Folks, I highly recommend Tucker Carlson’s today’s show. He invited a dude who is a CEO of a biotech company that makes designer babies, and it’s a lesson in neoliberal thinking. The designer baby dude has “choice” as every other word in every sentence. To every ethical objection that Tucker advances, the dude responds “It’s ok if it’s a choice.”
This is such an impoverished, inane philosophy that I understand why morons love it.
Clarissa's Blog 
This was a good choice of topic, but an absolutely terrible choice of interviewee by Tucker Carlson. Among competent statistical geneticists, Nucleus Genomics (the company of which Carlson’s interviewee is a CEO) is recognized to be at best grossly dubious, and at worst outright fraudulent:
https://totalhealthoptimization.com/2025/11/21/concerns-about-the-legitimacy-and-integrity-of-nucleus-genomics
LikeLike
I have no doubt that no matter whom he interviewed the interviewee would keep repeating “choice and freedom” like a trained monkey. That’s the entire worldview of these people. It’s good if it’s choice because choice is the highest good.
LikeLike
If you knew that Carlson was going to interview a critic of neoliberalism, would you want him to interview the most fraudulent and unaccomplished possible critic, or would you want him to interview somebody who actually had their intellectual, professional, and moral act together? And, of the possible interviewees, which one would be more likely to give a credible and interesting response when challenged about their morals?
For some time, it’s been a left-wing trope that nobody on the opposite side of one’s own moral or political position can possibly have any virtues, or any intellectual capacity, or anything interesting to say in their own defense. Over the last year or so, I’ve been dismayed to see that the American right seems to have developed something very much like the same attitude.
LikeLike
Here’s the thing, though. If he doesn’t think that choice, freedom and your own decisions are the highest good, then he’s not a neoliberal. It’s not about being stupid or brilliant. It’s about seeing choice as the ultimate factor in deciding what’s good and what bad.
Example. Are you for or against abortion? Tucker correctly asks, what if the government pushes you to abort because it considers your baby defective? No, the dude says, it’s wrong because it’s not the parents’ own choice. But if it’s their own choice, then yes, that’s good. That “your own choice” is very easily externally manipulated is something that doesn’t occur to him. If it’s choice, it’s good. If it’s not choice is bad. But the thing itself, Tucker asks. Is it good or bad? And there’s no answer the dude can give because it’s all about choice for him. There’s no morality that exists outside the purely individual whims of the moment.
As for disagreement, it’s not humanly possible to disagree more with an individual than I do with Tucker. But I also recognize that he’s very talented and clearly much more intelligent than his interlocutor. That’s why I keep watching. Talent is talent. I value it irrespective of political alignment.
LikeLike
For a recent interview about genetic selection of embryos with a professor of human statistical genetics who isn’t a fraud, is highly productive, and knows what the heck he is talking about, I would recommend this instead:
https://x.com/AlexTISYoung/status/2044143508873982389
LikeLike