COUNTERCOLUMN: All Your Bias Are Belong to Us

The increasingly unhinged Matt Yglesias is at it again, this time leveling his sights on those evil Jew neocons, spreading their wicked ideologies like a cancer on the body politic.

It’s actually true that neocon bashing is a bit on the tiresome side. That said, I think it really has to be understood as a vital social necessity. Adherents of a deranged and sociopoathic “neocon” conception of America’s role in the world continue to be tremendously influential in our society. They have columns at The Washington Post and dominate the foreign policy coverage on Fox News. They have The Weekly Standard and Commentary and a healthy slice of The New Republic. And most important, as best as anyone can tell their ideas remain utterly dominant in the Republican Party.

The JOOOOOS! The JOOOOOOOOS are infesting our media!

Seriously, Matt. Sociopathic?? I'm not sure just how many layers of arrogance and idiocy to peel back, here. But let's start by saying that both the terms neoconservative and sociopathic have meanings. And Matt clearly has a twisted, lazy-man libtard idea of both of those definitions.

There is simply no way on earth that neoconservatism can be expressed or labeled sociopathological. None.

Look:

From Dictionary.com:

–noun Psychiatry.
a person, as a psychopathic personality, whose behavior is antisocial and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

Neoconservative:

–noun
moderate political conservatism espoused or advocated by former liberals or socialist

s.

Ok, I guess there may be some pathology imported from libtards and socialists. But that's an unsatisfying definition. In order to be a meaningful geopolitical model, neoconservatism must have a definition beyond that of describing the former persuasions of its adherents. I submit this definition from Wikipedia:

Neoconservatism is a political philosophy that emerged in the United States of America, and which supports using American economic and military power to bring liberalism, democracy, and human rights to other countries.

Close enough to be useful. And clearly, as far as batshit-whacked libtards are concerned, there is nothing more clearly sociopathological, nothing that bespeaks the lack of a moral compass or sense of social responsibility, then the belief that the US should spread liberalism, democracy, and respect for human rights to the rest of the world. JFK was clearly, as far as Yglesias must be concerned, a sociopath.

Yglesias lets the mask slip: Sure, you can make a case that neoconservatism is misguided, that it doesn't work in practice, that those swarthy brown little sub-human ragheads overseas are not ready for democracy and they will only devolve into a howling mob of Israel-hating, genocidal whackjobs. I don't believe any of those things are necessarily true, but one could build and argue a respectful and rational case for them.

But the ONLY way anyone could seriously assert that neoconservatism is pathological is if they actually hated Western values.

Yglesias has already demonstrated himself so full of shit he can't draw a distinction between the Bush White House and the inhuman, brutal, murderous thugocracy in power in North Korea.


Splash, out

Jason

EDIT: I should note that I do think there have been true sociopaths in public life. William Ayers would be one example. Marion Barry.

Unlike Yglesias, I know what words mean, I don't throw words around lightly, and I don't use specific diagnoses as a political club without understanding the term.

Back in my reporting days, there would be no way I could get away with that garbage. Because I had real editors who cared about the truth. (That's you, Adam, Maggie, and John!). I don't know who the adult supervision is at The Atlantic, but I'd get pretty tired of lazy-assed hatchet men like Sullivan and Yglesias screwing up my brand pretty fast.

This guy needs an editor.

Labels: bloggers, foreign policy, The media, Yglesias