Infowars / Paul Joseph Watson "Morrissey: Diversity is Conformity" (November 30, 2022)

No doubt this will end up on Central.



Update:
Now a Morrissey Central post (December 1, 2022).

---

Related items:

• Sam Esty Rayner / YouTube: Morrissey Interview 2022. (Premiered November 28, 2022)
• Morrissey Central: "PAUL JOSEPH WATSON" - December 1, 2022

 

[A Man Escaped]

Yes, as I recall, Morrissey did respond negatively.

I wasn't shit stirring. I just remember more "mainstream media" coverage of Marr's response.

 

[caramel sea salt]

I don't find any of this particularly outrageous, just really really boring. I've always looked to art and my favourite artists for inspiration ... and beauty ... and insights. This is not it.

 

[Malarkey]

If Morrissey was consistent, he could just replace "Cameron" and "hunting" with "Watson" and "hating vegans," and condemn Watson on the same principles. This is a glaring disconnect, where David Cameron, Prince Harry, Gordon Ramsay, and Jamie Oliver are roundly condemned, and Watson gets a pass. Jamie Oliver publishes a meat-free cookbook, which ought to be worth at least something in terms of credit, while Watson does nothing but sate macho right-wing meat-eaters with rote mockery of effete purple-haired vegans.

Sorry, Morrissey. Some people think you actually read this forum, which is almost surely not true, but if you somehow do, then j'accuse—you are being inconsistent, and sullying your reputation in the course of it.

He is consistent - he only responds to the mainstream media. It's like he doesn't understand that things like YouTube have an impact.

 

[gashonthenail]

No offense, but I think you're pulling a Malarkey here. The problem with this theory is that Morrissey 's pissing off the woke left by posting videos from Watson comes with the reputational cost of people thinking he actually supports Watson. It's like how Malarkey thinks it should be obvious to the casual reader that Messages from Morrissey is messages from his nephew. Given various other comments made by Morrissey in recent years (and we all know what they are), the non-gnostic who does not glean Morrissey's intentions to wind up the woke wagon (if that's what's going on) is justified in thinking Morrissey likes Watson's content.

To be honest I think it's probably similar to Moz's thoughts on sexuality. He just doesn't care. He doesn't care what people think he is. He doesn't care if people think he's left wing or right wing. He does care if people think he's racist. But that's different - that accusation clearly goes against something deep in his sense of morality, and quite rightly. But whether people think he's left wing or right wing? He clearly just doesn't care - and almost certainly gets a chuckle out of all the pearl-clutching and hysteria.

 

[Malarkey]

I have never said it should be obvious to a casual reader @Aubrey McFate - I said it should be something a professional journalist should check.

 

[Still a fan]

The essence of it in my eyes: Morrissey would be wise to differentiate his stance of Romantic or artistic individualism from the relentless negativity of tedious vox pops.

Let’s not forget that World Peace boasted tracks attacking war-mongers, incarceration and planet-imperilling toxic masculinity. Even Low in High School - a document more contemporaneous with the new era of controversy - contained songs criticising police brutality and, quite brazenly, the dignity and decency of the uniformed serviceman. Morrissey has entertained a variety of stances that do not fit the new anti-woke reconstruction of conservatism. I was slightly disappointed that he seemed to dilute his admiration for protest (LIHS is a protest album) in his most recent interview.

Aligned neither to the progressivism of the present nor conservative traditionalism, Morrissey’s politics do not have to be simple However, they risk being seen this way whenever his media presentation suggests an easy affinity with cheap provocateurs.

 

[gashonthenail]

The essence of it in my eyes: Morrissey would be wise to differentiate his stance of Romantic or artistic individualism from the relentless negativity of tedious vox pops.

Let’s not forget that World Peace boasted tracks attacking war-mongers, incarceration and planet-imperilling toxic masculinity. Even Low in High School - a document more contemporaneous with the new era of controversy - contained songs criticising police brutality and, quite brazenly, the dignity and decency of the uniformed serviceman. Morrissey has entertained a variety of stances that do not fit the new anti-woke reconstruction of conservatism. I was slightly disappointed that he seemed to dilute his admiration for protest (LIHS is a protest album) in his most recent interview.

Aligned neither to the progressivism of the present nor conservative traditionalism, Morrissey’s politics do not have to be simple However, they risk being seen this way whenever his media presentation suggests an easy affinity with cheap provocateurs.

War mongers - last war fought by the UK (invasion of Iraq) was led by a Labour Prime Minister
Communist China could be on the brink of invading Taiwan
Incarceration - last Labour government wanted to bring in detention for up to 90 days without trial
Labour was very keen to have lockdown and imprison us all in our homes
Planet imperilling toxic masculinity - that's just woke jargon
The evil western patriarchy almost certainly is getting close to achieving nuclear fusion - and thereby 'solving' the impending doom of climate change - all that soup over Van Gogh will have gone to waste
Ukraine is being saved by its men and its women fighting and being strong
If you think strong men are 'bad' - weak men are much worse
The only people who criticised total restriction of our freedoms during lockdown? - politicians on the right
Your argument that left = good and right = bad just doesn't stack up

 

[Stephen Hofmann]

No, I don’t know them personally. Unlike Dirk Blaggard, I have never come across either one in a pub. And I don’t know if any rough trade strangers flail around Watson’s chambers. What I do know is that Dodwell professes to be vegan, and that Watson is on record as mocking vegans. You’d think that would be sufficient for Morrissey; it certainly is for me.

You can also glean it from their presentation. Dodwell is calm and politely-spoken; Watson is brusque and bristling with impotent rage. My YouTube algorithm coughed up this amusing little piece.

My only problem that makes me think Paul is a bit of an idiot is when he puts on this strange, sneery voice....like an 8 yr old whose mum wouldn't buy him the toy he wanted. Fiona seems nice and reasonable. Gets far too much flack on here....even if she doesn't have an in-depth knowledge of music.

 

[Stephen Hofmann]

I don't find any of this particularly outrageous, just really really boring. I've always looked to art and my favourite artists for inspiration ... and beauty ... and insights. This is not it.

If he wasn't talking about the real world, he'd be in Take That.

 

[Stephen Hofmann]

The essence of it in my eyes: Morrissey would be wise to differentiate his stance of Romantic or artistic individualism from the relentless negativity of tedious vox pops.

Let’s not forget that World Peace boasted tracks attacking war-mongers, incarceration and planet-imperilling toxic masculinity. Even Low in High School - a document more contemporaneous with the new era of controversy - contained songs criticising police brutality and, quite brazenly, the dignity and decency of the uniformed serviceman. Morrissey has entertained a variety of stances that do not fit the new anti-woke reconstruction of conservatism. I was slightly disappointed that he seemed to dilute his admiration for protest (LIHS is a protest album) in his most recent interview.

Aligned neither to the progressivism of the present nor conservative traditionalism, Morrissey’s politics do not have to be simple However, they risk being seen this way whenever his media presentation suggests an easy affinity with cheap provocateurs.

His anti-war songs are pants.

 

[Stephen Hofmann]

I think your point about children in a massacre is actually the stronger point. I didn't even connect the two, even tho I posted about the lawsuit. Alex Jones was sued by parents of the victims of the Sandy Hook massacre (which is coming up on the 10th anniversary on the 14th of December) because he said it was not real and it was staged, the children were not really dead, etc. There were 2 verdicts recently in October and November, I think. So, no, not a good idea to attach yourself to Alex Jones when you are trying to push a song and album named Bonfire of Teenagers, about children being massacred.

That's a bit of a strenuous stretch.

 

[esteban]

I heard Watson is a kiddy diddler.

 

[ZOOM FROM GLOOM]

You'll have to forgive my naivety, but I believe Watson publishes via "Summit News" and was picked up & shared by Infowars too - it's basically exactly the same post on both sites (can't pinpoint which posted first). Anyone with clearer (fully demonstrable) information about how close this person is to AJ - feel free to add in.

I say naive personally as I don't give this type of thing any importance or energy whatsoever. Most people reading it, when returning to the real world later, probably won't either. Impassioned blocks of text from either "side" seldom stops the world turning.

Regards,
FWD.

Hear! hear !

 

[Lucifer Sam]

I have never said it should be obvious to a casual reader @Aubrey McFate - I said it should be something a professional journalist should check.

You said I was "wrong" for thinking "Messages from Morrissey" purported to be messages from Morrissey. So you must think it should be obvious to the casual reader. I'm not interested in having a 12-page volley on it again, though.

 

[Lucifer Sam]

My only problem that makes me think Paul is a bit of an idiot is when he puts on this strange, sneery voice....like an 8 yr old whose mum wouldn't buy him the toy he wanted.

Really? That's the only thing you find idiotic about Watson? To each their own, I guess.

 

[Lucifer Sam]

To be honest I think it's probably similar to Moz's thoughts on sexuality. He just doesn't care. He doesn't care what people think he is. He doesn't care if people think he's left wing or right wing. He does care if people think he's racist. But that's different - that accusation clearly goes against something deep in his sense of morality, and quite rightly. But whether people think he's left wing or right wing? He clearly just doesn't care - and almost certainly gets a chuckle out of all the pearl-clutching and hysteria.

I'm fine with him not caring about people thinking he's left- or right-wing. I'm just irked by this continued promoting of Watson. It's wrong not because Watson is on the right per se, but because Watson has terrible views and a truly awful presentation for someone on the right. It would be like if Morrissey had liked proto-troll libertarian "shock jocks" such as Howard Stern or Morton Downey Jr. in the 80s and 90s. I never got the impression he did, though.

I genuinely like Morrissey's stances on most things. I even like Anne Marie Waters. It's a shame he's gone silent on her, and isn't promoting her over someone like Watson. It would get him the same amount, if not more, of pearl-clutching and hysteria (if that's what he's looking for), and it would carry the excellent benefit of her actually being righteous, and someone who defies left and right labels, like himself.

If he was just in it for "pwning the libs" then he might as well promote Donald Trump and Kanye West and Milo Yiannopolous. But he doesn't. So the Watson thing is weird. Yes, I know Watson claims to be a fan. But that comes back to some people being so odious that you shouldn't want them. "I forbid you from liking the Smiths," which Morrissey concurred on.

 

[Anonomous]

O.K., Here goes..... Morrissey on Infowars ? Have times changed or what ? Maybe Morrissey can show up with Conye West and have a James Baldwin backdrop for all to enjoy. What a joyous threesome spreading Holiday Cheer !Oh ya, Hi Morrissey

 

[Anonomous]

No one kicked the bucket at Sandy Hoax and thank heavens for it. But...all the crises actors got a free house for their C- at best performances.

 

[Anonomous]

Left or Right...people have a right to say as they may and we are free to listen or shut the channel off. Truly, Morrissey would agree with the Free speech issue because art and music are just that....a free expression of that artist expressing themselves. To cancel freedom is what the tyrant's have always done....Fire away.

 

[Malarkey]

I'm fine with him not caring about people thinking he's left- or right-wing. I'm just irked by this continued promoting of Watson. It's wrong not because Watson is on the right per se, but because Watson has terrible views and a truly awful presentation for someone on the right. It would be like if Morrissey had liked proto-troll libertarian "shock jocks" such as Howard Stern or Morton Downey Jr. in the 80s and 90s. I never got the impression he did, though.

I genuinely like Morrissey's stances on most things. I even like Anne Marie Waters. It's a shame he's gone silent on her, and isn't promoting her over someone like Watson. It would get him the same amount, if not more, pearl-clutching and hysteria (if that's what he's looking for), and it would carry the excellent benefit of her actually being righteous, and someone who defies left and right labels, like himself.

If he was just in it for "pwning the libs" then he might as well promote Donald Trump and Kanye West and Milo Yiannopolous. But he doesn't. So the Watson thing is weird. Yes, I know Watson claims to be a fan. But that comes back to some people being so odious that you shouldn't want them. "I forbid you from liking the Smiths," which Morrissey concurred on.

Still trying to make Anna Maria happen?