53 Comments
Nov 24, 2021Liked by Michael Tracey

I believe that Phillip Rieff wrote in depth about the therapeutic state.

Since I am gay and something of a drama queen, I am tempted to play the queer card from time to time but don't because it's sleazy. Of course, it's now a huge asset to have some sort of minority card to play and we know that public and political discourse time and again is based on they playing of such cards.

AOC knows exactly the effect of her performances.......and they don't happen by chance.

Expand full comment

Do any of these cards have a charge limit? The sex card and the gay card are used often enough, that I wonder but I know for a fact the race card has absolutely no spending limits.

Expand full comment

The "gay card (including lesbians)" has been de-queened and de-throned by the "trans" card. Espcially the "black trans" card.

Expand full comment

Of which there are max 200,000 in the entire US. If.

Expand full comment

Making it so much easier to play the card. No one knows one so...

Expand full comment

She was a successful waitress. I'm guessing she knew how to act to get good tips. Which is one form of social performance/manipulation.

Expand full comment

I liked congress better when it was "Hollywood for ugly people" now it's High School for idiots. If not for the media covering for them more people would see how poorly served they are by these morons.

Expand full comment

Chris Hedges says that politics attracts the mediocre of a society. I think he's right.

Expand full comment

This was a big surprise, not the unconventional take which is expected from you, but the emotional manipulation perspective. It's like Congress is yielding part of its good ole boy, frat house to the self indulged Housewives who dwell on the suffering of every hang nail & unflattering remark.

Expand full comment

In the "olden" days women were thought of as the weaker sex. They were accused of being manipulative in order to get their way. They were thought to be less logical than men. They were portrayed as being prone to emotional outbursts and purveyors of drama. Just an observation.

Expand full comment

As in hysterical? I remember it like it was yesterday. Pun intended.

Expand full comment
founding

Beauty

Expand full comment

It’s fascinating that you say you believe she’s sincere. I think she’s one of those young people of privileged identities whose uncontrollable emotions always seem to coincide neatly with their personal self interest.

Expand full comment

Sincerely though.

Expand full comment
founding

Coincidence: emotional posturing being useful for career ambition. Hum.

Expand full comment

The Dems in particular have been taken over by a group of hysterical mediocrities in AOC, Bush and Tlaib. None would have IQs much above 110.

Expand full comment

Don’t forget race-baiter Pressley, who replaced a genuine progressive fiercely committed to Medicare for All by presenting a set of credentials that consisted entirely of a nappy cooch, a qualification now somewhat diminished by alopecia.

Expand full comment

Pressley’s awful. The only one who strikes me as intelligent is Omar, which as the daughter of a member of Somalia’s former elite, doesn’t surprise.

Expand full comment

I've no doubt that AOC she experienced an assault, at some time in her life. Women are assaulted, that's an unfortunate fact. Men are falsely accused, that's another unfortunate fact.

But unless she reported that assault to the police, as an alleged strong role model who deals with injustices swiftly in order to prevent future victims, I'm sorry but I have reservations that the accusation was as serious as she seems to imply. Or that it caused to much trauma, that it triggered a physical manifestation during a protest that had no relation to the incident she's alleging.

I know for a fact that women are assaulted. More than half of my sisters were victims of either violent assault during a relationship, or of outright rape.

But high-profile allegations, specifically those which happen to present ancillary benefits to the accuser, are NOT representative of the tragic experiences of women at large. Nor does the reaction of skeptical onlookers to those high-profile allegations correlate with the attitude of men at large.

Also, historic allegations of ANY type, years later at a time when the defendent coincidentally happens to be in a position to aquire a position of power or wealth, should immediately invoke a 'wait and see' attitude. 'Wait and see' means wait until Due Process has run its course before taking sides.

I'm sure AOC was assaulted. Her accusation was very general, and covers many believable experiences. I just doubt how serious it was, if she didn't bother naming names in an official report to the police, while taking the initative to let Twitter react in predictable fashion.

Expand full comment

Men are assaulted too, in numbers nearly equal to women. Federal violent crime statistics are open to all.

Expand full comment

The explanatory rubric you're looking for here is: "histrionic personality disorder".

Expand full comment

There isn't a single thing sincere about AOC. A funded mediocrity who caught what's his face asleep at the switch, got into congress, and knows if she says "racism" and "misogyny" in every response she'll have a few million unthinking ahistorical normies tweeting in her defense.

The fact that it works is more of a testament of a broken country than anything else.

Expand full comment
founding

Ahistorical: I may borrow that, it captures much of the “end of history “ arrogance that is today’s myopia. We think we are special and somehow exempt from falling into the old traps that got those people who came before us. I believe the number one lesson of history is we don’t learn from history.

Expand full comment

Subscribed because someone finally scratched my itch about AOC. (It’s like hearing someone describe a magician’s act, you know there’s a trick but you can’t figure out what it is.)

Expand full comment

Does she really believe?

Or was she hired by the producers of the show to fill a bit-part?

Similar to the role Rachael Maddow was hired to play.

Expand full comment

She's a woman who is easily panicked and knows how to play off other people's sympathy.

Haven't you meet women like her before? I sure have.

I resented like hell her use of the term trauma, especially when I learned that her office is 1/4 mile or more away (3 city blocks at least) from where the demonstration took place. Using the same term that people who have been shot, stabbed or in terrible car wrecks for her getting scared pretty much ended my esteem of her.

And I had admiration for her. I grew up and delivered papers as a kid to where she has her apt in the Bx. I loved watching the Netflix show that featured her.

But during the Force The Vote debacle in early Jan and afterwards, I started to see a different side of her.

Trump is grifting on his supporters, and she's grifting on hers. BFD

I feel so relaxed about her b/c I think she's risen as far as she's going to be able in politics. Maybe she'll land something at MSNBC/CNN or something down the road when a Josh Hawley type, or the Mayor of NYC decides to endorse someone else for her seat. Nevertheless, she's more a curiosity than a political powerhouse. I can't see her getting into the Senate, but hey, maybe I'm wrong...

Now having said that, there's a topic I'd LOVE for you to look into w/ the talents you have in spades. This one's gonna take work and digging tho'...won't be low hanging fruit like Ortiz.

What is the degree of influence that the Trust In News initiative is having on MSM? Don't you find it curious how when there's an issue that 'the MSM' takes a stand on, they all parrot the identical talking points? (See Rittenhouse)

Where does TIN work out of? Who are the people that run it? Where does their money come from? How pervasive is their influence?

I think there's something there. I think it's a wide open story for an enterprising reporter. Aaaand I think there's one hell of a story to be told.

Expand full comment

Save me a Google? Is this Gates related?

Expand full comment

No. I got a whiff if it in Joe Rogan's 'Emergency Podcast' he did w/ Brett Wienstien & Dr. Koury a few months ago re Ivermectin. They referred to it in passing. I then saw that Time (I think) mag article about how the medica basically conspired against Trump in the last election. They discussed it in a round about manner, but it made my Spidey Sense tingle.

I did some digging at the time but found very little.

There's (((something))) going on there, but IDK what.

Expand full comment

Ok, triple parens? Really?

Expand full comment

? I don't understand

Expand full comment

Ok, so you just used it for emphasis without knowing what it means? I realize you need a meme encyclopedia to understand online comments today, so fine. But it’s a nasty reference fyi.

Expand full comment

Thanks (I guess?). Went over my head. Don't worry, I'm good b/c I really don't care.

Expand full comment

I have ignored AOC completely. I must analyze her actions a bit closer from now on. You've certainly brought up some interesting characteristics, thanks.

Expand full comment

Moi aussi. As a woman, It’s easy to see AOC’s manipulation. People like her are exhausting and therefore are necessary to ignore. They suck all the energy out of a room.

Expand full comment

Democrats are being idiots again. Instead of making a big deal out of it now, they should just wait until Gosar is up for reelection. All they have to say is "my opponent is a massive weeaboo."

Expand full comment
founding

This stuff is victimization in action, it is a game, and Michael is altogether correct to characterize it as manipulation. Do you want to be depressed - give this article to your children - they will read it differently than you. They have been marinated in this silliness, school and their piers reinforce the victim narrative. Your children are programmed to find transgressions and then descend into a world of dithering relativism.

Expand full comment