The Alex Jones trap: How ‘owning the libs’ can turn into a self-own for conservatives – Washington Examiner

Conservatives are accustomed to their viewpoints being described as disinformation, hate, even literal violence.

Its not a new phenomenon. Economic conservatism has been compared to anti-government extremism since at least the days of Barry Goldwater. Social conservatism is likened to ayatollahs, the Taliban, or The Handmaids Tale, whatever is in fashion at the time. All more or less successful forms of conservatism dating back to the 1960s have been described as a form of racist backlash, with Theodor Adornos work going further back than that.

But it is a situation that has gotten worse with the advent of social media and the woke Left. President Joe Biden sounds like Adorno himself, or at least a graduate student who has glanced at the CliffNotes, musing that a substantial wing of the Republican Party is at least semi-fascist.

BEN SASSE AND THE BATTLE OVER WHAT KIND OF CONSERVATIVE LEADS THE GOP

Tyler Sizemore/AP

So the temptation is there when, in a defamation case, Alex Jones is held liable to the tune of nearly $1 billion to think of how the Left could do this to ordinary conservatives next, bankrupting those who are outspoken and shuttering publications or organizations.

This isn't about calculating real damages from Alex Jones, tweeted conservative influencer Charlie Kirk. This is about sending a message: If you upset the Regime, they will destroy you, completely and utterly, forever.

A nontrivial number of progressives in academia, the media, activist circles, and even in government essentially views anyone a millimeter to the right of Ana Navaro as Alex Jones or at least a latent Alex Jones waiting to burst out.

Its nevertheless a bad temptation for conservatives to indulge in, both morally and strategically.

First, as conservatives themselves have often been quick to point out, defamation is not constitutionally protected speech anymore than theft or fraud are lawful acts of commerce and valid functions of the free market.

Jones told lies about the parents of children who were murdered, lies he did not attempt to defend as true. Some people believed those lies and harassed the grieving parents.

We can quibble about whether the dollar figure is appropriate or whether reviled and polarizing figures are at an unfair disadvantage in the legal system or whether Jones is more akin to a toxic version of professional wrestling and Stephen Colbert's old shtick aping Bill O'Reilly than someone making statements that are meant to be taken at face value in the first place.

But conservatives should be the last people to draw any kind of inference from the judgment against Jones to their own arguments about Second Amendment rights, Hunter Biden, COVID-19 protocols and origins, Ukraine, or anything else.

That some do in this case, but not in judgments against Amber Heard or Gawker, suggests not hard-headed realism or a new willingness to fight liberals on their own terms but a wholly counterproductive internalization of the Lefts critiques.

The media gatekeepers have come crashing down under the weight of their own political biases. As recently as the past couple of years, they have attempted to declare questions closed that were in fact open.

For conservatives, who seldom got to function as such gatekeepers, it is a real opportunity. But it is one that will be squandered if the old climate of three networks and a larger number of newspapers singing off the same song sheet is replaced by a retreat to fantasyland.

There are, of course, cases where defending free speech requires standing up for the right to say noxious things and any viewpoint discrimination sets harmful precedents, especially for whoever is in the political out-group. The American Civil Liberties Union and other liberals used to understand this.

But that means defending freedom of speech, not defending the indefensible.

I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it, Evelyn Beatrice Halls oft-quoted paraphrase of Voltaire, is a rather different sentiment from you know, thats a good point.

And its a distinction that can be grasped without resorting to government disinformation boards, flagging posts for potentially harmful content, or making liberal fact-checkers the final arbiter of the truth.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE IN THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

There is a growing movement among conservatives to be willing to defend their own interests against an increasingly hostile Left by any means necessary, even shedding abstract principles to exercise political power without fear of liberal rebuke.

But sometimes, owning the libs can turn into a self-own.

See more here:
The Alex Jones trap: How 'owning the libs' can turn into a self-own for conservatives - Washington Examiner