Tucker Carlson Destroys Conservatism, Inc. for Selling Out Conservatives to Big Tech for Cash

Rob Bluey of Heritage responds to Carlson, I think ineffectually.

Let me point out two things:

First of all, all conservatives believe that economic incentives change behavior. That belief is the fundamental premise upon which every single tax-reform plan stands: that if we change the incentives towards socially benevolent behavior (like getting and staying married, like buying and keeping a home), we will get more of that behavior.

But the same people who depend on this basic assumption for all their articles and white papers and propaganda efforts deny its existence when it comes to their own incentives and behavior.

So, Google is funneling money to us and paying our salaries and making our fundraising dinners possible? So what? Those economic incentives don't change our behavior, not one whit!

Oh really? Google is putting money directly into your pockets and you claim that does not change your behavior with regard to Google at all?

Then what the hell are you always prattling on about regarding small rejiggerings of tax incentives and disincentives? If someone giving you Free Money, directly into your organizational accounts, and indirectly into the personal accounts of your writers and "thinkers" does not influence behavior or attitudes, what the hell difference will a 1.5% penalty make as far as marriage rates?

If a politician told you that taking tens of thousands of dollars, or even hundreds of thousands or millions, from an industry pressure group did not affect their attitude towards that group at all, would you believe them?

Of course not.

But these second-order-politicians -- the politicians of paper -- claim that they can take any amount of dollars from Google and that won't affect their willingness to shill for Google at all.

Get bent, liars.

LOLGF.

Point two: Conservative organizations like Heritage and especially opinion outlets like National Review love, love, love publishing pieces that unexpectedly make a case contrary to usual conservative belief.

They love publishing pieces like, "The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage." They love publishing pieces like, "Two Cheers for George Soros."

It makes them feel "intellectually rebellious." It makes them feel like they're not just hacks and talking points robots, but curious and free-minded thinkers willing to give almost any position -- no matter how contrary to core conservative beliefs -- at least a public airing.

Okay, fine.

But then I'm a bit bewildered -- why can these opinion outlets and "think tanks" which are perennially willing -- nay, eager! -- to rubbish this or that conservative shibboleth about gay marriage completely unwilling to publish any articles or white papers supporting anti-trust investigations into Google?

Why is that particular dogma of Conservative, Inc. not grist for the usual let's-publish-an-article-pushing-a-contrary-thought impulse? Why isn't that on the list of Unexpected Arguments that Conservative, Inc. writers are permitted to sometimes explore?

Why is the one thing you're never allowed argue for in Conservative, Inc. -- the one unforgivable heresy -- the same thing that Google and the other tech monopolies are paying protection money for?

Why is this the only issue not up for debate? You can argue for Transgender Strippers doing "story hour" for kids in taxpayer supported libraries, and your fellow members of Conservative, Inc. will slap you on the back and call you "brave" for taking on small-minded bigotries.

But none of these bravehearts apparently feel as if suggesting we simply enforce on the-books laws against trusts and anticompetitive behavior and improper coordination between monopolists is worthy.

Or safe.

Is it just... a coincidence? Does it just work out that way?

Is it just happenstance that the one Unpopular Idea that Conservative, Inc. won't give a free and open airing to is also the one idea that Google and the other members of the Censorship Cartel are paying them to suppress?

I guess so. I guess it's all just coincidence.

posted by Ace of Spades at 05:16 PM

| Access Comments