Анти-анти-трампизм

[yakov_a_jerkov]

(via rsokolov)

Очень хорошее описание этого явления в статье "If Liberals Hate Him, Then Trump Must Be Doing Something Right":

Much of the conservative news media is now less pro-Trump than it is anti-anti-Trump. The distinction is important, because anti-anti-Trumpism has become the new safe space for the right.

Here is how it works: Rather than defend President Trump’s specific actions, his conservative champions change the subject to (1) the biased “fake news” media, (2) over-the-top liberals, (3) hypocrites on the left, (4) anyone else victimizing Mr. Trump or his supporters and (5) whataboutism, as in “What about Obama?” “What about Clinton?”

For the anti-anti-Trump pundit, whatever the allegation against Mr. Trump, whatever his blunders or foibles, the other side is always worse.

But the real heart of anti-anti-Trumpism is the delight in the frustration and anger of his opponents. Mr. Trump’s base is unlikely to hold him either to promises or tangible achievements, because conservative politics is now less about ideas or accomplishments than it is about making the right enemies cry out in anguish.

Mr. Trump’s most vocal supporters don’t have to defend his specific actions as long as they make liberal heads explode, or as Sarah Palin put it so memorably, “It’s really funny to me to see the splodey heads keep sploding.” If liberals hate something, the argument goes, then it must be wonderful and worthy of aggressive defense. Each controversy reinforces the divisions and the distrust, and Mr. Trump counts on that.

For many in the conservative movement, this sort of anti-anti-Trumpism is the solution to the painful conundrum posed by the Trump presidency. With a vast majority of conservative voters and listeners solidly behind Mr. Trump, conservative critics of the president find themselves isolated and under siege. But, as Damon Linker noted, anti-anti-Trumpism “allows the right to indulge its hatred of liberals and liberalism while sidestepping the need for a reckoning with the disaster of the Trump administration itself.”

This is also a much sounder business model than airing doubts about the president. Conservative media is, of course, a business that relies on ratings, and few things generate ratings more quickly than bashing liberals. In this case, it is more profitable for talk show hosts to play down Mr. Trump’s failures while piling on his enemies.

tijd привел отрывок из статьи, который отлично, на мой взгляд описывает тип и методы "анти-анти".

Статья называется "The Pathetic Lives of Putin’s American Dupes". И речь в ней идет о профессоре Stephen F. Cohen.

Позавчера этот профессор (via rsokolov) на Fox News сообщил, что те, кто сейчас нападают на Трампа представляют собой большую угрозу безопасности, чем террористы. Это сейчас главная опасность для США.

Вот этот отрывок из статьи. Я выделил фразу, которая меня особенно рассмешила тем, насколько часто мы это слышим.

The most prominent intellectual apologist for Putin is Stephen F. Cohen, Princeton professor, Russologist for the left-wing Nation. Cohen is a septuagenarian, old-school leftist who has carried on the mental habits of decades of anti-anti-communism seamlessly into a new career of anti-anti-Putinism. The Cohen method is to pick away at every indictment of the Russian regime without directly associating himself with its various atrocities. Is Putin persecuting gays? Well, Cohen wants us to know that various Ukrainians nationalists dislike gays, too. And also Barack Obama’s claim to snub Sochi because of gay rights is probably not on the level. Is Putin bullying and killing journalists? Eh, says Cohen, “Every time a journalist breaks a leg, they say the Kremlin did it.” Accidents happen.

The primary hub of Russian propaganda in the West is Russia Today, an English-language Kremlin-funded propaganda outlet. Joe Pompeo reported last fall how RT has actually acquired a devoted following in the West, in part through relentless viral YouTube sharing of its reports. Cohen, of course, appears regularly on RT. (Is RT biased? Well, he says, so is CNN: “I’m highly suspicious about the narrative I’m getting on CNN. It seems to be the flip side of RT.”)

Comments

[zlobnyi-karlik.livejournal.com]

я писал у себя - месяца три назад - про передачу на NPR, в которой Katrina vanden Heuvel (жена Стивена Когана, владелица и издатель The Nation) выступала в течение 30 минут, говорила про то, что с Россией и Путиным нужно налаживать отношения (кто бы спорил), что политика отчуждения непродуктивна – и при этом НИ РАЗУ не упомянула ни Крым, ни Донбасс.

А самого Когана я видел в дебатах по тому же поводу - как Запад (Америка прежде всего) должны вести себя с Россией - изолировать или наоборот, engage. Коган был в команде с Владимиром Познером и оба сумели произвести отвратительнейшее впечатление (главная мысль была - конечно, engage - вон, Сталина в 30-е годы изолировали, а он кровавую баню в России устроил – поэтому с Путиным нужно дружить(

[yakov-a-jerkov.livejournal.com]

Да, я сейчас вспомнил, что Вы об этом писали.

Я, кажется, еще написал Вам тогда, что помню его жену по выступлениям на телевидении в прошлом.