What does it say about Tucker Carlson that he's talking about America like its the fall of the Roman Republic? - Its an hour and a half listen, but they touch on a lot of unsaid truths in America today

What does the next 5 years look like for Tucker that he's heading into internet political heterodoxy


  • Total voters
    50

Haim Arlosoroff

Archpolitician June Lapercal
kiwifarms.net
Ok, so I listened to Curtis Yarvin, the Distributist, Black Pigeon Speaks, Blonde in the Belly of the Beast, Mike Enoch, Alt-Hype, and Frame Game Radio between 2014 and 2017. I even agree with a lot of Alternative Right-Wing (although not just Alt-Right) thought about Straight White Christians needing parallel societies in America to survive what the West is reinventing itself into. I generally never thought it would reach TV. My first instinct is the same as with Faith Goldy or Lauren Southern that Tucker is on his way out and is trying to find a new audience. However he has a new studio and his TV audience is still larger than most News Shows. I cannot think of why he would be bringing on outside voices who are going to talk about the continuing economic collapse and coming political upset? At this point Tucker is told that the next part of the American Political Cycle shouldn't have bloodshed in it, and he just seems delighted to have guessed the right answer. America is clearly, as Yarvin puts it, sliding into the third world slowly in collapsing intellectualism and decadence but to see it admitted on TV feels kind of odd.

2040.jpg
The future of America.jpg1620198571041.jpg
What does the next 5 years look like for Tucker that he's heading into internet political heterodoxy? Is he going to lead his section of America anywhere towards Neo-Reaction or just make the Neo-Reactionaries worse like Big Bang Theory did for the entire internet? Its just so weird to see an American Monarchist on TV saying that the Queen is just another Kardashian. Tucker during the interview has his Tucker Face referenced and he admits to just being blown away by Neo-Reactionary Thought, I don't know what to think about that. There was a lot of Ideas put out here, I'm not sure what a boomer will take away from this. Nothing?
 

DamnWolves!

kiwifarms.net
Let me show you the viewer numbers for last Friday:
4B4CC957-B436-47AB-8710-6176A9182D8E.jpeg

Tucker Carlson is the single most-watched news-adjacent host in America. The only person who comes close on another network is Rachel Maddow, and in their time slot her and Cuomo combined just barely beat Tucker. Keep in mind that Carlson has another show in the mornings; they don't release ratings, but it's probably another half million people at a minimum. When it comes to online clip views, it isn't even a competition; Carlson is far and away the most clipped anchor.

Why would he or Fox be looking for another audience when he already reaches just under 1% of all Americans on any given night? It's not an exaggeration to say that Carlson is the single most bankable news guy in the country; clearly, something about his content resonates with people--is it really fair to say he's "sliding into internet heterodoxy" when he pulls more viewers than any of his competitors?

Perhaps you've just been conditioned to dismiss this kind of content as heterodoxy by the endless stream of $30k a year online """journalists""" corporations like Vox Media employ and that Silicon Valley loves to amplify? We live in a world where they've convinced you "the mainstream" loves trannies and faggots, and that a bunch of unarmed boomers taking a free self guided tour of the Capitol is actually a deadly insurrection (and that "firey but peaceful protests" are not) but that's far from my experience with what normal people think. News media has always built false consensus, from Vietnam to the Invasion of Iraq and everything in between. The political and journalistic class reporting from New York and LA are not representative of orthodoxy; they're just really good at making you think they are.
 

LurkNoMore

kiwifarms.net
The next five years for Tucker will be a unprecedented rise and then sharp fall. By that I mean increasingly people are turning from the establishment and the establishment's mouthpieces (i.e. the mainstream media, of which fox is). The sources of "truth" are becoming less and less influential on the average American by the day.
Most Americans haven't stopped searching out the news or information on current affairs. Merely they are more likely to get the information from a Facebook group, youtuber or a twitter account. Of course most of the older generation does not either understand the internet or care to learn it and thus will drift toward those forms which mirror the media they are use too. Hence why I say tucker will gain in popularity as right wing, center and even a few left wing boomers are draw to his show.
This rise of course will tie into his inevitable fall. The more influence he gains, the bigger a target he becomes. People already label him with every nonsensical phrase that marks one as an enemy of the progressive order. Nazi, fascist, white nationalist, white supremacist, so on and so on. This rhetoric has increasingly lost traction and will become more useless as a means of curbing the reach of the progressive's opponents. Soon the calls for deplatforming will join the unheard background noise of the internet, if they haven't already.
This is where things will become very dangerous for tucker. Antifa have already shown up at his house. How much further till one of those rejects decide to carry out an assassination attempt not to different then the baseball field attack? And inevitably the establishment will encourage such attempts, if not outright orchestrate them. For Tucker will drive people to vote either for Trump in 2024 or Trump like outsiders to the establishment. Any of whom will oppose the managed decline of America. Which is what makes me skeptical of any claims that Tucker is controlled opposition.
 
Last edited:

Lorne Armstrong

Do you like my penis more, or my balls more? LOL
kiwifarms.net
Because compared to all of leftoid media he's more credible and honest.
How anyone can consider Bill Kristol’s former protege to be “credible and honest”, I’ll never understand.

I mean, does no one remember Tucker back 20 years ago when he was riding W’s tip along with Hannity and O’Reilly?

Tucker is a talking head. He’s given a script and paid to read it. He’ll say anything his bosses pay him to say, same as Maddow or any other talking head. He doesn’t believe any of it. All he believes in is his paycheck.
 

Haim Arlosoroff

Archpolitician June Lapercal
kiwifarms.net
How anyone can consider Bill Kristol’s former protege to be “credible and honest”, I’ll never understand.

I mean, does no one remember Tucker back 20 years ago when he was riding W’s tip along with Hannity and O’Reilly?

Tucker is a talking head. He’s given a script and paid to read it. He’ll say anything his bosses pay him to say, same as Maddow or any other talking head. He doesn’t believe any of it. All he believes in is his paycheck.
He talks about how humiliation shapes him, and how much the Bowtie Tucker said what he needed to say—in this interview, Glen Beck's Interview, and Adam Carolla's—in order to have had the career that Tucker enjoys. He's strangely coming clean about that, and I'm interested in seeing (and I think its been brought out by his role as a leaker to his 'friends' in the Washington Press Corps being exposed) where he's going with this. It might just be Tucker burning out, angry at a career of Brownnosing and then being hated for it by the very brownnosing community, and reaching anywhere for something to undo and hurt the establishment of either Washington or the Media. He moved out of Washington because of his neighbors, years after Antifa attacked his home and scared his Wife into hiding in a closet. Even Stephen Colbert monologued against the act, although probably never much cared. It might just be emotional catharsis that drives him more than any plan?

I'm trying to figure out if Tucker is really doing anything, or like your saying he's been given a script and this is him reading it? My cynicism is probably going to win the battle against my hope, again.
tiresome.gif
 

Lorne Armstrong

Do you like my penis more, or my balls more? LOL
kiwifarms.net
He talks about how humiliation shapes him, and how much the Bowtie Tucker said what he needed to say—in this interview, Glen Beck's Interview, and Adam Carolla's—in order to have had the career that Tucker enjoys. He's strangely coming clean about that, and I'm interested in seeing (and I think its been brought out by his role as a leaker to his 'friends' in the Washington Press Corps being exposed) where he's going with this. It might just be Tucker burning out, angry at a career of Brownnosing and then being hated for it by the very brownnosing community, and reaching anywhere for something to undo and hurt the establishment of either Washington or the Media. He moved out of Washington because of his neighbors, years after Antifa attacked his home and scared his Wife into hiding in a closet. Even Stephen Colbert monologued against the act, although probably never much cared. It might just be emotional catharsis that drives him more than any plan?

I'm trying to figure out if Tucker is really doing anything, or like your saying he's been given a script and this is him reading it? My cynicism is probably going to win the battle against my hope, again.
Tucker has a Prime-Time show on one of the Big-time “News” networks. When you see Tucker on FNC, he’s reading a script. He’s wearing a costume. It’s no longer the bowtie/tortoiseshell glasses costume. That’s been replaced by the rumpled off-the-rack suit and loosened-tie “Everyman” costume.

Step back and look at this objectively. Can you imagine ANY major network that would allow a talking head to “go rogue” and go off-script? Not just allow it once, but continue to allow it to go on for weeks or months or years? Of course they wouldn’t. Tucker is on TV every night reading the script provided for him by his employer. He’s not “speaking truth to Power” any more than Maddow was 5 years ago. He’s saying what they WANT him to say. They WANT him to say this shit because it makes money. It draws people in who think “MAYBE there’s a chance. Even though I know they’re all liars, maybe THIS TIME one of them isn’t”. It’s stupid. Hes been on TV for a couple of decades at least plus he wrote plenty of op-ed pieces over the years. Read some of them. Go back and look at the MANY years of footage of him voicing support for the PATRIOT Act, the Iraq War, W. in general, all kinds of absolute bullshit.

Tucker=Maddow. Tucker is selling the same shit that Maddow sold for the last 5 years, just packaged and tweaked to appeal to a different demographic group.

Oh, BTW, Glen Beck ought to have his own thread on here. Maybe he does, I haven’t looked because I’d forgotten he existed until you brought him up.
 
Last edited:

Shamash

kiwifarms.net
I don't think Tucker Carlson's sincerity is really relevant. Firstly he's a late night commentator and pundit, not a political leader.

The important thing is, he is exposing his audience to political content beyond Fox News Boomerism. Namely that corporations and tax cuts shouldn't be worshipped, government intervention isn't SocialismTM, and that demographic displacement is happening.

This is good work that moves people in a positive direction.
 

Lorne Armstrong

Do you like my penis more, or my balls more? LOL
kiwifarms.net
Tucker is a rich kid who wears makeup on TV and pretends to care about hard working Americans.

He's good at the grift and it has paid him well.

I would prefer to look myself in the mirror.
Tucker looks himself in the mirror and likes what he sees because he sees someone who gets paid millions to talk on TV regardless of what he says. Half the world may love him, the other half may hate him, but they all know who he is and they all tune in/click/pay attention to every word he says.
I don't think Tucker Carlson's sincerity is really relevant. Firstly he's a late night commentator and pundit, not a political leader.

The important thing is, he is exposing his audience to political content beyond Fox News Boomerism. Namely that corporations and tax cuts shouldn't be worshipped, government intervention isn't SocialismTM, and that demographic displacement is happening.

This is good work that moves people in a positive direction.
”Beyond Fox News Boomerism”? His show is on Fox News Channel and draws in more Boomers to Fox News Channel than any other show FNC broadcasts.

The only place Tucker moves his audience to is to the couch to sit through the commercials while consuming his content.
 

Shamash

kiwifarms.net
He's a talking head, and part of the hydra that is MSM.

He's saying what he's told to say and getting paid for it like any other actor. Believing otherwise is just naive.
Okay? Have you watched any other Fox anchors? Even ones in his time slot? Like Hannity or Ingraham? What are they talking about? Beyond Ingraham occasionally doing anti immigration stuff, I’m not familiar with any other Fox anchor doing what Tucker does.
Tucker looks himself in the mirror and likes what he sees because he sees someone who gets paid millions to talk on TV regardless of what he says. Half the world may love him, the other half may hate him, but they all know who he is and they all tune in/click/pay attention to every word he says.

”Beyond Fox News Boomerism”? His show is on Fox News Channel and draws in more Boomers to Fox News Channel than any other show FNC broadcasts.

The only place Tucker moves his audience to is to the couch to sit through the commercials while consuming his content.
Dude, these people aren’t going to go reading Pol. Where else do you think they will learn anything? They can’t act, join a protest, learn more unless they actually have some inkling about what is going on.*

*People on the internet never seem to remember most Americans aren’t online doing their own research 24/7. They have jobs and families or are retired and hanging out with the grand kids or just eating breakfast late.
 
Top