Honestly, (almost) everyone likes to shut down views they disagree with. Free speech has never been a conservative value--they're into tradition, family, country, that sort of thing. The difference is the American left has adopted the values of their communist neighbors to the left.
"He has placed his loyal acolytes in charge of major state institutions, turned most of the media into propaganda outlets, compromised the independence of the judiciary, and destroyed all democratic checks and balances."
How is this different from most democracies in the West? At least Hungary isn't being flooded with hostile foreigners who will eventually rise up and kill the locals.
Wow. This was some mighty weak tea. Not only the main commentary, but also Lee's claim below that the commentary is strengthened by Joe Forgas's expertise. Any number of anti-conservative op-ed writers without a single publication could have written something like this, and yes, at least spelled Carlson's name correctly. In this context, the expertise claim is no more than an appeal to authority since the article is just plain ol' one-sided, unidimensional commentary. Nothing "unsafe" about that. It's what we get in the mainstream every single day.
I'm not sure what I'm supposed to take away from this article. "Don't platform bad people" might be it, but there seems to be an expectation I already believe that Orban is outside of the realm of person you can talk to despite being a head of state, and I'm not really one for guilt by association.
Perhaps it's "Tucker is a rube", which I am willing to believe here, but the article doesn't really lay out what was the grift here. The main contention seems to be "Orban is more illiberal than the author would like" which I think Tucker is keenly aware of. Perhaps that bit about Hungary being worse rated on a press freedom scale.
I'm willing to believe Orban is a person who shouldn't be looked up to when it comes to running a state, is more illiberal than even I am comfortable with, and whose values even Tucker would disagree with if more closely examined. But I don't see that argument being made here in a way meant to persuade me.
I see you've adopted the leftist definitions whereby "democracy" means technocratic oligarchy and "fascism" or "autocracy" means rule according to popular will.
I’m conservative. I watch Tucker Carson [sic]. There are things I could say about Forgas’ patronizing view of easily-duped conservatives and dismissal of Orbán’s political views. Forgas is, of course, welcome to his opinion, but I got lost. What does this partisan political opinion have to do with the Unsafe Science Substack? What does it have to do with psychology? Was this education about Hungary, Carlson, and autocrats supposed to illuminate the current state of woke academia?
This Tucker Carson fellow... He reminds me a lot of one Tucker Carlson. Coincidence?
Anyway, citing US govt mouthpieces Voice of America and Freedom House (which refers to Jan 6 as a iNSurRecTiOn) mostly discredits the author, which sucks because I was interested in this topic when I saw the post. Maybe the author is right and Orban is an autocrat. I know next to nothing of Hungary. But this author is clearly not in any position to make the point he's trying to make. Especially as much of his description of the evils happening in Hungary sound no worse than what is happening now in the US.
It is much harder to accept a critique when the writer misspells the name of his target (Carlson). It’s also harder to accept a critique focused almost entirely on someone he merely supports.
Tucker is well-within the Overton Window of liberal understanding. Yesterday at the Turning Point conference a youngster asked him if he supported Christian Nationalism (a government based on the teachings of Jesus Christ). Tucker gave the standard classic liberal answer about separation of religion from state. He understands that stopping the current Bolshevik criminals might require a more powerful revolutionary/reactionary force. I am with him.
Honestly, (almost) everyone likes to shut down views they disagree with. Free speech has never been a conservative value--they're into tradition, family, country, that sort of thing. The difference is the American left has adopted the values of their communist neighbors to the left.
I blame the matriarchy.
https://www.richardhanania.com/p/womens-tears-win-in-the-marketplace
"He has placed his loyal acolytes in charge of major state institutions, turned most of the media into propaganda outlets, compromised the independence of the judiciary, and destroyed all democratic checks and balances."
How is this different from most democracies in the West? At least Hungary isn't being flooded with hostile foreigners who will eventually rise up and kill the locals.
Wow. This was some mighty weak tea. Not only the main commentary, but also Lee's claim below that the commentary is strengthened by Joe Forgas's expertise. Any number of anti-conservative op-ed writers without a single publication could have written something like this, and yes, at least spelled Carlson's name correctly. In this context, the expertise claim is no more than an appeal to authority since the article is just plain ol' one-sided, unidimensional commentary. Nothing "unsafe" about that. It's what we get in the mainstream every single day.
I'm not sure what I'm supposed to take away from this article. "Don't platform bad people" might be it, but there seems to be an expectation I already believe that Orban is outside of the realm of person you can talk to despite being a head of state, and I'm not really one for guilt by association.
Perhaps it's "Tucker is a rube", which I am willing to believe here, but the article doesn't really lay out what was the grift here. The main contention seems to be "Orban is more illiberal than the author would like" which I think Tucker is keenly aware of. Perhaps that bit about Hungary being worse rated on a press freedom scale.
I'm willing to believe Orban is a person who shouldn't be looked up to when it comes to running a state, is more illiberal than even I am comfortable with, and whose values even Tucker would disagree with if more closely examined. But I don't see that argument being made here in a way meant to persuade me.
I see you've adopted the leftist definitions whereby "democracy" means technocratic oligarchy and "fascism" or "autocracy" means rule according to popular will.
I’m conservative. I watch Tucker Carson [sic]. There are things I could say about Forgas’ patronizing view of easily-duped conservatives and dismissal of Orbán’s political views. Forgas is, of course, welcome to his opinion, but I got lost. What does this partisan political opinion have to do with the Unsafe Science Substack? What does it have to do with psychology? Was this education about Hungary, Carlson, and autocrats supposed to illuminate the current state of woke academia?
The man's name is Tucker CARLSON. Hard to make an argument that Carlson has not done his homework when you cannot even get his name right.
This Tucker Carson fellow... He reminds me a lot of one Tucker Carlson. Coincidence?
Anyway, citing US govt mouthpieces Voice of America and Freedom House (which refers to Jan 6 as a iNSurRecTiOn) mostly discredits the author, which sucks because I was interested in this topic when I saw the post. Maybe the author is right and Orban is an autocrat. I know next to nothing of Hungary. But this author is clearly not in any position to make the point he's trying to make. Especially as much of his description of the evils happening in Hungary sound no worse than what is happening now in the US.
Omg! Hilarious. Such a deluded and insane view. It seems obvious that you need to strengthen your psyche meds prescription.
It is much harder to accept a critique when the writer misspells the name of his target (Carlson). It’s also harder to accept a critique focused almost entirely on someone he merely supports.
Tucker is well-within the Overton Window of liberal understanding. Yesterday at the Turning Point conference a youngster asked him if he supported Christian Nationalism (a government based on the teachings of Jesus Christ). Tucker gave the standard classic liberal answer about separation of religion from state. He understands that stopping the current Bolshevik criminals might require a more powerful revolutionary/reactionary force. I am with him.
Carlson, Musk, and Rogan are at the barricade.