Sign up for a free recipe e-book →

Clarissa's Blog

Magical Thinking

Published by

Clarissa

on

Tucker Carlson says that we are “now far closer [to a nuclear war] than we were during the Cuban Missile Crisis.”

He’s right. Soviets were not on a death spiral while Russians are.

Where he’s wrong is in ascribing to the US the capacity to save Russia from itself and by doing so save the world from Russia and its growing dysfunction. That’s magical thinking on par with “men can become women.” Tucker has interiorized the belief that people are interchangeable widgets. Cultural differences don’t exist in his worldview. Everybody thinks the same, in his worldview, and that sameness means that everybody thinks like he does. Life is good, so it makes sense to preserve it. That it might not be as good for everybody as it is for him never occurs. This is exactly the mentality of “I believe women are skirts, heels and makeup, so it must be obvious to everybody else that if I’m wearing them I’m a woman.” It’s also the mentality of “migrants immediately become just like Americans once they step over the border.”

8 responses to “Magical Thinking”

  1. Avi Avatar
    Avi

    Very true and, unfortunately, very American.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    1. Clarissa Avatar
      Clarissa

      I’m going to post later today about how and why people interiorize ideas that are hostile to them and do that without wanting to.

      Like

      Reply
  2. Nonna Maus Avatar
    Nonna Maus

    Preventing a nuclear war is about saving the world (large swathes of humanity) from the after effects of having a bunch of nuclear weapons being discharged.

    Saving Russia from itself or whatever political entity is just a side effect.

    Do you think a country operating under Russia’s mentality would not want to take over a country (that they claim is theirs and they have a right to) that is (or that they turn into) a radiation zone? Or am I misunderstanding, like Tucker, the hagiography behind their imperialistic war?

    Like

    Reply
    1. Clarissa Avatar
      Clarissa

      Yeah, they want to take over a country. Then another country. Then yet another, and so on. Nothing will ever be enough. Nothing will feed the hunger. As a result, they’ll always be tempted to just end everything for everybody.

      By giving more and more, we only make them hungrier and angrier. Because the more they get, the greater their rage is.

      Nothing is more stupid than believing that more concessions will placate them. Concessions are achieving the exact opposite.

      Like

      Reply
      1. PaulS Avatar
        PaulS

        The thinking is more likely that the more they get the more insurgents the they will face and the more difficult it they will find it to administer their empire. The logical conclusion of this line of thinking is to give them as much as possible so as to hasten their collapse from imperial overreach.

        Like

        Reply
    2. cliff arroyo Avatar
      cliff arroyo

      “Preventing a nuclear war”

      Remember the mighty Oreshnik? Turns out it was a psy-op to intimidate the west.

      It didn’t work so now faithful servant Tucker has been called to his masters to bark at the west instead.

      russia will or won’t use nukes (for the time being certainly won’t) and it won’t have any causal relation to anything the west does or doesn’t do.

      Modern russia is not powered by rationality and rational thinking about it will just make your head hurt and not accomplish anything.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
      1. Clarissa Avatar
        Clarissa

        All true. Russia exists in its own historical process, it’s doing its own thing. We are not causing it in any way. I know it’s scary to accept but things often happen without us causing them.

        Truly, Russia is the Right’s global warming.

        Like

        Reply
  3. cliff arroyo Avatar
    cliff arroyo

    Sort or related: Translated (voiceover) conversation between Aleksandr Nevzorov (Russian) and Volodymyr Zolkin (Ukrainian) on the nature of the mentality of russians.

    Of the two, Nevzorov is far harsher about the state of russians (including the useless and impotent russian ‘opposition’). Zolkin tries to have some kind of sympathy or understanding for some of them but admits that he fails and is astounded at the brutally uneducated nature of russian soldiers who seem essentially incapable of abstract thought.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment

A conservative literary critic and college professor

Recent posts