Gutfeld’s Joy of Hate: turn a new leaf, turn some tables

January 26, 2014 Asheville , Columnists , Hendersonville , News Stories 1287 Views
Gutfeld’s Joy of Hate: turn a new leaf, turn some tables

_joyofhate RS

By Leslee Kulba-It hit me during the Christmas season. Somebody was singing a song without much of a melody about Jesus being black or white. It was all I could do to contain my temper. I had had my full of people telling me I can only relate to people who look like me. The message was divisive and ignorant, and I was sick of it. What’s more, I was sick of the whole wad of demonic leftist propaganda that hipsters are supposed to embrace in lockstep.

Consequently, I’ve been attracted this New Year to books by authors who by today’s standards need anger management courses. Donald Fagen’s Eminent Hipsters seemed to suffer from over-editing, as did Greg Gutfeld’s The Joy of Hate. I wanted to commune with somebody who could stand up to evil and call it fallacious, damaging, and wrong. I wanted somebody to be on the right side of the two-edged sword as clearly as Jesus was as he turned the tables in the temple, cursed the fig tree, or called Herod a “fox,” an epithet which, by some accounts, had shock value on a par with the N-word back in the day.

Although it lacked the anticipated punch, Gutfeld’s book made many good points. He spoke against the tolerati who demand conformity with the left. Gutfeld is understanding, as he once was a liberal. He tells of winning a debate in his school years. As soon as his opponent had persuaded him that he was wrong, Greg fought back with emotion and was voted the victor. That convinced him that a lot of outspoken lefties know they are wrong. Even so, Gutfeld would afterword participate in greenie activities to get good grades. People want to belong and be liked.

Taking that one step further, one can explore the cult of cool. Two hundred years ago, people spoke of an eternal war between good and evil. In the post-Fonzie world, the war on everybody’s mind is the war between the cool and the intolerant. The cool argue for global values while serving selfish interests, like saying things sure to score dates. Gutfeld argues the phenomenon is a continuation of the preps vs. jocks scene from high school.

The problem is, most of the cool people are totally dependent on the uncool corporate sacrifices of their parents. The parents, for example, pay for them to get their liberal arts degrees. “Young people can happily spend thousands of dollars on electronics and clothes, then complain about economic unfairness. Old people know what it’s like when the bill comes.” The mass media prefers to focus on cool extremes than boring, stable self-sustainers. Gutfeld points out the glossy zines never talk about a rocker calling his mom for gas money. Instead, they focus on the wannabe’s “dark side.” For the beautiful people, “stuff just appears [like] Democratic voters in Ohio.”

Ironically, Gutfeld says progressivism is aggression against daddy, liberals biting the hand that feeds them. Working-class parents typically don’t have time to engage the nonsense. They’re busy trying to provide opportunities for their kids. In a way, nothing changes. The shiftless have always been romanticized while the industrious are demonized. Consider Ancient Egypt with the glorious pharaohs and those pyramids that mysteriously happened.

Instead of the haves and have-nots, Gutfeld distinguishes between the makers and the takers. Right wingers like to point out that they only wish to be allowed to make their own choices about smoking, self-defense, education, and such; left wingers want to make those decisions for everybody else. Lately, we’ve seen a lot of kind-hearted and caring government action perpetrated in the name of compassion that punishes hard work. As an example, Gutfeld rants, “I can’t remember missing a mortgage payment, and I cannot even get refinancing. I am a maker who is getting taken. But in this backwards equation, I’m not a victim, so I get punished.”

The left makes incessant demands, and demands acceptance for being demanding. The right, on the other hand, is asked to surrender, after all else, their consciences. “Gutfeld calls this “repressive tolerance,” and it is inconsistent with itself. For a few examples, gays never march on anti-gay black churches. animal rights activists never go after Native American traditions, Bill Clinton can treat women like a total pig, and the only thing less tolerable than a fat kid is a fetus. The left’s agenda is bent on “turning civilization against itself.”

“We have now made it a rule to respect those who refuse to respect us.” Worse, “The press is more tolerant of the people who want us dead than they are of the people trying to protect us from those who want us dead.” During the last presidential campaign, it was apparent a large number of Americans were showing greater interest in winning the election than in winning the war. On a more personal scale, the press and those who seek its attention, appear to be clamoring louder for the rights of perps than the rights of victims.

The left is angry about Fox News, so angry it demands, in the name of the Fairness Doctrine, that they get equal time. The fact is, the left dominates about 95 percent of media outlets. The fact that they have to target the opposition’s tiny market share with strawman arguments is a double confession of their lie. Gutfeld recounted how he undertook damage control after an imposter posted a mean Tweet in his name. When it was established that the Tweet was a fake, people didn’t want to retract their reactions because he was right-wing and deserving of the hostility thus engendered.

So, the beat goes on. The left gets more insistent on forcing its Utopia that can’t work, while forcing suppliers to make bricks without straw. And something that used to be called evil continues to brew and spew to trap good people into feeling stodgy. One reason, Gutfeld notes, is it’s easier “to throw money at angry fools than to argue with them.”

Share this story
Email

About author

Related articles