It was just a couple of days ago when did a post on one of former Vox writer David Roberts' hot takes: he was upset that the mainstream media fell for the bait and covered the Harvard plagiarism scandal that was "ginned up out of nothing" by conservatives like Christopher Rufo.
We have to come back to Roberts because he's been thinking about conservatives' reactions to the loss of freedoms attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic. Sure, some blame Fauci, others whine about school closings, but that's not really it. The reason conservatives experienced "fundamental brain rage" is that there was an "undeniable moral imperative for solidarity."
There was solidarity. Conservatives got in line with everyone else and got the vaccine, which has proved to neither prevent you from contracting COVID nor spreading it to others. But Roberts argues that "solidarity" enrages the Right:
I still think frequently about the fact that a pandemic came & created an undeniable moral imperative for solidarity -- for acting together, on one another's behalf -- and it caused an eruption of fury among conservatives that is still raging.
— David Roberts (@drvolts) December 25, 2023
"We all need to sacrifice a bit, undergo some inconvenience, to protect the weakest among us."
— David Roberts (@drvolts) December 25, 2023
They try to pin it on Fauci or school closings or whatever, but really it was just that -- that basic call for solidarity -- that enraged the right. Fundamental brainstem rage.
You can Monday-morning quarterback the pandemic forever -- there are plenty of legit criticisms of public officials & policies -- but in the end there was never any chance that the right wouldn't erupt with fury over it. Their worldview is based on hierarchy & dominance ...
— David Roberts (@drvolts) December 25, 2023
... & the structure of a pandemic calls for the opposite of that. They needed, on a deep psychological level, to reject the call for solidarity; they worked backward from that to all the (shifting, often nonsensical) reasons. They would -- & did! -- choose death over solidarity.
— David Roberts (@drvolts) December 25, 2023
Narrator: No they didn't.
The reason I stress this point is that many of the other problems facing humanity today -- most notably & obviously climate change -- *also* ultimately call for solidarity. They can't be solved alone; we cooperate or we all suffer.
— David Roberts (@drvolts) December 25, 2023
We don't have to wait to hear all the (shifting, nonsensical) reasons why they reject these problems too. We don't have to waste time arguing over those reasons. We know in advance that they will be no help -- an active hindrance -- & can plan accordingly.
— David Roberts (@drvolts) December 25, 2023
The major problems facing humanity today will be solved over, or around, or despite, the right. If you ever doubted that, the pandemic should have settled the issue once & for all.
— David Roberts (@drvolts) December 25, 2023
Hillary Clinton already got our minds straight with her book, "It Takes a Village."
I still frequently think about the fact that a pandemic came that caused a total abandonment of logic and principle among leftists, who in their hubris remain content to strawman anyone who correctly warned them that what they were doing would cause far more harm than good
— Clifton Duncan (@cliftonaduncan) December 26, 2023
please explain how BLM/Antifa protests(really riots) somehow "didn't" spread Covid but a family or church gathering did? The same rule should have either applied across the board or not.
— Scott Stringle (@scott_stringle) December 26, 2023
People got mad when they sacrificed first Amendment rights like worshipping together only to see the other side-including public health officials- declare the pandemic rules optional so long as you were protesting on behalf of George Floyd. https://t.co/XqLRZm69ZD
— Michael Brendan Dougherty (@michaelbd) December 25, 2023
That was the breaking point for a lot of people. You couldn't go to school or church, but you could march in massive groups in the street because "racism is a public health issue" too. Seriously, that was what they said.
“Solidarity: acting together to achieve the worst possible outcome which disproportionately hurts the most vulnerable but makes rich people feel good about themselves.”
— Tanya Berlaga (@TBerlaga) December 26, 2023
Nice straw man.
— ZalinskySilverworks (@ZalinskyS) December 26, 2023
You told people they couldn't have funerals
— Shoshon The Elegant (@AdmiralXum) December 26, 2023
Laptop class thinks shutting down the economy was just an “inconvenience” for the peasants
— Aaron Smith (@AaronCSmith1) December 26, 2023
Politicians and pundits who didn't lose a single day of pay because they could work from home were sitting there telling people who lost their livelihoods, "We're all in this together!"
— Sharkweek (@sharkweek0178) December 26, 2023
Except we didn’t all come together. Once again the common man sacrificed while the elite went around, business as usual.
— Matthew Lee (@Mattnonymous091) December 26, 2023
Did you mean to write "we leftists will use this disease as an excuse to go on a crusade against normal people because we want them to suffer"? And yeah I sure wonder why the right has a problem with leftists destroying our lifes because you resent everything normal and good.
— Smoker (@homosmoker) December 26, 2023
Conservatives don't buy into Marxism or collectivism. We don't believe we have to give up our rights "for the common good." And certainly not for hoaxes like climate change.
Solidarity in service of Marxism is not the solidarity we need comrade.
— steve miller (@stevemiNumbers) December 26, 2023
***
Join the conversation as a VIP Member