larger, more important point is the role that grievance/“victimhood conditioning” plays in society. 7/
But the larger, more important point is the role that grievance/“victimhood conditioning” plays in society. 7/
I’ve written about the role (collective) Narcissism has played in the decay of society. Victimhood is a common presentation of narcissism. Victimhood helps to sustain their sense of grandiosity, & avoid having to contemplate their inadequacy/insecurity.
8/ https://twitter.com/Nick_Carmody/status/1061031933402988545
8/ https://twitter.com/Nick_Carmody/status/1061031933402988545
Victimhood relies on, and results in, narcissists desperately clinging to claims of “unfairness”: 9/ https://twitter.com/Nick_Carmody/status/1153620273540636672
....and....10/ https://twitter.com/Nick_Carmody/status/1165598826431860738
“Pre-emptive retaliation” is a justified objective in grievance/victimhood politics:
“I’m a victim, and therefore ethics/morality/laws/constitutional norms not only do not apply to me or my tribe, but I’m entitled to retaliate pre-emptively”: 11/ https://twitter.com/Nick_Carmody/status/1165599600352186368
“I’m a victim, and therefore ethics/morality/laws/constitutional norms not only do not apply to me or my tribe, but I’m entitled to retaliate pre-emptively”: 11/ https://twitter.com/Nick_Carmody/status/1165599600352186368
In our society, there is a belief that victims have a right to take extreme measures to defend themselves, up to and including, deadly force. 12/
In the law, there is a common law principle called the "Castle Doctrine" that allows people to use reasonable force (including deadly force) to protect themselves against an intruder in their home. 13/
This doctrine was codified by state legislatures with “stand your ground” statutes that expanded it to include public places.
The Florida law states: “a person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity & who is attacked in any other place where he/she has a right to be....14/
The Florida law states: “a person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity & who is attacked in any other place where he/she has a right to be....14/
...has no duty to retreat & has the right to stand his ground & meet force with force, including deadly force, if he reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” 15/
The important language in the statute: A “victim”…..has a legal right to take extreme measures (“meet force with force”) if they “reasonably believe” it is required.
This is an important backdrop in an age of grievance politics, disinformation, & perpetual victimhood. 16/
This is an important backdrop in an age of grievance politics, disinformation, & perpetual victimhood. 16/
Along these same lines, there are parallels to the recently enacted “anti-riot” laws.
Aside, from potential violations of 1st Amendment-protected freedoms of assembly and freedom of speech....17/
Aside, from potential violations of 1st Amendment-protected freedoms of assembly and freedom of speech....17/
...when viewed through the lens of the "Castle Doctrine" & "Stand Your Ground" statutes, the laws potentially immunize a (white) "nationalist" who responds to a changing demographical make-up of the country by “defending the castle” & driving over/killing minority protestors. 18/
The important take away is the “moral authority” to pre-emptively act in self-defense. Remember the empowering/entitling language of the “stand your ground” statutes to “reasonably act” and to “meet force with force”.
Now think back to the January 6th insurrection. 19/
Now think back to the January 6th insurrection. 19/
Think about how often people were told the election was “stolen”. Not just by Trump, by nearly all of the Right Wing Media Echo Chamber, and most Congressional Republicans. Think about how often people in chat rooms, and Qanon disciples repeated the lies and conspiracies. 20/
Think about the logic-inhibiting emotion that people experienced after repeatedly hearing the election, and therefore the country, was being stolen from them. 21/
Now think back to the language of the stand your ground statute: to “meet force with force” if they “reasonably believe” it is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. In this context, the stealing an election is a "forcible felony" by order of magnitude. 22/
The “Firehose of Lies” disinformation campaign created an element of “reasonable belief”:
Storming the capital to steal an election back from people (Democrats) that the insurrectionists were manipulated into believing had stolen an election…was “meeting force with force”. 23/
Storming the capital to steal an election back from people (Democrats) that the insurrectionists were manipulated into believing had stolen an election…was “meeting force with force”. 23/
The fact that many of them were walking around talking about it being “My house” or the “peoples’ house”, is ironically incidental to the castle doctrine theme. 24/
Obviously, this begs the question: Who is responsible for the January 6th insurrection? The people who stormed the capital? Trump? Congressional Republicans? The Right Wing Media Echo Chamber that manipulated them? The answer is all of the above. Why? 25/(cont...)
Well, let’s start with an archaic Republican mantra that is no longer in circulation: Personal Responsibility.
Personal responsibility involves allowing people to exercise their own free will. 26/
Personal responsibility involves allowing people to exercise their own free will. 26/
Unfortunately, we reached a point where "free will" has essentially become synonymous with “willful ignorance”.
This ties into the next point: “Cancel Culture”. 27/
This ties into the next point: “Cancel Culture”. 27/
A careful dissection of "Cancel Culture" can be defined in this way:
People who have chosen not to engage with reality, are claiming victimhood when they are “disinvited” from participating in the reality that they deny exists. 28/
People who have chosen not to engage with reality, are claiming victimhood when they are “disinvited” from participating in the reality that they deny exists. 28/
For example, the Right refuses to acknowledge the results of 2020 election...(“Reality”)...and when they attempt to deny that reality with alternate reality-creating lies/disinformation, and are denied access to the common shared reality by private companies (social media),...29/
...the Right claims they are victims because they are being excluded from a reality that the Right refuses to acknowledge exists.
Now obviously this begs the question, who gets to determine or define “reality”. 30/
Now obviously this begs the question, who gets to determine or define “reality”. 30/
The answer to that is the FBI, the DHS, the DOJ, and the Article III branch of the US Constitution....... All of which were empowered by consent of the people to govern the people…….and all of which found no evidence of the election being stolen. 31/
Recent thread: https://twitter.com/Nick_Carmody/status/1385973235351625731
Article version of the above thread on grievance politics, perpetual victimhood, and "cancel culture" (no paywall): https://www.patreon.com/posts/50540810
