I have an idea. What if you advertise at the beginning of each Tucker post how you can unsub from those specific ones? Oh, wait.....you already do that.
I LIKED the TC interview of Cooper. I didn’t fully agree on the Hitler piece, but I think for myself. I’m going to now make time to listen to Coopers series on Israel-Palestinians & American Labor. There was a TON of other interesting stuff in that talk that was all about seeking truths and the myths that drive people & nation states. I have several historical subjects to look into thanks to Tucker platforming Daryl.
Cooper has not yet created/released his WW2 podcast and already so many are losing their shit. I think that’s why he was a bit coy in interview because WW2 history is COMPLICATED but what we’ve been fed over the last 80 years is not this grey, but instead black/white binary options that support myths. I.e. opponents of new forever wars are warned ‘not to be a Chamberlain… and whoever is the new opponent is a ‘Hitler…’
I would suggest that anyone condemning Cooper without even listening to the interview is a bit foolish and lazy, or perhaps more likely, motivated by FEAR.
I think that is kinda Tuckers point with interviews like that. Its not about agreeing. It is about seeing other POVs and using that info to inform yourself about the world. If you only talk to people you already agree with, how do you learn? Even bad or wrong info can inform you, even if it is just to learn how 'wrong' people think.
1. It was a major mistake on the part of TC to have this guy as a guest. He ought to have known about the guy's crackpottery, and wanted nothing to do with him. This would have been no more a surrender to a politically correct consensus than an insistence that the sun orbits the Earth would unfairly disqualify someone from being taken seriously as an astrophysicist. The Shoah did happen. Millions of captive people didn't just happen to die in concentration camps because the Germans hadn't imagined the levels of human displacement their invasions would cause.
Someone who says such a thing, whether he knows better or not, is trafficking in evil. This guy either knows better or has gone done a psychotic's rabbit hole. TC ought to have known better, and how in the world could he not have anticipated that the Left would insist on making this a Trump/Vance issue?
Cooper is the last person to teach history. His recounting of Jonestown is an embarrassment to anyone who knows the facts of that horrible event. He got just about everything wrong. He said that on the day of the mass death, the real White Night that lunatic, Jones, had been rehearsing those poor people for throughout 1978, Jones had been reduced to a figurehead. What is true is that by November 18, 1978, Jones was doped up around the clock. It's also true that like the Fuhrer in his bunker, Jones was still running everything. And if he had withered to figurehead status, why were his wife and son planning to lure him into the jungle and murder him?
Cooper says that whatever you say about Jones' madness, you can't deny that his righteous outrage about racial inequality was real. To an extent, maybe. What you also cannot deny if you know anything about People's Temple/Jonestown is that every position of authority within it was held by a white person. Apparently, Jones' commitment to racial equality went only so far.
Cooper says the event was a mass suicide. Those 900 people just committed suicide. First, an intelligent person, considering the hundred or more infants and toddlers who died that evening, could be forgiven for doubting this. Second, the audiotape of the mass killing has long been available to the public. I'd be shocked if it weren't on YouTube. If not, it is certainly there for anyone to listen to if you go to the Jonestown archives at San Diego State University: sdsu.edu
What do you hear on that tape? If you were listening to several hundred people committing suicide in happy and eager anticipation of surcease from pain and entrance to The Great Beyond, you'd hear laughing, handclapping, chanting about Paradise.
You don't hear that. You hear moaning, wailing, and sobbing. Yes, the Jones top dogs committed suicide, the hardcore wackjobs, but every one of the few people who managed to slip into the jungle and get away said the same thing: yeah, a lot of people drank the Flavoraid willingly, because they preferred that to being shot by one of the rifle carrying Jones goons.
So, Cooper is a crummy historian. Whether he's a furtive Nazi or not is almost beside the point. If he is, you shouldn't be surprised at his lies about the Holocaust. If he isn't, he's a dolt or a loon. The fact that he's as clueless about Jonestown as he is betrays his professionalism. It might be too kind to call him a hack.
2. I go back to this: why, oh why would Tucker Carlson do this interview at this time? If he had pushed back, great. Part of what a guy in Carlson's position should be doing is revealing mountebanks for what they are. That Carlson would sit there, lost in wonder as though he were St John staring up at Jesus, is shocking. It reveals that Sean Hannity wasn't the only male bimbo at Fox News.
3. No, Carlson shouldn't be deplatformed or canceled. That shouldn't happen to Cooper, either. What should happen is that the public should realize that there is as much point in taking him seriously as there would have been in the American public's taking Lee Harvey Oswald's blathering about Marxism seriously in 1963.
Gee, talk about an unforced error. Maybe Tucker Carlson is a Manchurian candidate, having been "turned" by Russia's wiliest psychologists when he went to interview Putin.
Bobby, what I learned about the Jonestown story that I had never heard before is that the vast majority of the suicides were children and people over 60. And to add to this, the vast majority were also African Americans. Cooper explores why that was the case, and it has to do with American history of repeated demographic turnover, and in this case, the African American Great Migration out of the South and to the Urban centers of America, seeking equality and a better life. In the case of the People's Temple, this was originally Indianapolis then later, San Franscisco and Oakland, CA. I also wasn't aware of the politicians who grew powerful in the 1970's, were closely connected to the People's Temple. George Moscone, Harvey Milk, Willie Brown, Roslynn Carter, sympathies with the Symbionese Liberation Army, etc.
There's a takeaway that 'revolution' that continues on after initial gains are secured must do so by seeking more and new enemies to oppose. Which morph into a sort of psychosis that can climax in death & destruction to the innocent. Certainly, history shows us this occurred previously in 20th century on larger scale. Exhibit A is Stalin/USSR deliberate starvation of Ukraine (Holodomor, 1932-33) and then Exhibit B the famine under Mao in China (1958-60). These famines killed millions of people and were perpetrated by powers that like the Peoples Temple, first pontificated equality (socialism/communism).
The one worthwhile thing Cooper said was what he said about the politicians who may have sensed something awful could happen at Jonestown but did nothing whatever to investigate it. We all know what happened to the one politician who had the courage to go there, Congressman Leo Ryan.
It's fascinating that nine days later, Dan White killed both Milk and Moscone. What had happened at Jonestown has never to my knowledge been thought to have figured into those assassinations, but I think I wasn't the only one who wondered at the time if there might be a connection.
You have an excellent understanding of the psychology of revolutions and their leaders.
I’m a TC subscriber so I’ll keep listening to his podcasts regardless of your decision, but it’s convenient to chime in about his posts on your stack since there’s no mechanism at his website.
Geeze, people get their panties in a V so easy these days. Follow your heart Sasha.
Jrod, World War II was the greatest cataclysm of the 20th century. When somebody says what Cooper says, it isn't overreaction to point out that no historian of that war agrees with him. The famous Holocaust denier, David Irving, likes him, which should tell you something.
Bobby, id suggest you are exhibiting viewpoint that gave birth to cancel culture (guilt by association).
Do you not wonder why there was such a large, singular multi platform ‘attack’ on TC/Cooper all at once. Exhibit A: Julian Assange 2: Exhibit B: Edward Snowden Exhibit c : TC/Cooper.
The neocons do not like anyone poking holes in thier romanticized narratives, many of which were given birth by ‘historians’ post WW2.
Matt, not at all! I hate the maximum security state which we have been imprisoned in for the last twenty years. Please draw the difference between strong denunciation and cancellation. We had cancel culture when I was a tot, but from the Right. Dozens of people in the arts, primarily in movies and theaters, had their careers ruined because they had been or maybe still were varying degrees of Communist in the 1930s and 1940s. They weren't spies, they were naive and idealistic and young, got caught up in something which they later separated themselves from or became deeply skeptical of, but suffered terribly years after the fact because of it.
Cancellation is a form of attempted murder, and always wrong. But a quack is a quack, and denouncing a quack isn't cancelling him.
Cooper had a few valid points but to think that the German military didn't foresee the possibility they might be responsible for a few million people is absurd. There are plans for every possibility in the military. The honest answer would have been that the German high command considered Slavs as little better than serfs or slaves and were indifferent to their fate. Churchill did want conflict with Germany (it was a means to return to power) and he was supported by Jews that wanted Nazism gone and saw common cause with Churchill. I remember Jonestown, I know a lot of people were forced to take the poison and a smaller number committed suicide. I disagree about pushing back during interviews. It's better to listen to what someone has to say without too much interruption. A little is fine but too often if someone says something controversial the moderator (who's probably worried about keeping his job) can't stop interrupting and it ruins the interview. I noticed Putin says he supports Harris but it didn't seem to get the same sort of airplay he'd have received if he had said he supported Trump. Walz was paid by the Chinese government in the 1990s for a bunch of trips he took as part of a side business, perhaps he's the Manchurian candidate. He also drove 100 mph as a drunk driver in the 90's and is completely dishonest about dodging Iraq and his so-called "combat experience" but his behavior isn't important. He's only a VP candidate, Tucker as a talking head is oh so much more important.
You say quite a few valid things, but I have to disagree that Churchill wanted war because he wanted to return to power. You must take into account that when Churchill started to decry Hitler and the Nazis in the early 1930s, he was thought to be absolutely washed up in British politics. I'm pretty sure he had a sense of himself as a man of destiny, or wanted to ( desperately ), but he started to warn against Hitler before Hitler was Chancellor.
One of the great, almost unknown things about Churchill is that by the mid - 1930s, he had his own private spy ring going because he was certain that Hitler was preparing for war and was distraught about the British government's complacency. I've read that on one occasion, Churchill may have trod a little too far into classified material provided to him by one of his men in MI5 or the Foreign Service, and could, if he had been caught, have been sent to the gallows.
Not long after Churchill was made First Lord of the Admiralty, he had one of his "zigzag streaks of lightning in the brain," as he called his inspirations. Looking at a map of Scandinavia, it occurred to him that if the Royal Navy could choke off the little bit of sea between Sweden and Denmark, they could prevent the Germans from getting the iron ore they were buying from the Swedes, without which they would have had to surrender. For once, the entire Cabinet was taken with an enthusiasm of Winston's, but within a day or two they had all realized that the RAF wasn't strong enough to fight off the Luftwaffe attack which would come at any Royal Navy blockade. If they had been able to do it, the war would have ended, Chamberlain would have been a hero, and though Churchill would have been credited with the idea, he wouldn't have become Prime Minister. Churchill wasn't perfect, but he was a great man, and the idea that he wanted war with Germany so he could be in power isn't fair.
What is fair is the assertion that Churchill was convinced he was the only British politician who should be Prime Minister in a war against Germany. That's far different from asserting that he had the kind of coldness which your idea presumes.
I don't think Tucker Carlson had any worries that if he pushed back against Cooper he'd lose his gig. I think he's so ill educated, he didn't know what to say. It's the same kind of ignorance which underlies his frequent flat statements that "we know the CIA killed John F Kennedy." I wonder whether the effect of his lack of resistance to Cooper will be akin to a slow burn which causes Carlson long term damage? It will be interesting to see how this plays out. One thing is certain: he's created a potential big headache for Trump/Vance which the ticket doesn't need. I'd be shocked if Trump gets through the debate next week without being asked about the Carlson/Cooper interview.
Tucker Carlson can be uninformed but I wouldn't consider him "ill educated." Some say the CIA killed Kennedy, some say the mob, some say Israel had something to do with it, but personally I'd pick Johnson. It certainly wasn't Oswald but it appears he had some involvement at some level. I agree the Cooper interview will likely be brought up and if Trump is smart he'll dismiss the question by saying he didn't listen to it. The last thing the media wants to discuss is the Biden/Harris policy of the past 4 years. I don't think puberty blockers for adolescents, teaching gay sex to primary school kids, free home loans for illegals, or Venezuelan gangs taking over apartment complexes is something that the media will bring up.
BTW Churchill was cold. Look up the Bengali famine. This was Churchill's response to it: "The notes also reveal the British prime minister's attitude towards India. During one government discussion about famine relief, Secretary of State for India Leopold Amery recorded that Churchill suggested any aid sent would be insufficient because of "Indians breeding like rabbits". Estimates of the dead were between 3 and 5 million people. I doubt many people would find Churchill a hero if he had been responsible (fully or partially) for that number of deaths had they been Jewish or Christian. Churchill was ruthless and a great leader but that doesn't mean he was a good man. Hitler, Mao, Stalin, and to some degree Roosevelt had the same qualities. We demonize or idolize leaders without looking at them from other perspectives. I assure you that Indians do not see Churchill in the same light as you do. Should their perspective be dismissed?
Mike, I confess to ignorance about the famine. I'll try to fix that. You couldn't be more wrong about the Kennedy assassination. The most accessible book which proves as much as anything can that Oswald was the lone gunman is Gerald Posner's “Case Closed.” You can find a good interview with Posner about his book in several places on YouTube. The most recent one is on an extremely new YouTube channel, “On the Trail of Delusion.”
The most exhaustive forensic analysis of the JFK assassination is Vincent Bugliosi's “Reclaiming History.” At 1,500 pages, it's daunting. There is a historian, Dr Sean Munger, who has a two part, three hour long video about the JFK assassination on his channel. He works strictly from the Bugliosi book.
Also not to be missed: there is a YouTube channel, LEMMiNO, which is a treasure. His ninety minute long graphic analysis of the JFK assassination is almost miraculous. I've never seen anything as remarkable.
I'm 72. I'm astounded at how many people say the kinds of things you say about the assassination. Oswald’s sole guilty is ridiculously obvious from the evidence, and I hope you'll learn it.
Yes and no. Walz is so much more important if he becomes President. Carlson has been of great help, but if he succumbs to nuttery, what credibility does he have left? Go to The Washington Free Beacon and read Andrew Roberts' succinct article about the Carlson/Cooper interview. It's almost funny how easily, trenchantly, and contemptuously Roberts deals with it.
Tucker first caught my eye because he was so good at pushing back. He pushed back, hard, against.any guests on Fox. Nobody else pushed back like he did. His classic, perplexed, expression was ties in with pushing back. It is the very look of "wait a minute."
So to your point, it says volumes that he did not push back.
I listened to it. He was zealous about all the books he had read. Some of it was interesting, sure, but some of it was crazily, overwhelmingly dangerous B.S. Fear was appropriate, like finding a snake in your kitchen.
Which is why when I hear stuff online, I make a note and go and do my own research to validate. For example, Cooper claimed that Italians suffered the most lynchings in American history or something to this effect. I'm going to check that out because that's not something I've ever heard before.
Cooper was also pontificating on something that feels very relevant to today's world. Which is America history, from its very beginning, is based on repeated demographic turnover. And what is then considered 'American' morphs with each subsequent generation. We are used to this because it's part of our very DNA. The 1798 call for immigrants was needed to settle the vast North America continent, or else another Euro Nation State would do so. And how this is totally different to European Nation States, who long ago (for thousands of years) organized themselves into specific land areas. Each plot of land is connected to a race/culture and how you get 'Englishman', Irishman', 'Franco', etc. But now, driven by just 1 generation born between 1946 and 1964, these countries majority ‘deplorables’ are losing their historical identity due to newcomers. The Boomer elites that are part of a more global, border less cabal that are behind this change, don’t care. These 'newcomers' are part of the USA experience, so we take it in stride here in North America. We saw it with the Irish, then the Italians, then with Mexican's, etc. and it all worked (for the last 240 years). But in Europe, this is now a radical transformation all at once, largely without any prior historical precedent. The USA as dominant power is imposing its ‘demographic turnover’ history onto European ‘vassal’ nations, it would appear. I.e. London is no longer majority native English population. France also much changed, same with Ireland, Germany. What does it all look like in another 40-50 years? Those countries that don’t want to play ball (see Hungary/Orban) are blackballed. This is a subject worth exploring more, IMHO.
I don't think he said that Italians suffered the most lynchings, but that the biggest lynching in the U.S. was the lynching of Italians. And this is true; it happened in 1891 in New Orleans. It's also a fact that almost 30% of the people lynched in the U.S. between 1882 and 1968 were white.
My grandmother scandalized her family by marrying an Irishman (who along with dogs was to keep off the grass). My mother was told by that very Irishman that her Italian boyfriend was not welcome in their house. It was what it was. We are all the decedents of slaves.
Some things about WWII are not COMPLICATED or even complicated. Sorry, (Not that it has anything to do with the question on the table -- FWIW I'm one of those annoying free speech is free speechers.)
Casey, I agree. There are some uncomplicated parts, and some that are complicated.
On the latter, most American's today don't know that 6-months prior to Dec 7, 1941, the US and Britian imposed an oil embargo on Japan, which led IMO to the attack. Nor is there much questioning on why the flattops were not in harbor that AM. That part isn't widely taught, and in my view, the USA 'invited' the attack. At the time Roosevelt had a country totally against entry into another war, and a 'shock event' was the only way to change opinions. All that said, I support that the USA did what they did. I also support USA opposition to USSR post-WW2.
Thank you, Ungovernable! And thank you, Sasha! The freedom to speak one's mind without fear of persecution is exactly why the globalists fear & want to destroy the US. What happened to people ignoring content they don't like? Of course, communists can't just "coexist", despite their stupid bumper stickers. Remember, the slogan was "workers of the WORLD unite".
Please keep up the good work, Sasha, and as a 2009 redpilled liberal, please never forget that you don't have to walk in lockstep with any party.
Exactly! Theoretically, your subscribers should be proponents of free speech. This way of thinking is what has us in our current cancel culture position. Just because you don't agree with someone, or think they are deplorable, does not mean they don't have a right to their opinion (even if it is batshit crazy). In my opinion, we need to hear opposing voices instead of insulating ourselves in echo chambers.
Absolutely. Dissenting opinions are the lifeblood of broadened perspectives. That's why the 1st Amendment enshrines our right to boldly speak what we believe or just want to air out. The 5th enshrines our right to say nothing at all if we choose. By both standards, demands to “denounce” belong only in the playbook for authoritarian blowhards and despots. "Denounce!" is the reason Torquemada and the Spanish Inquisition deserve universal contempt. Forcing people to lie humiliates human beings and creates propaganda, and a culture of lies—forced or voluntary—is on the fast track to chaos and destruction.
So relieved to read all these replies here. I love you guys so much! I agree with all of you. Tucker likes to allow all POV to be heard. I listened to the interview the day it came out, and while it didn’t “convert” me into an antisemite, nor change my own personal views of Hitler or the holocaust, I wasn’t shocked or offended in any way because I just saw it as understanding how someone may come to different conclusions or opinions than me.
I abhor cancel culture, and I’m sick of this bullying of people who don’t agree with our views or history. I’d rather hear interviews like this and have the freedom to have discussions because through that you can actually change someone’s heart. Canceling them won’t ever do that.
And Tucker is NOT an antisemite! Why aren’t those criticizing him for this interview seeing that it’s the MSM playbook again to hyper focus on one part of a picture and have it overpower the whole image. Tucker interviewing Cooper is not a sin or a slap in anyone’s face. There was a LOT more in that interview about other history than just that part of it.
Thanks to all who are posting in support of him.
And Sasha? I say lose that subscriber. As soon as I can find a job I promise to subscribe to you. ❤️
I love Tucker and subscribe to his site. I absolutely love his content. However, I can see that if the shoe were on the other foot, the recurring notices would bug me. So, my vote would be that you cease posting the Tucker links altogether. Those of us who like Tucker will find his content anyway, so its no loss for us. Thank you so much Sasha for all the great work you do!!!
THIS! Why can’t everyone see Tucker’s interview from this perspective? Why do people have to try and drum up a social backlash against someone who allowed offensive views to have a mic? So what? Get a mic of your own and post a counter argument then. I just don’t understand the bullying.
I don’t agree with all of what Darryl Cooper or Tucker Carlson, for that matter says but l’ll defend his right to say them. Cancel culture is toxic. I am an anti cancel absolutist. I see no reason you should cave to anyone.
It was an INTERVIEW, not an endorsement. I’d like to see him interview Xi, and I’m no fan of the man or his policies. Does ANYONE remember when '60 Minutes' used to interview people like Roman Polanski, the Shah of Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini, the terrorist Hasan Salameh?? Kevorkian? Timothy McVeigh?
Unfortunately today's 60 Minutes is only the slightest shadow of it's former self. I gave up watching when they too became infected with partisan, woke, BS.
I used to watch 60 Minutes every Sunday until they gradually became unbearable and biased ti the point of laughable. Haven’t watched for over 10 years.
That was longer ago than you think. Check out the movie Illinois Power made about their being questioned about Nuclear Power back in the 70's. The agreed to the interview if they would be permitted to tape it too. They did and showed the shenanigans that 60 minutes pulled that is as bad as anything we currently see today. All that is nothing new. We are just aware of it now.
Just as the loony Leftist warmongers tried to paint Tucker as a "Putin apologist" for merely interviewing him. Heaven forbid we learn his perspective on a war that we deliberately incited.
I used to watch 60 Minutes until about 20 years ago. And when I heard they 'interviewed' the Pedo's from The Lincoln Project a couple weeks before the 2020 election, I had to laugh to myself. They are so obviously in the tank for the leftists, it's frankly hilarious, albeit dangerous.
I don’t recall him ‘agreeing’… Carlson has a way of getting people to say what they really think. Did you watch him with the weird guy who wants to stop aging? Or the guy who claimed to be Obama’s 'gay pickup'?
Do we want free speech or not? Can you handle someone with a different opinion? Tucker can interview whomever the hell he wants to and you can choose to watch/listen or not. I like hearing straight from the horses mouth to decide whether I value or accept their opinion. I thought David Duke a fool and abhorrent , but was interested in why he thought the way he did. So I watched interviews with him.
Calling for cancellation of Tucker throws you right into the facist stream.
I had something similar on a small town scale when trump was elected. I was a part of a circle of artists. One person who i thought of as a friend wrote me a scathing email, saying she never wanted to hear from me again, and calling me a racist. Because trump was a racist, so anyone who liked anything about him, was also a racist. Suddenly, i noticed that none of the artists in town, except one, were still speaking to me. Some of them i had been really kind to and supportive during serious illness etc. but, eventually i got over it..and it made it easier for me to know who the real haters were..i now have a smaller social circle of good people. There are just a lot of haters out there...and they think WE are the problem! Hahaha
This feels like I'm writing a letter to Penthouse magazine: "I had heard about cancellations, but didn't really believe they happened, until this past weekend," when I was canceled by a friend I met decades ago in law school and would have dinner with once or twice a year. After insisting (I resisted, unsuccessfully) we talk about politics, he found it unforgivable that I couldn't definitively state the 2020 election was "fair". I pointed out as one of the reasons the media/tech's burying of the Hunter Biden laptop story shortly before the election - which he said he didn't know much about. This guy is a health-care lobbyist in DC and hadn't heard much about the laptop? While blaming Trump for the failure of the "bipartisan" (I hate that word when it contains a Romney and his ilk) border deal, he had no idea that the deal would have allowed 1.8 million illegals into the country per year, ASSUMING Biden would have enforced it (which, of course, he would not). I asked if he ever read anything besides NYT and WaPo and he said he saw no need to do so. He had never even heard of Taibbi, Greenwald, Bari Weiss, The Free Press, etc. I suggested he open his mind and read other sources. After dinner, I could sense he was troubled by our conversation. At 7 a.m. the next morning I received his text, "I wish you well. Don't call me again." I thought, "Wow, this really happens to real people." Luckily, I didn't give a rat's ass.
Wow. I am so happy that you don't give a rat's ass! He does not wish you well and in fact, he probably wishes you were forced to sew your mouth shut. Their disdain for another view is mind boggling to me. 🥺
Yesterday I made a post on Jordan Schachtel's substack 'The Dossier' questioning his takedown of TC/Cooper and whether he was getting the same memo as all the others to pile on. After 30+ likes he banned me forever from his site so I went ahead and unsubscribed my paying membership. That was my first personal encounter with cancel culture. His stack so he can do what he pleases, of course. Long live Free Speech.
I was banned yesterday too by Jordan. His post was shameful. Cooper is an extraordinary thinker, writer and researcher and the blood of my dead ancestors does not cry out from the ground because I read and admire him.
I felt the Jordan banning me was really strange. I subscribed to him initially due to his opposition to Covid censorship. Seems either he’s Jewish and hit a nerve or he’s been bought off. I did recently notice he’s added ads to his site (like buy gold) so he’s looking for $$.
He is Jewish. I am a Jew too. I think I can figure out if someone is reeking of Jew-hatred, or not.
I noticed those ads too and the shilling of nutritional supplements like Mike Huckabee flogging 'em to the old folks got my antennae wiggling madly.
But the quality of his writing has gone down. I began reading him because he was mentioned as "friend of the blog" etc. etc. by a few of the guys I continue to admire greatly. But all of us have had that asshole friend we retain affection for even as they keep sinking lower.
I was shadow banned from Instapundit. Don't know why but that is the nature of shadow banning. Irony is that I agreed with Reynolds about a lot more than I disagreed with.
I was banned from Gateway Pundit for making some comment about black naming practices sometime before the plandemic. I've asked to be reinstating but they refused.
This is what the Left, Hollywood, and the MSM has taught everyone for years and years, that when people behave badly (aka disagree with you or the narrative, or speak the truth,) then the only way to deal with them is to shut them out or down, show them the hand, slam the door in their face. They convinced everyone that it’s too toxic to hear an opposing view and life is too short for that toxicity so you stifle it immediately and get them out of your life, and then they will learn their lesson that if they want to keep relationships they won’t talk that way.
That’s how they control others. It’s all about “control”, not truth. Even therapists are teaching their patients to respond this way, always prefaced with saying something kind about the other person first because you aren’t supposed to be cruel yourself, but then draw that boundary. It’s quack psychology. They have everybody convinced it is abusive when someone with an opposing viewpoint tries to have an intellectual conversation with you about politics. 🙄And you must separate yourself from that abuse. That’s what Sasha’s subscriber was doing, giving an ultimatum to control what she did. That’s what jemarr’s friend did to her with “don’t call me again”. Why preface that with “I wish you well”? Obviously he doesn’t if he can say the next thing he did. That’s more to make himself look good.
The real toxicity is them and that tactic!
This all started over 20 years ago. It’s taken a long time to get to where we are at today and it’s much worse now, but it started long ago.
Cancel culture was mastered in our family on both sides starting 20 years ago, and anyone honest was a threat to everyone. Guess who that was? Yeah, me and my husband. They built a family on lie after lie and everyone was expected to stick to it. We were canceled by everyone on both sides because we spoke the truth and that truth threatened each of them in different ways. Mostly they wanted to control a particular narrative for selfish gain or reasons, and the truth would make them look really bad. I never spoke the truth just to hurt them. I only spoke it when something untruthful was said about us, in order to defend us and clarify. But of course it made them look awful - so then they had to keep everyone from ever wanting to see us so that no one would ever hear our side of the story. And they were extremely successful in doing that. Sound familiar? Democrats 101. So they even stopped inviting us to all holidays, graduations, weddings, even funerals! We aren’t notified about any significant life events. It’s too risky to have us in the family because we might actually speak and blow the lid off something. *gasp*
So we have been living without any family all these years. And it has been very hard on our kids. People used to think something was wrong with us because nobody is canceled like this without reason, right? Then Covid happened. Now half the world can finally relate to me. Go figure it took a fake pandemic to be understood.
There are a lot of haters but the glaringly obvious truth is that by far we have the best people on our side like Elon, Tucker, Tulsi, Bret Weinstein, Glenn Greenwald, Joe Rogan, Megyn Kelly, Sasha and so many others. These are the ones you should pay attention to and follow, not the nutcases that in effect are in favor of open borders and the war on meritocracy.
It's weird (sorry) to take comfort in the fact that your friends were never really your friends, but I find that I do. After all, I didn't know it at the time.
Julia- I'm in the art world as well. Some of the least tolerant people on the planet!! All fine if you toe the party line, but dare to step in another direction, or disagree w/ doctrine, and you become persona non grata!
You should run your substack the way you want to run it. For every cancellation you will probably get 2-3 subscribers that will stay with you because of a principled stand, even if they don't agree.
If you agree with 100% of what "someone" says, you are probably in a cult. It's ok to disagree.
Don't submit to cancel culture. Tucker Carlson pushes the boundaries of acceptable discussion. For example his interview with Putin. He caught a lot of flak for it, but talking to Putin about his views, war aims, etc. is appropriate journalism. Tucker in no way was acting as a mere Putin puppet.
Likewise he has had a few other interviews that made me question his judgement. Whatever. I have my own judgement and can choose to listen to any particular interview or not. Don't like what a particular guest says? Then do your own video or write a rebuttal and publish it. Canceling is just wrong and a sure way to create more division in society.
I thought the Putin interview was a must watch ( though it turned out to be kinda boring, especially the first 30 minutes). I don’t understand people who condemn him for interviewing Putin, or for Trump visiting North Korea and Kim Jong for that matter. Isn’t increased dialogue with our so-called “enemies” (manufactured enemies imo) a good thing? Not to the Democrats, which is why I hate them these days.
I’ve watched almost every one he has posted in the last month or two and I’ve yet to find any that weren’t worth the time. Because they are long, I listen to half while I’m doing my daily walk, and the other half while making and eating dinner. My husband comes home each day and says “what’s Tucker saying today?” Lol. He’s hooked now. Lmao
Thank you for not giving in to cancel culture, whatever you decide to do about the videos. Why can’t people see that this is all about removing Tucker’s voice before the election. He has many important and unique guests, like Mike Benz and the Means siblings who add major value to the election conversation.
Yep, and since interviews like those blow the lid off of deep state crap, they have to divert people from wanting to listen to him. They knew he’d have a controversial one sooner or later and were waiting to jump on it when it happened.
You/we are witnessing the complete moral bankruptcy of the Western World. Power and control are the two objectives, with supporting operations of "Counter Hate Speech", "Climate Change" and "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion".
From a Christian perspective, we need to stand firm on the Truth, and not get caught up in the Left's spiritual doctrine and sacraments which will define for us what 'truths' are authorized for discussion. Those speaking the Truth, or exploring where the Truth is, need to be amplified. I see Tucker Carlson as being in that camp.
Stand fast, we are in the last days for sure! (2 Timothy)
I have an idea. What if you advertise at the beginning of each Tucker post how you can unsub from those specific ones? Oh, wait.....you already do that.
Ignore the haters!
I LIKED the TC interview of Cooper. I didn’t fully agree on the Hitler piece, but I think for myself. I’m going to now make time to listen to Coopers series on Israel-Palestinians & American Labor. There was a TON of other interesting stuff in that talk that was all about seeking truths and the myths that drive people & nation states. I have several historical subjects to look into thanks to Tucker platforming Daryl.
Cooper has not yet created/released his WW2 podcast and already so many are losing their shit. I think that’s why he was a bit coy in interview because WW2 history is COMPLICATED but what we’ve been fed over the last 80 years is not this grey, but instead black/white binary options that support myths. I.e. opponents of new forever wars are warned ‘not to be a Chamberlain… and whoever is the new opponent is a ‘Hitler…’
I would suggest that anyone condemning Cooper without even listening to the interview is a bit foolish and lazy, or perhaps more likely, motivated by FEAR.
I think that is kinda Tuckers point with interviews like that. Its not about agreeing. It is about seeing other POVs and using that info to inform yourself about the world. If you only talk to people you already agree with, how do you learn? Even bad or wrong info can inform you, even if it is just to learn how 'wrong' people think.
If you missed the memo other point of views are not allowed any longer, only group think.
Yes!
I watched all of it. This is what I think:
1. It was a major mistake on the part of TC to have this guy as a guest. He ought to have known about the guy's crackpottery, and wanted nothing to do with him. This would have been no more a surrender to a politically correct consensus than an insistence that the sun orbits the Earth would unfairly disqualify someone from being taken seriously as an astrophysicist. The Shoah did happen. Millions of captive people didn't just happen to die in concentration camps because the Germans hadn't imagined the levels of human displacement their invasions would cause.
Someone who says such a thing, whether he knows better or not, is trafficking in evil. This guy either knows better or has gone done a psychotic's rabbit hole. TC ought to have known better, and how in the world could he not have anticipated that the Left would insist on making this a Trump/Vance issue?
Cooper is the last person to teach history. His recounting of Jonestown is an embarrassment to anyone who knows the facts of that horrible event. He got just about everything wrong. He said that on the day of the mass death, the real White Night that lunatic, Jones, had been rehearsing those poor people for throughout 1978, Jones had been reduced to a figurehead. What is true is that by November 18, 1978, Jones was doped up around the clock. It's also true that like the Fuhrer in his bunker, Jones was still running everything. And if he had withered to figurehead status, why were his wife and son planning to lure him into the jungle and murder him?
Cooper says that whatever you say about Jones' madness, you can't deny that his righteous outrage about racial inequality was real. To an extent, maybe. What you also cannot deny if you know anything about People's Temple/Jonestown is that every position of authority within it was held by a white person. Apparently, Jones' commitment to racial equality went only so far.
Cooper says the event was a mass suicide. Those 900 people just committed suicide. First, an intelligent person, considering the hundred or more infants and toddlers who died that evening, could be forgiven for doubting this. Second, the audiotape of the mass killing has long been available to the public. I'd be shocked if it weren't on YouTube. If not, it is certainly there for anyone to listen to if you go to the Jonestown archives at San Diego State University: sdsu.edu
What do you hear on that tape? If you were listening to several hundred people committing suicide in happy and eager anticipation of surcease from pain and entrance to The Great Beyond, you'd hear laughing, handclapping, chanting about Paradise.
You don't hear that. You hear moaning, wailing, and sobbing. Yes, the Jones top dogs committed suicide, the hardcore wackjobs, but every one of the few people who managed to slip into the jungle and get away said the same thing: yeah, a lot of people drank the Flavoraid willingly, because they preferred that to being shot by one of the rifle carrying Jones goons.
So, Cooper is a crummy historian. Whether he's a furtive Nazi or not is almost beside the point. If he is, you shouldn't be surprised at his lies about the Holocaust. If he isn't, he's a dolt or a loon. The fact that he's as clueless about Jonestown as he is betrays his professionalism. It might be too kind to call him a hack.
2. I go back to this: why, oh why would Tucker Carlson do this interview at this time? If he had pushed back, great. Part of what a guy in Carlson's position should be doing is revealing mountebanks for what they are. That Carlson would sit there, lost in wonder as though he were St John staring up at Jesus, is shocking. It reveals that Sean Hannity wasn't the only male bimbo at Fox News.
3. No, Carlson shouldn't be deplatformed or canceled. That shouldn't happen to Cooper, either. What should happen is that the public should realize that there is as much point in taking him seriously as there would have been in the American public's taking Lee Harvey Oswald's blathering about Marxism seriously in 1963.
Gee, talk about an unforced error. Maybe Tucker Carlson is a Manchurian candidate, having been "turned" by Russia's wiliest psychologists when he went to interview Putin.
Bobby, what I learned about the Jonestown story that I had never heard before is that the vast majority of the suicides were children and people over 60. And to add to this, the vast majority were also African Americans. Cooper explores why that was the case, and it has to do with American history of repeated demographic turnover, and in this case, the African American Great Migration out of the South and to the Urban centers of America, seeking equality and a better life. In the case of the People's Temple, this was originally Indianapolis then later, San Franscisco and Oakland, CA. I also wasn't aware of the politicians who grew powerful in the 1970's, were closely connected to the People's Temple. George Moscone, Harvey Milk, Willie Brown, Roslynn Carter, sympathies with the Symbionese Liberation Army, etc.
There's a takeaway that 'revolution' that continues on after initial gains are secured must do so by seeking more and new enemies to oppose. Which morph into a sort of psychosis that can climax in death & destruction to the innocent. Certainly, history shows us this occurred previously in 20th century on larger scale. Exhibit A is Stalin/USSR deliberate starvation of Ukraine (Holodomor, 1932-33) and then Exhibit B the famine under Mao in China (1958-60). These famines killed millions of people and were perpetrated by powers that like the Peoples Temple, first pontificated equality (socialism/communism).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peoples_Temple_in_San_Francisco
The one worthwhile thing Cooper said was what he said about the politicians who may have sensed something awful could happen at Jonestown but did nothing whatever to investigate it. We all know what happened to the one politician who had the courage to go there, Congressman Leo Ryan.
It's fascinating that nine days later, Dan White killed both Milk and Moscone. What had happened at Jonestown has never to my knowledge been thought to have figured into those assassinations, but I think I wasn't the only one who wondered at the time if there might be a connection.
You have an excellent understanding of the psychology of revolutions and their leaders.
I’m a TC subscriber so I’ll keep listening to his podcasts regardless of your decision, but it’s convenient to chime in about his posts on your stack since there’s no mechanism at his website.
Geeze, people get their panties in a V so easy these days. Follow your heart Sasha.
Jrod, World War II was the greatest cataclysm of the 20th century. When somebody says what Cooper says, it isn't overreaction to point out that no historian of that war agrees with him. The famous Holocaust denier, David Irving, likes him, which should tell you something.
Bobby, id suggest you are exhibiting viewpoint that gave birth to cancel culture (guilt by association).
Do you not wonder why there was such a large, singular multi platform ‘attack’ on TC/Cooper all at once. Exhibit A: Julian Assange 2: Exhibit B: Edward Snowden Exhibit c : TC/Cooper.
The neocons do not like anyone poking holes in thier romanticized narratives, many of which were given birth by ‘historians’ post WW2.
Matt, not at all! I hate the maximum security state which we have been imprisoned in for the last twenty years. Please draw the difference between strong denunciation and cancellation. We had cancel culture when I was a tot, but from the Right. Dozens of people in the arts, primarily in movies and theaters, had their careers ruined because they had been or maybe still were varying degrees of Communist in the 1930s and 1940s. They weren't spies, they were naive and idealistic and young, got caught up in something which they later separated themselves from or became deeply skeptical of, but suffered terribly years after the fact because of it.
Cancellation is a form of attempted murder, and always wrong. But a quack is a quack, and denouncing a quack isn't cancelling him.
You have to follow your heart Sasha. Whatever you decide, I will honour. I know how to find TC and the links are not why I subscribe to you.
A Canadian Grandma
Cooper had a few valid points but to think that the German military didn't foresee the possibility they might be responsible for a few million people is absurd. There are plans for every possibility in the military. The honest answer would have been that the German high command considered Slavs as little better than serfs or slaves and were indifferent to their fate. Churchill did want conflict with Germany (it was a means to return to power) and he was supported by Jews that wanted Nazism gone and saw common cause with Churchill. I remember Jonestown, I know a lot of people were forced to take the poison and a smaller number committed suicide. I disagree about pushing back during interviews. It's better to listen to what someone has to say without too much interruption. A little is fine but too often if someone says something controversial the moderator (who's probably worried about keeping his job) can't stop interrupting and it ruins the interview. I noticed Putin says he supports Harris but it didn't seem to get the same sort of airplay he'd have received if he had said he supported Trump. Walz was paid by the Chinese government in the 1990s for a bunch of trips he took as part of a side business, perhaps he's the Manchurian candidate. He also drove 100 mph as a drunk driver in the 90's and is completely dishonest about dodging Iraq and his so-called "combat experience" but his behavior isn't important. He's only a VP candidate, Tucker as a talking head is oh so much more important.
You say quite a few valid things, but I have to disagree that Churchill wanted war because he wanted to return to power. You must take into account that when Churchill started to decry Hitler and the Nazis in the early 1930s, he was thought to be absolutely washed up in British politics. I'm pretty sure he had a sense of himself as a man of destiny, or wanted to ( desperately ), but he started to warn against Hitler before Hitler was Chancellor.
One of the great, almost unknown things about Churchill is that by the mid - 1930s, he had his own private spy ring going because he was certain that Hitler was preparing for war and was distraught about the British government's complacency. I've read that on one occasion, Churchill may have trod a little too far into classified material provided to him by one of his men in MI5 or the Foreign Service, and could, if he had been caught, have been sent to the gallows.
Not long after Churchill was made First Lord of the Admiralty, he had one of his "zigzag streaks of lightning in the brain," as he called his inspirations. Looking at a map of Scandinavia, it occurred to him that if the Royal Navy could choke off the little bit of sea between Sweden and Denmark, they could prevent the Germans from getting the iron ore they were buying from the Swedes, without which they would have had to surrender. For once, the entire Cabinet was taken with an enthusiasm of Winston's, but within a day or two they had all realized that the RAF wasn't strong enough to fight off the Luftwaffe attack which would come at any Royal Navy blockade. If they had been able to do it, the war would have ended, Chamberlain would have been a hero, and though Churchill would have been credited with the idea, he wouldn't have become Prime Minister. Churchill wasn't perfect, but he was a great man, and the idea that he wanted war with Germany so he could be in power isn't fair.
What is fair is the assertion that Churchill was convinced he was the only British politician who should be Prime Minister in a war against Germany. That's far different from asserting that he had the kind of coldness which your idea presumes.
I don't think Tucker Carlson had any worries that if he pushed back against Cooper he'd lose his gig. I think he's so ill educated, he didn't know what to say. It's the same kind of ignorance which underlies his frequent flat statements that "we know the CIA killed John F Kennedy." I wonder whether the effect of his lack of resistance to Cooper will be akin to a slow burn which causes Carlson long term damage? It will be interesting to see how this plays out. One thing is certain: he's created a potential big headache for Trump/Vance which the ticket doesn't need. I'd be shocked if Trump gets through the debate next week without being asked about the Carlson/Cooper interview.
Tucker Carlson can be uninformed but I wouldn't consider him "ill educated." Some say the CIA killed Kennedy, some say the mob, some say Israel had something to do with it, but personally I'd pick Johnson. It certainly wasn't Oswald but it appears he had some involvement at some level. I agree the Cooper interview will likely be brought up and if Trump is smart he'll dismiss the question by saying he didn't listen to it. The last thing the media wants to discuss is the Biden/Harris policy of the past 4 years. I don't think puberty blockers for adolescents, teaching gay sex to primary school kids, free home loans for illegals, or Venezuelan gangs taking over apartment complexes is something that the media will bring up.
BTW Churchill was cold. Look up the Bengali famine. This was Churchill's response to it: "The notes also reveal the British prime minister's attitude towards India. During one government discussion about famine relief, Secretary of State for India Leopold Amery recorded that Churchill suggested any aid sent would be insufficient because of "Indians breeding like rabbits". Estimates of the dead were between 3 and 5 million people. I doubt many people would find Churchill a hero if he had been responsible (fully or partially) for that number of deaths had they been Jewish or Christian. Churchill was ruthless and a great leader but that doesn't mean he was a good man. Hitler, Mao, Stalin, and to some degree Roosevelt had the same qualities. We demonize or idolize leaders without looking at them from other perspectives. I assure you that Indians do not see Churchill in the same light as you do. Should their perspective be dismissed?
You are a conspiracy guy, like Tucker. "Oswald could have had something to do with it"
It is a personality type.
Mike, I confess to ignorance about the famine. I'll try to fix that. You couldn't be more wrong about the Kennedy assassination. The most accessible book which proves as much as anything can that Oswald was the lone gunman is Gerald Posner's “Case Closed.” You can find a good interview with Posner about his book in several places on YouTube. The most recent one is on an extremely new YouTube channel, “On the Trail of Delusion.”
The most exhaustive forensic analysis of the JFK assassination is Vincent Bugliosi's “Reclaiming History.” At 1,500 pages, it's daunting. There is a historian, Dr Sean Munger, who has a two part, three hour long video about the JFK assassination on his channel. He works strictly from the Bugliosi book.
Also not to be missed: there is a YouTube channel, LEMMiNO, which is a treasure. His ninety minute long graphic analysis of the JFK assassination is almost miraculous. I've never seen anything as remarkable.
I'm 72. I'm astounded at how many people say the kinds of things you say about the assassination. Oswald’s sole guilty is ridiculously obvious from the evidence, and I hope you'll learn it.
Yes and no. Walz is so much more important if he becomes President. Carlson has been of great help, but if he succumbs to nuttery, what credibility does he have left? Go to The Washington Free Beacon and read Andrew Roberts' succinct article about the Carlson/Cooper interview. It's almost funny how easily, trenchantly, and contemptuously Roberts deals with it.
Tucker first caught my eye because he was so good at pushing back. He pushed back, hard, against.any guests on Fox. Nobody else pushed back like he did. His classic, perplexed, expression was ties in with pushing back. It is the very look of "wait a minute."
So to your point, it says volumes that he did not push back.
I’m here for your Substacks and will continue however you go forward with or without TC.
I listened to it. He was zealous about all the books he had read. Some of it was interesting, sure, but some of it was crazily, overwhelmingly dangerous B.S. Fear was appropriate, like finding a snake in your kitchen.
Which is why when I hear stuff online, I make a note and go and do my own research to validate. For example, Cooper claimed that Italians suffered the most lynchings in American history or something to this effect. I'm going to check that out because that's not something I've ever heard before.
Cooper was also pontificating on something that feels very relevant to today's world. Which is America history, from its very beginning, is based on repeated demographic turnover. And what is then considered 'American' morphs with each subsequent generation. We are used to this because it's part of our very DNA. The 1798 call for immigrants was needed to settle the vast North America continent, or else another Euro Nation State would do so. And how this is totally different to European Nation States, who long ago (for thousands of years) organized themselves into specific land areas. Each plot of land is connected to a race/culture and how you get 'Englishman', Irishman', 'Franco', etc. But now, driven by just 1 generation born between 1946 and 1964, these countries majority ‘deplorables’ are losing their historical identity due to newcomers. The Boomer elites that are part of a more global, border less cabal that are behind this change, don’t care. These 'newcomers' are part of the USA experience, so we take it in stride here in North America. We saw it with the Irish, then the Italians, then with Mexican's, etc. and it all worked (for the last 240 years). But in Europe, this is now a radical transformation all at once, largely without any prior historical precedent. The USA as dominant power is imposing its ‘demographic turnover’ history onto European ‘vassal’ nations, it would appear. I.e. London is no longer majority native English population. France also much changed, same with Ireland, Germany. What does it all look like in another 40-50 years? Those countries that don’t want to play ball (see Hungary/Orban) are blackballed. This is a subject worth exploring more, IMHO.
I don't think he said that Italians suffered the most lynchings, but that the biggest lynching in the U.S. was the lynching of Italians. And this is true; it happened in 1891 in New Orleans. It's also a fact that almost 30% of the people lynched in the U.S. between 1882 and 1968 were white.
My grandmother scandalized her family by marrying an Irishman (who along with dogs was to keep off the grass). My mother was told by that very Irishman that her Italian boyfriend was not welcome in their house. It was what it was. We are all the decedents of slaves.
The rest was ok, but that first sentence should be chiseled in granite, formed into neon tubing -- whatever it takes to get it everywhere,
THANK YOU!!!! Watched it and it was nothing as described! It definitely was not hateful at all!
Correct. Correct you are my friend!!
Some things about WWII are not COMPLICATED or even complicated. Sorry, (Not that it has anything to do with the question on the table -- FWIW I'm one of those annoying free speech is free speechers.)
Casey, I agree. There are some uncomplicated parts, and some that are complicated.
On the latter, most American's today don't know that 6-months prior to Dec 7, 1941, the US and Britian imposed an oil embargo on Japan, which led IMO to the attack. Nor is there much questioning on why the flattops were not in harbor that AM. That part isn't widely taught, and in my view, the USA 'invited' the attack. At the time Roosevelt had a country totally against entry into another war, and a 'shock event' was the only way to change opinions. All that said, I support that the USA did what they did. I also support USA opposition to USSR post-WW2.
I cannot agree more with your entire, COMMENT, MY FRIEND!! NOT A BIT!! NOT-A-BIT!!
Signature ………. Garland Remington III
Thank you, Ungovernable! And thank you, Sasha! The freedom to speak one's mind without fear of persecution is exactly why the globalists fear & want to destroy the US. What happened to people ignoring content they don't like? Of course, communists can't just "coexist", despite their stupid bumper stickers. Remember, the slogan was "workers of the WORLD unite".
Please keep up the good work, Sasha, and as a 2009 redpilled liberal, please never forget that you don't have to walk in lockstep with any party.
Exactly! Theoretically, your subscribers should be proponents of free speech. This way of thinking is what has us in our current cancel culture position. Just because you don't agree with someone, or think they are deplorable, does not mean they don't have a right to their opinion (even if it is batshit crazy). In my opinion, we need to hear opposing voices instead of insulating ourselves in echo chambers.
Absolutely. Dissenting opinions are the lifeblood of broadened perspectives. That's why the 1st Amendment enshrines our right to boldly speak what we believe or just want to air out. The 5th enshrines our right to say nothing at all if we choose. By both standards, demands to “denounce” belong only in the playbook for authoritarian blowhards and despots. "Denounce!" is the reason Torquemada and the Spanish Inquisition deserve universal contempt. Forcing people to lie humiliates human beings and creates propaganda, and a culture of lies—forced or voluntary—is on the fast track to chaos and destruction.
Liked your poll, why not do one asking who would be a better president, Kamala -or- Tucker.
Do not participate with the cancel bullies. Response from Cooper: https://open.substack.com/pub/martyrmade/p/my-response-to-the-mob?r=nl3ud&utm_medium=ios
Wait! MartyrMade is Cooper?
Yep
Yes.
So relieved to read all these replies here. I love you guys so much! I agree with all of you. Tucker likes to allow all POV to be heard. I listened to the interview the day it came out, and while it didn’t “convert” me into an antisemite, nor change my own personal views of Hitler or the holocaust, I wasn’t shocked or offended in any way because I just saw it as understanding how someone may come to different conclusions or opinions than me.
I abhor cancel culture, and I’m sick of this bullying of people who don’t agree with our views or history. I’d rather hear interviews like this and have the freedom to have discussions because through that you can actually change someone’s heart. Canceling them won’t ever do that.
And Tucker is NOT an antisemite! Why aren’t those criticizing him for this interview seeing that it’s the MSM playbook again to hyper focus on one part of a picture and have it overpower the whole image. Tucker interviewing Cooper is not a sin or a slap in anyone’s face. There was a LOT more in that interview about other history than just that part of it.
Thanks to all who are posting in support of him.
And Sasha? I say lose that subscriber. As soon as I can find a job I promise to subscribe to you. ❤️
Sasha, please do what's best for you. We all know where to find Tucker.
Tucker will just get more popular over time.
TOUCHE!
I love Tucker and subscribe to his site. I absolutely love his content. However, I can see that if the shoe were on the other foot, the recurring notices would bug me. So, my vote would be that you cease posting the Tucker links altogether. Those of us who like Tucker will find his content anyway, so its no loss for us. Thank you so much Sasha for all the great work you do!!!
If people don’t want to read Tucker don’t…….your audience has no right to tell you what you can and can not post.
Yeah these cancel culture types are very annoying, and immature. Don’t like it, don’t watch it!
I get it.
They know if the public decides on facts truth and logic, they will become irrelevant real quick.
So the engage in smear and personal attacks.
That’s all they got.
Like, nobody's holding a gun to this cretin's head.
AMEN!
“The mark of an educated mind, is to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.”
Arstotle
He said it so much better than I.
THIS! Why can’t everyone see Tucker’s interview from this perspective? Why do people have to try and drum up a social backlash against someone who allowed offensive views to have a mic? So what? Get a mic of your own and post a counter argument then. I just don’t understand the bullying.
I don’t agree with all of what Darryl Cooper or Tucker Carlson, for that matter says but l’ll defend his right to say them. Cancel culture is toxic. I am an anti cancel absolutist. I see no reason you should cave to anyone.
It was an INTERVIEW, not an endorsement. I’d like to see him interview Xi, and I’m no fan of the man or his policies. Does ANYONE remember when '60 Minutes' used to interview people like Roman Polanski, the Shah of Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini, the terrorist Hasan Salameh?? Kevorkian? Timothy McVeigh?
Unfortunately today's 60 Minutes is only the slightest shadow of it's former self. I gave up watching when they too became infected with partisan, woke, BS.
I used to watch 60 Minutes every Sunday until they gradually became unbearable and biased ti the point of laughable. Haven’t watched for over 10 years.
UGH. Agreed!!!
That was longer ago than you think. Check out the movie Illinois Power made about their being questioned about Nuclear Power back in the 70's. The agreed to the interview if they would be permitted to tape it too. They did and showed the shenanigans that 60 minutes pulled that is as bad as anything we currently see today. All that is nothing new. We are just aware of it now.
I think they’ve always been ‘liberal’, most of journalism has been, traditionally. ‘Now' is something different altogether though.
Not even a sliver of a shadow.
Just as the loony Leftist warmongers tried to paint Tucker as a "Putin apologist" for merely interviewing him. Heaven forbid we learn his perspective on a war that we deliberately incited.
Excellent points & re 60 Minutes, “back in the day”!
They were just as bad back in the day. We just didn't know.
I used to watch 60 Minutes until about 20 years ago. And when I heard they 'interviewed' the Pedo's from The Lincoln Project a couple weeks before the 2020 election, I had to laugh to myself. They are so obviously in the tank for the leftists, it's frankly hilarious, albeit dangerous.
The way he was agreeing says otherwise unless he blindly agrees to everything people says.
I don’t recall him ‘agreeing’… Carlson has a way of getting people to say what they really think. Did you watch him with the weird guy who wants to stop aging? Or the guy who claimed to be Obama’s 'gay pickup'?
I did watch it he didnt disagree and seemed very positive on that tact.
Well, you’re certainly entitled to that opinion.
You ready to absolutely endorse everything Kamala nods her head to, or giggles at? Purity tests ok going both directions?
Nope I feel Democrats are trapping themselves if they win 2024
Yep!
Do we want free speech or not? Can you handle someone with a different opinion? Tucker can interview whomever the hell he wants to and you can choose to watch/listen or not. I like hearing straight from the horses mouth to decide whether I value or accept their opinion. I thought David Duke a fool and abhorrent , but was interested in why he thought the way he did. So I watched interviews with him.
Calling for cancellation of Tucker throws you right into the facist stream.
I had something similar on a small town scale when trump was elected. I was a part of a circle of artists. One person who i thought of as a friend wrote me a scathing email, saying she never wanted to hear from me again, and calling me a racist. Because trump was a racist, so anyone who liked anything about him, was also a racist. Suddenly, i noticed that none of the artists in town, except one, were still speaking to me. Some of them i had been really kind to and supportive during serious illness etc. but, eventually i got over it..and it made it easier for me to know who the real haters were..i now have a smaller social circle of good people. There are just a lot of haters out there...and they think WE are the problem! Hahaha
This feels like I'm writing a letter to Penthouse magazine: "I had heard about cancellations, but didn't really believe they happened, until this past weekend," when I was canceled by a friend I met decades ago in law school and would have dinner with once or twice a year. After insisting (I resisted, unsuccessfully) we talk about politics, he found it unforgivable that I couldn't definitively state the 2020 election was "fair". I pointed out as one of the reasons the media/tech's burying of the Hunter Biden laptop story shortly before the election - which he said he didn't know much about. This guy is a health-care lobbyist in DC and hadn't heard much about the laptop? While blaming Trump for the failure of the "bipartisan" (I hate that word when it contains a Romney and his ilk) border deal, he had no idea that the deal would have allowed 1.8 million illegals into the country per year, ASSUMING Biden would have enforced it (which, of course, he would not). I asked if he ever read anything besides NYT and WaPo and he said he saw no need to do so. He had never even heard of Taibbi, Greenwald, Bari Weiss, The Free Press, etc. I suggested he open his mind and read other sources. After dinner, I could sense he was troubled by our conversation. At 7 a.m. the next morning I received his text, "I wish you well. Don't call me again." I thought, "Wow, this really happens to real people." Luckily, I didn't give a rat's ass.
Wow. I am so happy that you don't give a rat's ass! He does not wish you well and in fact, he probably wishes you were forced to sew your mouth shut. Their disdain for another view is mind boggling to me. 🥺
Yesterday I made a post on Jordan Schachtel's substack 'The Dossier' questioning his takedown of TC/Cooper and whether he was getting the same memo as all the others to pile on. After 30+ likes he banned me forever from his site so I went ahead and unsubscribed my paying membership. That was my first personal encounter with cancel culture. His stack so he can do what he pleases, of course. Long live Free Speech.
I was banned yesterday too by Jordan. His post was shameful. Cooper is an extraordinary thinker, writer and researcher and the blood of my dead ancestors does not cry out from the ground because I read and admire him.
I felt the Jordan banning me was really strange. I subscribed to him initially due to his opposition to Covid censorship. Seems either he’s Jewish and hit a nerve or he’s been bought off. I did recently notice he’s added ads to his site (like buy gold) so he’s looking for $$.
He is Jewish. I am a Jew too. I think I can figure out if someone is reeking of Jew-hatred, or not.
I noticed those ads too and the shilling of nutritional supplements like Mike Huckabee flogging 'em to the old folks got my antennae wiggling madly.
But the quality of his writing has gone down. I began reading him because he was mentioned as "friend of the blog" etc. etc. by a few of the guys I continue to admire greatly. But all of us have had that asshole friend we retain affection for even as they keep sinking lower.
I was shadow banned from Instapundit. Don't know why but that is the nature of shadow banning. Irony is that I agreed with Reynolds about a lot more than I disagreed with.
I was banned from Gateway Pundit for making some comment about black naming practices sometime before the plandemic. I've asked to be reinstating but they refused.
I figured out how to defeat the ban but decided not to.
F'em
I sent an RFK speech to an old Dem friend from Boston, and she had the same reply. “Do not contact me again.“
Wow-what is wrong with people? No room for dissent!
Good riddance to bad rubbish!!
I feel your pain but it is better to know there is no room for differing opinions.
Certainly not worth it but is still a blow.
Luckily, people show us who they really are. Narrow-minded, and immature. "My way is the ONLY way," is quintessentially narcissistic.
This is what the Left, Hollywood, and the MSM has taught everyone for years and years, that when people behave badly (aka disagree with you or the narrative, or speak the truth,) then the only way to deal with them is to shut them out or down, show them the hand, slam the door in their face. They convinced everyone that it’s too toxic to hear an opposing view and life is too short for that toxicity so you stifle it immediately and get them out of your life, and then they will learn their lesson that if they want to keep relationships they won’t talk that way.
That’s how they control others. It’s all about “control”, not truth. Even therapists are teaching their patients to respond this way, always prefaced with saying something kind about the other person first because you aren’t supposed to be cruel yourself, but then draw that boundary. It’s quack psychology. They have everybody convinced it is abusive when someone with an opposing viewpoint tries to have an intellectual conversation with you about politics. 🙄And you must separate yourself from that abuse. That’s what Sasha’s subscriber was doing, giving an ultimatum to control what she did. That’s what jemarr’s friend did to her with “don’t call me again”. Why preface that with “I wish you well”? Obviously he doesn’t if he can say the next thing he did. That’s more to make himself look good.
The real toxicity is them and that tactic!
This all started over 20 years ago. It’s taken a long time to get to where we are at today and it’s much worse now, but it started long ago.
Cancel culture was mastered in our family on both sides starting 20 years ago, and anyone honest was a threat to everyone. Guess who that was? Yeah, me and my husband. They built a family on lie after lie and everyone was expected to stick to it. We were canceled by everyone on both sides because we spoke the truth and that truth threatened each of them in different ways. Mostly they wanted to control a particular narrative for selfish gain or reasons, and the truth would make them look really bad. I never spoke the truth just to hurt them. I only spoke it when something untruthful was said about us, in order to defend us and clarify. But of course it made them look awful - so then they had to keep everyone from ever wanting to see us so that no one would ever hear our side of the story. And they were extremely successful in doing that. Sound familiar? Democrats 101. So they even stopped inviting us to all holidays, graduations, weddings, even funerals! We aren’t notified about any significant life events. It’s too risky to have us in the family because we might actually speak and blow the lid off something. *gasp*
So we have been living without any family all these years. And it has been very hard on our kids. People used to think something was wrong with us because nobody is canceled like this without reason, right? Then Covid happened. Now half the world can finally relate to me. Go figure it took a fake pandemic to be understood.
Cognitive Dissonance in action!
There are a lot of haters but the glaringly obvious truth is that by far we have the best people on our side like Elon, Tucker, Tulsi, Bret Weinstein, Glenn Greenwald, Joe Rogan, Megyn Kelly, Sasha and so many others. These are the ones you should pay attention to and follow, not the nutcases that in effect are in favor of open borders and the war on meritocracy.
They were never your friends in the first place. Your life moving forward will be much more fulfilled without their narrow minded, sycophantic toxins.
It's weird (sorry) to take comfort in the fact that your friends were never really your friends, but I find that I do. After all, I didn't know it at the time.
They are terrifying.
They think they are open minded.
They believe their way is best.
They believe all they see on media.
Wanna know their biggest fear?
Losing all their friends because of wrong views.
Julia- I'm in the art world as well. Some of the least tolerant people on the planet!! All fine if you toe the party line, but dare to step in another direction, or disagree w/ doctrine, and you become persona non grata!
You should run your substack the way you want to run it. For every cancellation you will probably get 2-3 subscribers that will stay with you because of a principled stand, even if they don't agree.
If you agree with 100% of what "someone" says, you are probably in a cult. It's ok to disagree.
I became a paid subscriber as soon as I finished reading Sasha's article.
Don't submit to cancel culture. Tucker Carlson pushes the boundaries of acceptable discussion. For example his interview with Putin. He caught a lot of flak for it, but talking to Putin about his views, war aims, etc. is appropriate journalism. Tucker in no way was acting as a mere Putin puppet.
Likewise he has had a few other interviews that made me question his judgement. Whatever. I have my own judgement and can choose to listen to any particular interview or not. Don't like what a particular guest says? Then do your own video or write a rebuttal and publish it. Canceling is just wrong and a sure way to create more division in society.
I thought the Putin interview was a must watch ( though it turned out to be kinda boring, especially the first 30 minutes). I don’t understand people who condemn him for interviewing Putin, or for Trump visiting North Korea and Kim Jong for that matter. Isn’t increased dialogue with our so-called “enemies” (manufactured enemies imo) a good thing? Not to the Democrats, which is why I hate them these days.
I don't normally watch the long videos but I did sit through that one because it was important.
I’ve watched almost every one he has posted in the last month or two and I’ve yet to find any that weren’t worth the time. Because they are long, I listen to half while I’m doing my daily walk, and the other half while making and eating dinner. My husband comes home each day and says “what’s Tucker saying today?” Lol. He’s hooked now. Lmao
I just wish there were transcripts. I can read 10x what anyone can talk.
Oh right!? Same here. That would be nice.
I appreciate it when you post Tucker interviews. It often alerts me to check them out, they're always good, sometimes great.
screw them, keep posting Tucker vids, he's done more for the overall movement than any 'hater'
They won’t like you better if you cave. You will just be a scalp.
Lose thirty subscribers by not swimming with the school, gain 130 subscribers later on.
They are starting to panic because Joy does not seem to enough to carry the Election.
My local radio station host said he tried to pay his expensive gasoline bill with JOY but the cashier wouldn’t accept JOY for payment😂
Thank you for not giving in to cancel culture, whatever you decide to do about the videos. Why can’t people see that this is all about removing Tucker’s voice before the election. He has many important and unique guests, like Mike Benz and the Means siblings who add major value to the election conversation.
Yep, and since interviews like those blow the lid off of deep state crap, they have to divert people from wanting to listen to him. They knew he’d have a controversial one sooner or later and were waiting to jump on it when it happened.
You/we are witnessing the complete moral bankruptcy of the Western World. Power and control are the two objectives, with supporting operations of "Counter Hate Speech", "Climate Change" and "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion".
From a Christian perspective, we need to stand firm on the Truth, and not get caught up in the Left's spiritual doctrine and sacraments which will define for us what 'truths' are authorized for discussion. Those speaking the Truth, or exploring where the Truth is, need to be amplified. I see Tucker Carlson as being in that camp.
Stand fast, we are in the last days for sure! (2 Timothy)