Moral Degeneracy
With pundits like this, no wonder we have the problems we have.
For some reason, I keep finding myself encountering Erick Erickson’s tweets wherein he finds himself having to dismiss some clearly indefensible statement or action by Trump by saying some version of, “but the Democrats would have been worse, so whaddya gonna do?”
Here’s a tweet from January that I had bookmarked, which gives the basic formula: yes, Trump is bad, but the Dems would have been worse!!
I have often thought about writing about those tweets, but what would really be the point? I doubt he would ever read my words, and it is hardly as if I really pay that much attention to him. I mostly know his name because he bubbled up during the early days of the blogosphere.
Moreover, I get it to a point, at least from a political science and economics point of view. In terms of polisci, his partisan identity is such that breaking out of his position is unlikely, and, moreover, I do understand that given the binary choice before him, the Republicans better fulfill his policy preferences (although the degree to which Trump himself does so is another matter, but partisans gotta partisan!). The economics argument is stronger, of course. Erickson makes his money as a right-wing commentator. Breaking with MAGA, even if at times he has flirted with criticizing Trump, would likely lead to unemployment.
I think a core bit of frustration is that he likes to play the game that he is a critic of the president’s, but when the formulation is ultimately, Trump may be bad, but the Dems are worse, then you really aren’t, as your Twitter bio claims, working for “Truth over tribe.”
Still, the following is just a distillation of where too many Americans find themselves, and it both sickens and angers me.
To simply dismiss this as not “appropriate” is underselling by quite a bit, shall we say.
The tweet he is downplaying does, at a minimum, the following.
- Promises war crimes.
- Mocks Islam, a religion that has millions of American adherents.
- Does both of the above whilst using obscene language, all on the holiest day of the Christian calendar.
But, you know, Joe Biden recognized the Transgender Day of Visibility that happened to correspond to Easter in 2024, and that is the true crime that makes all the inappropriate stuff acceptable! Never mind that the Transgender Day of Visibility is always March 31st, meaning it is not always on a Sunday, and further, that Easter moves around (it was April 5th this year).
No, it is such a big deal to dare to ask to be kind to fellow citizens if they are the wrong kind of citizens that it ends up that that is worse than to be publicly profane on Easter, mock a major religion, and to threaten death and destruction than to love your neighbor as yourself (or something–maybe I read that on a fortune cookie?).
To be clear, this post really isn’t about Erickson; it is about the way in which the thinking on display here is a cancer to our politics.
There is a general problem here, which is the way in which the depths of partisanship override anything else.
The first word in Erickson’s Twitter bio is “Christian.” And yet he seems unfazed, at least in terms of his rank-ordered preferences, as to the insulting way Trump behaved in public on Easter. I keep stressing this point, not because it is the most important issue to me, but because it ought to really be insulting to people like Erickson.
It seems worth noting in this context that Trump did not go to church on Easter, but Biden did. But, you know, trans!!
Beyond the breach of decorum and general rudeness on display, I also think that a Christian should be concerned about threatened war crimes. If all it takes to commit adultery is to have lust in one’s heart for a woman (or so say many conservative Evangelicals), then maybe fantasizing about death and destruction should be a problem? Especially when those public fantasies are being perpetrated by someone with the power to make those fantasies real?
Look, I know that the Christian right tossed their own alleged moral compasses in the trash roughly a decade ago when they glommed onto Trump. But sometimes there are these punctuated moments when just how far they have gone becomes obvious, and it really is nauseating.
Erickson’s (and many others’) rank-ordered preference for someone who is anti-trans over concerns over profanity on a holy day, mockery, or the threat of war crimes is, in my view, depraved.
And I started this post before this morning’s most recent threat or catastrophic violence by the Evangelical right’s favorite president.
But, hey! Trump didn’t recognize the Transgender Day of Visibility, so war crimes are cool!
It is truly stunning, and yes, morally degenerate, that hatred or lack of understanding about a certain segment of the population because they do not conform to a certain set of sexual and gender norms is so important to some people that they can ignore truly awful behavior as well as the threat of crimes against humanity.
I tire of people who claim to have direct access to core truths and morals, allowing their concerns about other people’s lives to justify this kind of moral vacuity.
As a bonus of this genre, here’s Rod Dreher. And his proof that the “Democrats are worse” is (wait for it!) because Biden appointed a qualified trans person to a position in HHS!
The obsession with trans people is just off the charts.
Here’s a nice generic one from The Angry Baseball, which I found laughable. After all, Republicans elected Trump, and continue to support him, but Democrats are where the real problem lies!!
Remember, kids, Democrats are always worse because, well, what matters isn’t what politicians do, it is what letter they have after their name! And if they refuse to treat trans persons with dignity, so much the better!
Up-voting OP. No notes.
The obsession with and hatred of trans people still puzzles me and pisses me off. My daughter and her trans friends just want to live and let live. But I think your broader point stands. Conservatives always justify supporting policies/actions that will harm thousands/millions of people by pointing to one person or one event that harmed no one to justify what they do.
Steve
I find it especially remarkable that it’s self-declared Christians who think it’s better to needlessly kill thousands than to have a visible trans person somewhere.
This is extreme even by historical standards.
Well, it’s happened. Trump has moved the crazy bar so low that Tucker Carlson is sane.
By what metric is Fatso better than the alternatives (Democrats)?
Maybe immigration? But it’s well documented that immigration is a net plus to the economy.
LGTQB folks? C’mon…like there are no gay Republican’s? I’m looking at you, Lady G. Trans people? Does anyone have a legitimate reason to care?
What else? Gas if four dollars a gallon at the corner station here.
Job creation is in the dumps.
Please…provide me a meaningful metric.
I’m no war-doer, but isn’t the Chief of Staff an important position during a war / lethal incursion / fancy barbecue?
As for the genders.. When you see a pickup truck with nuts on the back of it, that truck is trans.
@Daryl:
Lady G?
@drj:..self-declared Christians…
I would suggest that all people who claim to be Christian are self declared.
Is that a Christian?
Do you remember the crusades?
Communism as implemented was nothing like what Marx envisioned. Capitalism these days bears little resemblance to what Adam Smith proposed. It follows modern American Christianity has almost nothing to do with Christ.
It reminds me of a discussion I had at Political Wire the other day, having to do with the fact that all the polls seem to indicate a blue wave coming this year, yet the Democratic Party remains unpopular. Several people pointed out that the GOP as a party did not poll well in 2010, either. We’re just in a period of high negative partisanship, where people feel more strongly against a party than for one. After all, one type of poll that has generally been quite predictive over the past several cycles is which side the so-called “double-haters” (voters with negative views of both parties, or both presidential nominees) favor; in other words, who they consider the lesser of the two evils.
I believe a lot of this is reflective of the impact that conservative media has had on the culture. From talk radio to Fox News to all the outlets that have sprung up in the 21st century as well as social media, a significant part of their strategy is to build on outrage by picking out obscure incidents that may or may not be real: somewhere, somehow, a feminist professor says all men should be castrated, or a school has banned the word “Christmas,” or a trans person beat someone up, or there are litterboxes for students who identify as cats; etc. etc. Meanwhile, those same outlets gin up hatred for the GOP “establishment”–the RINOs, the Deep State, the swamp–and as a result, viewers end up with far more passion against Dems and the left than for the GOP or the right.
Why, then, do we see more or less the same dynamic existing on the left, who for a long time didn’t have any equivalent to Fox, Newsmax, etc., and it was the neutral, “objective” news which Dems generally watched or read the most that was accused of being left-wing? Partly because Dems eventually caught up (with MSNBC, with Daily Kos, and more truly left-wing sites like TYT), and partly because Trump is so awful a lot of formerly Republican figures (like those at the Bulwark) ended up joining the anti-Trump coalition and have been effectively Democrats for the past several cycles. Meanwhile, the influence of progressives from Bernie to AOC led to an anti-establishment bloc that views Dem leadership as weak and, especially after the debacle with Biden, too old.
So whether one likes it or not, this is where we are right now. I’m reminded of the old Woody Allen line about the atheist couple, one raised Christian, the other Jewish, and they argue about which religion not to raise their kids in.
@Kurtz:
Lindsey Graham.
The story goes that gay prostitutes, in DC, refer to him as Lady G.
@Kylopod:
In Catch 22 Yossarian and Lt. Scheisskopf’s wife, both atheists, argue in bed. She doesn’t believe in a kind, gentle god and he doesn’t believe in a mean, vengeful god.
I’ve held that conservatives avoid utilitarian judgement of good and evil and as a result have very strange priorities. They judge good and evil according to their personal, often weird, moral intuitions. According to which being asked not to say “fag” is a bigger moral offense than the deaths of thousands of brown people. The latter is god’s will, the former is against the teachings of Jesus in their heads.
Dr. T quotes Rod Dreher. I checked out Dreher’s old home, The American Conservative, this morning. They are not happy about Trump’s war. I guess confusion to our enemies is good. But they’re disagreeing about flavors of crazy, none of them are developing any real attachment to reality.
Wonder if Dreher will return home if Orban loses? Probably depends on whether Hungary maintains his foundation sinecure.
Excellent post. We like to point out that MAGA is a cult, but the GOP is too when so many people can be so delusional.
Regarding that last twit, I think anyone that is unbiased would recognize that Biden, Obama, and Carter have all been men of outstanding character. (Bill Clinton only gets left out because of his proclivities that complicate things in such an argument.) At least they’re starting to admit that their current guy is an absolute train wreck in the character department.
@steve222: “The obsession with and hatred of trans people still puzzles me and pisses me off.”
My guess is that someone like Ericksson doesn’t give a fuck about trans people. He just knows that hardcore MAGAs have a hardon for the subject, so it’s what he uses for “dems are worse” bullshit. Because, you know, he’s still not allowed to say “the democrats would let black people move into your neighborhood.” For the moment.
@Gavin:..When you see a pickup truck with nuts on the back of it, that truck is trans.
When I was in Junior High School (1961) a tranny was the transmission in a car and a fag was a cigarette.
Words change. People change.
Oh, but now old friends, they’re acting strange
And they shake their heads and they tell me that I’ve changed
OK, but why oppose the Ayatollahs? Don’t they share these opinions about transgender people? Iran has hung people for being gay. Won’t ending the current Iranian civilization be a big setback for the religious zealots? If a nominally Christian regime springs up in Tehran, it might well be like a Scandinavian nation with gays in high public office.
@gVOR10:
That I think relates to the very word used in this post: “degenerate.” While it’s not intrinsically a right-wing buzzword or necessarily political at all, it has a history of being used in that way among right-wing reactionaries, starting perhaps with the Nazis’ war against “degenerate art.” In the 1990s Limbaugh and his ilk were railing against “Ellen Degenerate.” And I hear the word crop up today most often in anti-LGBT rhetoric. Even when liberals use the word, they are frequently using it in an ironic way by throwing a common right-wing insult back at them, like when we call Trump a “snowflake.”
I think what appeals to right-wingers about the word degenerate is that it equates moral degradation with personal disgust. In some contexts that’s perfectly legitimate: I would assume there’s something wrong with anyone who doesn’t feel at least some disgust hearing about Epstein’s island or the recent bombing of the Iranian school. The problem is that disgust isn’t a particularly reliable guide to judging moral infractions. You can be grossed out by certain sexual practices, for example, without thinking there’s anything morally wrong with them. It just isn’t your thing.
When right-wingers use the word degenerate, what they are usually doing is trying to cloud the distinction between harm and distaste, enabling them to condemn things that are objectively not harmful at all. They never stop there, of course–a large part of anti-LGBT propaganda involves making up stories about queer people doing harmful things–but their worldview is rooted in the notion that an act can be bad without being harmful, and degenerate has been a tool for furthering that notion along.
The continuing closure of Hormuz can cause a global recession. If Iran attacks oil production and oil terminals successfully, this can drag on for months. So, after people on both sides of the partisan divide lose their jobs, some lose their homes, and generally have a miserable time trying to recover, transgender people will still be there, as harmless as ever.
@Daryl:
Thanks. I had only heard about the “Lady G” moniker in passing, so it did not stick.
@gVOR10:
Speaking of Orban and Hungary, J D Vance has popped up at a Fidesz rally, lauding Orban and blasting the evils of the EU.
I wonder if thes little stunt will actually harm Orban at the vote?
At any rate, the opposition Tisza party are at 52% in the latest opinion polling, Fidesz at 38%.
This should be enough to overcome the gerrymandering.
“Poll of polls” is a bit tighter at 49% to 39%.
@Gregory Lawrence Brown:
“When I was in Junior High School (1961) a tranny was the transmission in a car and a fag was a cigarette.”
And my alma mater (Penn) has within one of its school songs the line, “For tomorrow may bring sorrow, so tonight, let’s all be gay”. That song ended with the line “Here’s a toast to dear old Penn”. And, in true Rocky Horror fashion, the student section threw slices of toast onto the football field each week.
Seen on Xitter today:
Q: “How does Donald Trump resemble British foreign policy?”
A: “Both avoided fighting in Vietnam!”
@Gregory Lawrence Brown:
Conservative once meant sober, serious people who wouldn’t tear down a fence without asking why it was there. (OK, there never really were such conservatives, but everyone thought that was what the word meant.)
@Kylopod:
I think you’re missing a eugenics angle, where good wholesome folks degenerate (verb) into savages.
Give it a shot, dude, you might be surprised by what you’re into. The moral transgression is the big kick. It’s like Kristy Noem’s husband dressing up like a (hideously deformed) woman — the thrill is crossing the boundaries.
(Easily achievable taboos are probably the way to go — we need a puritan revival that makes a bunch of otherwise innocuous things “dirty” so everyone can enjoy them. I think the last taboo we really have is trans people existing, and we would all be better off with a moral panic over ankle bracelets or something else instead — those filthy harlot catboys with their rings of metal around their ankles, tempting all of us into despair)
But seriously, there’s a whole lot of eugenics in words like “degenerate (noun)”.
@steve222: Rod is the guy who got fired from the American Conservative for posting about his childhood obsession with his classmate’s “primitive root wiener.” And who has talked about the need for young men to “achieve heterosexuality.” And who has written repeatedly about the reason for banning gay marriage and fighting against normalizing gay people in society is to set up guardrails for people who might struggle with their own sexuality.
Which is to say, there is a good amount of projection in his single-minded obsession regarding gay and trans people. With conservatives like him, the accusation is always the confession. Always.
@wr: Not that I think there isn’t hostility to black people, but I am here to tell you that the hostility to trans people is quite real. I would very much appreciate it if you would hold it as real.
I mean, it’s possible for people to hate more than one thing at a time, right?