[pass the popcorn – the popcorn of existential horror]

The grown-ups are still arguing about who loves America more – the one from Southern Europe versus the one who lives in Southern Europe. On balance I’m supporting Team Hoyt on the grounds of them not being racial-supermacists but eek, Team Vox just argues better.

Hoyt here: http://accordingtohoyt.com/2016/02/28/i-was-born-american-a-blast-from-the-past-7-4-2014/

and Vox here: http://voxday.blogspot.com.au/2016/02/the-mask-comes-off.html

Vox continues to confuse ethnicity with race. Hoyt continues to confuse culture with ideology. So from Vox we have the appalling idea that if you have the wrong genes you aren’t a proper American and from Hoyt we have the appalling idea that if you don’t follow her ideology you aren’t a proper American. Wrong-blood versus wrong-think – both awful in their own special way.

I said ‘Team Vox’ but it is just Vox. The comment section at Vox Popoli doesn’t argue as well as their boss. At Hoyt’s the atmosphere is more egalitarian – a similar quality of argument from the regulars as the host. Vox keeps throwing out rhetorical punches – basically the ropes in this analogy are scary left-sounding arguments that Sarah Hoyt doesn’t want to make (e.g. maybe some things are performative rather than innate) on one side of the ring and the other the inherent contradictions of her position.

My, these transamericans are certainly entitled, aren’t they? Not only can they tell Americans what Real Americans are and are not, but they are going to kick out everyone who doesn’t think like they do, no matter whose posterity they happen might be! Nations aren’t genetically-related peoples, after all, but mere collections of similarly-minded groupthinkers. – Vox Day

So a nasty little double-edged dig at transgender people from Vox in a lead into a paragraph that paints (sort of correctly) that Hoyt’s position implies a kind of thought police or a ‘window into men’s souls’ to define citizenship.

I’ll leave the last word* to J Carlton who is a regular at According to Hoyt and who reblogged this at his own place in an attempt to do a mike-drop.

Here’s the thing, Vox, YOU don’t get a say in who’s an American, not anymore. You’ve given that up for a villa in Italy. I imagine that you enjoy it, that means that you no longer have to deal with America’s problems. All your problem are the problems of Europe and you are welcome to them. As for REAL Americans, I would rather have some of the people I’ve had the pleasure of knowing over the years than somebody who is as childish and cowardly as you, Vox. You ran from America’s problems and then had the unmitigated GALL to say that Sarah isn’t good enough to be an American.

Yeah, but on the internet you can never do a mike-drop. Come on Team Hoyt! That isn’t going to work! Vox has been shouted out by professionals!

*[OK, I didn’t leave the last word. That was my attempt to show how the brilliant emotional fueled telling off doesn’t close a discussion. OK, some tips. Go for the apparent STRENGTH of your opponent which is actually a hidden WEAKNESS. In Vox’s case it is THEOLOGY. The hidden weakness is FREE WILL. He is philosophically committed to it but his position tends towards DETERMINISM.]


11 thoughts on “[pass the popcorn – the popcorn of existential horror]

  1. Other key weaknesses: his ego and his craving for institutional acceptance.

    Odd to have watched his GG in Paris video and found it a bit endearing how unimposing and nervous he was, quick to cede the spotlight to nutty Mike C and Milo. He does argue better and more smartly and I can’t help but wonder what might have resulted had he had a different father and different non-rabid wife. Maybe he could have transcended the echo chamber and made a more positive contribution to SF and discourse. It’s sweetly painful how badly he wants to be let in the treehouse.

    But yeah. SH is out of her depth there. Watching them scrap reminds me of that Honey Badger Don’t Give a Sh!t video awhile. Vox is honey badger, she’s the cobra, and this blog is amusing commentary. Thank you!


    1. Vox was also poor in his debate with Sandifer. I don’t think speaking is really his thing. He probably realises this, because I’d expect such an avid self-promoter to make many more appearances on podcasts etc.


      1. One thing Vox wants is intellectual acceptance – i.e. to be recognized by clever people that he is clever. It is something he can’t get from his minions. But in that kind of discussion he can’t play his usual games *and* his root positions are very weak. He relies on the ‘rhetoric’ to back up those root positions.


  2. I could imagine Vox pulling a reverse Hitchens, actually, given different psycho(sonic)-social conditions.


  3. “from Hoyt we have the appalling idea that if you don’t follow her ideology you aren’t a proper American.”

    She’s really laid that one out in all its ugly glory, hasn’t she? There’s some tapdancing around mindset v legality, but she’s pretty close to just declaring everyone to her left to be un-American.

    On the Trump thing that kicked this all off, JCW has made an appalling but probably valid point which I would paraphrase as “If I’ve previously held my nose and voted for a moderate Republican because they were the popular candidate necessary to beat the Democrats, why isn’t it now time for moderates to hold their noses and vote for my frontrunner?” (http://www.scifiwright.com/2016/02/half-a-loaf-is-better-than-no-bread/)


  4. I’mma have to correct “J. Carson” there… Teddy didn’t run from America’s problems, he ran from something America does right, which is that it very occasionally prosecutes financial shysters who’ve screwed over fellow citizens with dodgy schemes.

    Sadly, it more often makes them the GOP candidate for president, which explains Teddy’s choice in politicians.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. So basically the scene from Annie Hall where adult Alvie Singer is watching his flashback parents arguing over how to deal with the maid’s thievery and saying, “You’re both wrong.”


    1. I haven’t seen Annie Hall (which isn’t even a principled stand against Woody Allan…just never got round to it).
      However I imagine that would be the case 🙂
      Basically 1984 v Brave New World


Comments are closed.