Here, Read This

Source: Unrolled thread from @drvox

I think this is what they call “straight savage”.

4. Trump’s rise has shown that purported principles of conservative ideology meant virtually NOTHING to the conservative masses. Trump abandoned the Very Serious script & the RW base didn’t care, at all. He voiced their anger & resentments. That’s all the RW base is any more.

7. If NYT printed the *actual, real-life* sentiments of today’s conservative masses, it would print a bunch of paranoid, Fox-generated fairy tales and belligerent expressions of xenophobia, misogyny, racism, and proud, anti-intellectual ignorance.

9. The NYT’s commitment to “intellectual diversity” doesn’t go THAT far — not far enough to expose its readers to that reality. It is too invested in America’s own Noble Savage myth, the idea that conservative Heartland Americans are more authentic & in touch w/ simple virtues.

12. It is no coincidence that these guys – Gerson, Douthat, Brooks, Stephens – have little voice or influence inside actual conservatism, or that they’re all anti-Trump (unlike 95+% of Republicans). They are anomalies, idiosyncrasies, not representative of anything broader.

18. In the name of “exposing readers to diverse viewpoints,” NYT is, in practice, obscuring the true nature of today’s right. Virtually the entire political elite & most NYT readers are in denial about what the right has become & that denial is increasingly dangerous.