Over the last several years as “wokeism” has taken root within the Democratic party and the media, and cancel tactics have become their preferred method for dealing with people who they can’t force into submission or compliance, interesting political alliances have formed among prominent figures on the right and left that a decade ago would have been unheard of.
These alliances were founded on the fundamental understanding that if we allow woke cancel cultureists to win then there will one official narrative. permittedTo be safelyWe allow freedom of expression in our society, without fear of reprisals. This includes loss of reputation/or livelihood.
It’s why conservative commentators use social media to promote the views of ex-New York Times journalists who received wake-up calls. It’s why we’ve seen podcasters like Joe Rogan and former Occupy Wall Street documentarian and self-described “disaffected liberal” Tim Pool gain in popularity on YouTube and other platforms among diverse groups of people.
All of them have an implicit agreement that conservatives and libertarians won’t always agree on everything, but that all sides must reach consensus on fundamental principles of society. One key principle is the right to be free and express your opinions without fear.
This understanding is at the heart of why we frequently see independent journalists like Glenn Greenwald as a guest on Tucker Carlson’s program. While they have their differences, Greenwald and Carlson share common ground in issues such as the rampant liberal media bias, American intelligence agencies’ rot, and the need for vigorous questioning the U.S. role in foreign wars.
Though Carlson is generally considered to be “on the right” and Greenwald “on the left” based on past writings, you wouldn’t know it from reading a recent piece from Washington Post “reporter” Philip Bump who though not a media reporter pretended to be one in his write-up on how Carlson is a conduit for allegedly finding “powerful proponent[s] for its straw men.”
There was a lot to take issue with in the article, but one area that raised eyebrows was in Bump’s portrayal of Greenwald as a “right-wing pundit”:
Soon after [UFC fighter Bryce]Mitchell had finished speaking and his “no war/no Biden” riff began to spread via social media. Glenn Greenwald, right-wing pundit shared it with his millions of followers on Twitter, writing how it was “amazing what you hear when you listen to people who don’t pay constant attention to politics for a living and therefore don’t have their basic values corrupted and perceptions warped by constant propaganda.”
That was news to a lot of people, Greenwald especially, who zapped Bump not because he wrongly labeled him but because obviously Bump was using the word “right-wing” as a slight, a means to discount Greenwald’s opinion altogether:
Liberals enjoy @pbumpCall everyone you disagree with Russian agents or “right-wing”. This is how US discourse operates. Liberals are furious at @TheFIREorg because of that NYT op-ed, so they called it “right-wing” even though they defend the free speech of leftists & Palestinians. https://t.co/OsBR87yKik
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) March 9, 2022
These labels don’t matter to me. Other than “civil libertytarian”, I don’t claim any of these labels. These are empty insults that liberal pundits call “civil libertarian”. @pbumpWPost used to disqualify. However, I hold a number of views that no one could consider “right-wing”, but the WashPost is not allowed to lie about my enemies.
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) March 9, 2022
Bump tried to be funny play the victimGreenwald, however, was against it.
“Also, if you’re upset about having never broken any major stories of note in your life,” Greenwald tweeted, “working harder would be a better solution than calling journalists who have “pundits,” all to to expel your resentments, jealousies, and bitterness.
The larger point here, and which Greenwald also noted is that labeling someone as “right-wing” has become the media’s way of signaling to a reader/viewer that this person is a fringe kook/bigot/insurrection-y type who is just a couple fries short of a Happy Meal if you catch my meaning. It’s the same thing they do when they label questioners of the level of U.S. involvement in the Ukraine/Russia situation as having a “soft spot for Putin.”
There’s no basis in reality for it, but it’s a way for them to try and get readers to dismiss that person’s opinion as unworthy of serious consideration. They’ve not only done it to Greenwald but a number of other prominent writers/media contributors who generally have taken leftist viewpoints in the past (like ex-NYTer Bari Weiss, for example) but who also very clearly see the direction this country is headed from a free speech perspective if we don’t reverse course soon.
As a right-winger myself, I say these people should look at it as a badge of honor that so-called “straight news reporters” have been reduced to trying to discredit them by labeling them in such a way. Their critics are running out of honest tactics, so they resort to using whatever weapon is left.
Sadly for Bump and others like him, they’re going to figure out one day (if they haven’t already) that using such loaded labels as a way of shortchanging a person’s opinion is not the powerful tool it used to be, as more people like the Greenwalds, Carlsons, Pools, and the Weisses of this world join together despite their other differences in united opposition against leftist GroupThink.
Related: Sobering New Poll Reveals What Years of ‘Woke’ Anti-America Indoctrination Have Brought Us
About Post Author
