Another PJW discussion

[gashonthenail]

Not every person, no, but the thing with Watson is that he’s vocally anti-vegan. And yes, Morrissey should be vetting for that (especially when it only takes a few seconds). This isn’t even to mention the rest of Watson’s awful ideology. Don’t you think there are commentators who are simply beyond the pale?

Posting alt-right personalities without comment doesn’t make Morrissey look smart or cryptic or cool. For comparison, Ian Brown’s Twitter feed during the pandemic was a joy to read. The man went absolutely bonkers and believed in the looniest conspiracy theories, but he was also informative, provocative, and couldn’t really be mistaken for far-right. It was like he was his old self again: wry, disruptive, and combative. He wrote as frequently as he re-tweeted, and took on his detractors directly. Why can’t Morrissey get his own mojo back? This stuff just makes him look like a drunk old dullard going down ultra-conservative rabbit holes.

Is PJW anti-vegan, or just critical of soy boys? There is a difference.
I wonder what he would make of I'm Not A Man?

 

[Crisstti]

Not every person, no, but the thing with Watson is that he’s vocally anti-vegan. And yes, Morrissey should be vetting for that (especially when it only takes a few seconds). This isn’t even to mention the rest of Watson’s awful ideology. Don’t you think there are commentators who are simply beyond the pale?

No, I don't really. I say judge each comment on its own merits.

Why should Morrissey vet people for their stance on veganism? Can't he agree with someone on one issue, whilst (strongly) disagreeing on another?

 

[Lucifer Sam]

No, I don't really. I say judge each comment on its own merits.

Why should Morrissey vet people for their stance on veganism? Can't he agree with someone on one issue, whilst (strongly) disagreeing on another?

1. Vetting takes only a few seconds, and 2. it shows a righteous intolerance on his part: some people should be beyond the pale. “When will you die?”

Surely he can agree with someone on one issue, but there is no reason for him to promote an anti-vegan on that issue when there are plenty of other less awful commentators saying the same thing. I don’t think Ian Brown or Noel Gallagher were sharing Paul Joseph Watson videos, and they got their anti-lockdown points across just fine, often in their own words. Posting Watson was only going to be negative, sure to invite another “Morrissey is far-right” pile-on.

 

[Crisstti]

1. Vetting takes only a few seconds, and 2. it shows a righteous intolerance on his part: some people should be beyond the pale. “When will you die?”

Is righteous intolerance a good thing? If Moz thought it was before, he may well have changed his mind about it. Especially since it's precisely the stance that the press promotes about him.

Surely he can agree with someone on one issue, but there is no reason for him to promote an anti-vegan on that issue when there are plenty of other less awful commentators saying the same thing. I don’t think Ian Brown or Noel Gallagher were sharing Paul Joseph Watson videos, and they got their anti-lockdown points across just fine, often in their own words. Posting Watson was only going to be negative, sure to invite another “Morrissey is far-right” pile-on.

The reason could simply be, that he happened to watch the video, and doesn't know or doesn't care about PWJ stance on veganism. And I guess he doesn't care whether it causes a pile-on on him.

 

[Lucifer Sam]

Is righteous intolerance a good thing? If Moz thought it was before, he may well have changed his mind about it. Especially since it's precisely the stance that the press promotes about him.

Everyone is intolerant to some extent; a person willing to tolerate everything is a nihilist. People just disagree on what’s righteous. If Morrissey doesn’t have a righteous intolerance of snide anti-vegan blowhards, then okay. I’ll add that to the list of disappointments.

The reason could simply be, that he happened to watch the video, and doesn't know or doesn't care about PWJ stance on veganism. And I guess he doesn't care whether it causes a pile-on on him.

We’re going in circles. I’m just trying to say that he’s an intelligent adult human capable of a five-second Google search. If he doesn’t care, and won’t even do that much, then fine, but he needs to stop whining that people keep accusing him of being far-right. He can’t have it both ways.

Add to the problems already mentioned: Watson’s presentation. It’s shrill and petulant. Where did Morrissey’s good taste go?

 

[Crisstti]

Everyone is intolerant to some extent; a person willing to tolerate everything is a nihilist. People just disagree on what’s righteous. If Morrissey doesn’t have a righteous intolerance of snide anti-vegan blowhards, then okay. I’ll add that to the list of disappointments.



We’re going in circles. I’m just trying to say that he’s an intelligent adult human capable of a five-second Google search. If he doesn’t care, and won’t even do that much, then fine, but he needs to stop whining that people keep accusing him of being far-right. He can’t have it both ways.

Add to the problems already mentioned: Watson’s presentation. It’s shrill and petulant. Where did Morrissey’s good taste go?

Because he posted a video of PJW agreeing with something he had said, and another against lockdown?

 

[Lucifer Sam]

Because he posted a video of PJW agreeing with something he had said, and another against lockdown?

Correct. Beyond the pale.

 

[Oh stop it]

The difference is that Morrissey lives in a world in nuance. He's not politically and socially polarized like most here. Never in a time in his life except for now, has agreeing with someone's statement meant you condone every aspect of who that person is. So while you demand Morrissey forensicly vet every single person he agrees with, he simply eats another snack and continues reading his book.

I swear that often times the only people propping up these "right wing boogyeman" are the equally tribalized opposition. Nobody would be shedding any light currently on PJW and Infowars if someone here wasn't crying about some dated central posts we all basically paid no atention to and forgot.

Now we've all gotten a history lesson in someone you wish had *less* notoriety. PJW thanks you.

 

[Malarkey]

The difference is that Morrissey lives in a world in nuance. He's not politically and socially polarized like most here. Never in a time in his life except for now, has agreeing with someone's statement meant you condone every aspect of who that person is. So while you demand Morrissey forensicly vet every single person he agrees with, he simply eats another snack and continues reading his book.

I swear that often times the only people propping up these "right wing boogyeman" are the equally tribalized opposition. Nobody would be shedding any light currently on PJW and Infowars if someone here wasn't crying about some dated central posts we all basically paid no atention to and forgot.

Now we've all gotten a history lesson in someone you wish had *less* notoriety. PJW thanks you.

He hasn't agreed with any statements & they're not PJW's opposition.

 

[Lucifer Sam]

The difference is that Morrissey lives in a world in nuance. He's not politically and socially polarized like most here. Never in a time in his life except for now, has agreeing with someone's statement meant you condone every aspect of who that person is. So while you demand Morrissey forensicly vet every single person he agrees with, he simply eats another snack and continues reading his book.

Judging by Notre Dame, I don't quite think he's reading a book. I suspect he's clicking on YouTube's algorithm suggestions and watching more of these sorts of videos. Snacking, though, sure.

 

[gashonthenail]

The difference is that Morrissey lives in a world in nuance. He's not politically and socially polarized like most here. Never in a time in his life except for now, has agreeing with someone's statement meant you condone every aspect of who that person is. So while you demand Morrissey forensicly vet every single person he agrees with, he simply eats another snack and continues reading his book.

I swear that often times the only people propping up these "right wing boogyeman" are the equally tribalized opposition. Nobody would be shedding any light currently on PJW and Infowars if someone here wasn't crying about some dated central posts we all basically paid no atention to and forgot.

Now we've all gotten a history lesson in someone you wish had *less* notoriety. PJW thanks you.

Really good point. To 'big up' the likes of PJW as some sort of threat to Western civilisation, is to grant him far more influence than he deserves, or has.

 

[Oh stop it]

Really good point. To 'big up' the likes of PJW as some sort of threat to Western civilisation, is to grant him far more influence than he deserves, or has.

These people live and die by their political alliances. Shame on me if my life is ever that boring or void of purpose. Aubrey McFate has probably spent more time going into detail about PJW in the last 48 hours than most subscribed to his youtube channel.

 

[gashonthenail]

Judging by Notre Dame, I don't quite think he's reading a book. I suspect he's clicking on YouTube's algorithm suggestions and watching more of these sorts of videos. Snacking, though, sure.

Maybe The Strange Death of Europe or The War on the West?
There is very little on Youtube or Google about Notre Dame being caused by arson. Strangely quiet on the subject.
I wonder would Douglas Murray share Morrissey's apparent conviction on the cause of the fire? Or would he think the evidence does not justify such lyrical certainty?

 

[Lucifer Sam]

Aubrey McFate has probably spent more time going into detail about PJW in the last 48 hours than most subscribed to his youtube channel.

Probably. My abhorrence of him outpaces most people’s appreciation.

I don’t really care about his notoriety, though. My ankle-biting on a Morrissey forum isn’t going to change his numbers. I’m more interested in pointing out that while of course you can agree with someone on one point and not on others, it still doesn’t make sense for a self-professed vegan to promote a known anti-vegan. You can find someone else to make the same point, or make it yourself. You don’t need the shrill presentation of an anti-vegan turd.

 

[Oh stop it]

Probably. My abhorrence of him outpaces most people’s appreciation.

I don’t really care about his notoriety, though. My ankle-biting on a Morrissey forum isn’t going to change his numbers. I’m more interested in pointing out that while of course you can agree with someone on one point and not on others, it still doesn’t make sense for a self-professed vegan to promote a known anti-vegan. You can find someone else to make the same point, or make it yourself. You don’t need the shrill presentation of an anti-vegan turd.

Perhaps M likes not only what he had to say, but the way he said it.

We are here on a Morrissey forum because we like the way he sings right? We like the way he says things, conveys his thoughts. We could find any singer to hum along to or say the same message, yet here we are. Humming along to someone who has some great things to say and at times, some controverial things we may not agree with. Look at that, we're full circle. By your own logic supporting Morrissey means you support right wing causes, you surely must be anti-immigration too? After all thanks you, I've had big introduction to PJW. Keep up the good fight.

 

[Malarkey]

hmmmm, yes.

I take most comments here as speculation, especially when it concerns what Morrissey’s probable motives could be.

I don’t really think positive or negative comments here are really going to change Morrissey.

He never gets angry at the right-wingers.

I'm going by the things Morrissey's actually said - about the Notre Dame fire, about the media, about his social media use & about the internet.

The internet has completely changed the moral climate of the entire world. Just imagine what world leaders got away with in pre-internet days! Just imagine what the police got away with before iPhones and You Tube exposures! Politicians are always the last to join evolving societies because they don’t ever want the systems to change. We can also now see how people who question everything are usually punished by the power elite. Certainly in the UK we live in times that moral philosophers could consider fascist. There is a conservative lockdown on any criticism of the Boil Family. I cannot use the world ‘royal’ because there is no such thing as a royal person. There is a natural understanding of law, but there is also state law, and the latter keeps the rich protected from the poor, and it has no other function. You can campaign peacefully in the UK, but only if whatever you shout is out of earshot of those to whom it is directed.

- Morrissey, Sussissimo, 23 September 2015

 

[Lucifer Sam]

Perhaps M likes not only what he had to say, but the way he said it.

Perhaps he does. Crisstti and I already went over this. Maybe Morrissey genuinely likes Watson's constipated and shrill presentation. That's up to him. If so, I would just file it under "disappointed in Morrissey." The videos are posted without comment, though. Did he like the content, the presentation, or both? It remains a mystery.

We are here on a Morrissey forum because we like the way he sings right? We like the way he says things, conveys his thoughts. We could find any singer to hum along to or say the same message, yet here we are. Humming along to someone who has some great things to say and at times, some controverial things we may not agree with. Look at that, we're full circle. By your own logic supporting Morrissey means you support right wing causes, you surely must be anti-immigration too? After all thanks you, I've had big introduction to PJW. Keep up the good fight.

You're missing my point. It's not a matter of "it's okay to disagree on things." It's a matter of who Morrissey would typically consider beyond the pale. Morrissey is more committed to animal rights than other issue. The "Please Support" page on Morrissey Central solely lists animal welfare causes. In the past he has been scathing and unforgiving in his criticism of anyone who crosses him on this issue. It seems like if he knew Watson's position on this, he would despise Watson. And it would take only a few seconds for him to find it out.

 

[gashonthenail]

Probably. My abhorrence of him outpaces most people’s appreciation.

I don’t really care about his notoriety, though. My ankle-biting on a Morrissey forum isn’t going to change his numbers. I’m more interested in pointing out that while of course you can agree with someone on one point and not on others, it still doesn’t make sense for a self-professed vegan to promote a known anti-vegan. You can find someone else to make the same point, or make it yourself. You don’t need the shrill presentation of an anti-vegan turd.

I haven't read anyone on here expressing appreciation of PJW, or certainly not to any significant extent. I'm indifferent to the guy. I agree with some things he says. I disagree with some things he says. His whining tone can be a bit irritating. Pass the salt.
Abhorrence is a strong word, Aubrey. From a psychological point of view, strong protestations of hatred often speak of an unconscious attraction. Like a campaigner against promiscuous sex and indecency, who really deep down is plagued by lewd thoughts.
Sorry, I don't mean to come across as condescending. But I think there are more important things in this world to abhor, than some man with a mouth on Youtube. War, poverty, disease.

 

[Lucifer Sam]

I haven't read anyone on here expressing appreciation of PJW, or certainly not to any significant extent. I'm indifferent to the guy. I agree with some things he says. I disagree with some things he says. His whining tone can be a bit irritating. Pass the salt.
Abhorrence is a strong word, Aubrey. From a psychological point of view, strong protestations of hatred often speak of an unconscious attraction. Like a campaigner against promiscuous sex and indecency, who really deep down is plagued by lewd thoughts.
Sorry, I don't mean to come across as condescending. But I think there are more important things in this world to abhor, than some man with a mouth on Youtube. War, poverty, disease.

No, that's a fair point. But it's not just Paul Joseph Watson. It's his whole scene. If Morrissey had posted Jordan Peterson videos, I would be even more irritated. Ultimately what I'm tilting against is the whole "meat/manliness/Judaeo-Christian West" thing, which is a many-headed monster. Watson just serves as the target on here because several of his videos were posted to Morrissey Central. I didn't object to the Black Pigeon Speaks video as much because, in fairness, Black Pigeon Speaks is vegetarian and he even had a tweet picturing some sweet innocent animal and asked "is there any argument other than taste? Just curious."

The thing about Watson's whining tone is that while some people can take it in stride, Morrissey always used to be unforgiving when it came to things like that in presentation. Take his evocative description of W.H. Auden's presence on the BBC, or his praise of presenters he likes, and consider it against his sharp and relentless criticism of the various hacks, blowhards, and talking heads of Watson's caliber (especially if there was even a whiff that they ate meat, went hunting, made a snide remark about vegetarians, &c). It seems like he's lost that hyper-critical fire.

 

[gashonthenail]

No, that's a fair point. But it's not just Paul Joseph Watson. It's his whole scene. If Morrissey had posted Jordan Peterson videos, I would be even more irritated. Ultimately what I'm tilting against is the whole "meat/manliness/Judaeo-Christian West" thing, which is a many-headed monster. Watson just serves as the target on here because several of his videos were posted to Morrissey Central. I didn't object to the Black Pigeon Speaks video as much because, in fairness, Black Pigeon Speaks is vegetarian and he even had a tweet picturing some sweet innocent animal and asked "is there any argument other than taste? Just curious."

The thing about Watson's whining tone is that while some people can take it in stride, Morrissey always used to be unforgiving when it came to things like that in presentation. Take his evocative description of W.H. Auden's presence on the BBC, or his praise of presenters he likes, and consider it against his sharp and relentless criticism of the various hacks, blowhards, and talking heads of Watson's caliber (especially if there was even a whiff that they ate meat, went hunting, made a snide remark about vegetarians, &c). It seems like he's lost that hyper-critical fire.

Now that we can agree on - PJW is definitely not W.H. Auden or John Betjeman.
But is anyone on Youtube in 2023? Modern life is rubbish.