The New York Times is such a closed, smug system that it simply renders its readers unconscious. The Left’s Clouseau-like confidence in their mad ideas is a bottomless source of amazement to those of us who’ve read books not written by J.K. Rowling.
Read more Do this to cancel student debt
With the flat affect of a burned-out life insurance salesman, they rattle off civilization-extinguishing ideas like abolishing the Pentagon, the Senate, the two-party system, and the Constitution’s separation of powers, and, of course, naturally, it goes without saying, defunding the police and opening the borders. Presumably saving the dynamiting of Slytherin for last on their revenge tour of despised institutions.
What’s worse, their mad compulsion to Uganda-ize America is paired with a bloodlust that leads their acolytes to (allegedly) murder an insurance CEO and Charlie Kirk, (allegedly) burn down cities, and (sure as hell) obsessively try to assassinate President Trump.
To investigate the source of the Left’s misbegotten but passionate intensity, I subscribed to the belly of the beast, the Gray Lady herself, The New York Times. What I discovered is a fenced-in ideological playground that protects its readers from having any uncurated thoughts.
As you’d expect, the Times’ dreary leftist bias drips from every page, but the magnitude of it was really driven home by the Times’ hilarious coverage of Lefty BFF Anthony Fauci’s Fifth Amendment-athon. As the giddy architect of America’s catastrophic pandemic response refused to answer any questions about America’s catastrophic pandemic response, the Times—using five reporters!—raced along with his non-testimony to debunk the questions for its readers in real time.
As each Republican senator grilled Fauci, a tag team of Times staffers laughed off legitimate questions about Covid’s origin, the vaccine’s efficacy, serious vaccine side effects, the effectiveness of treatments such as ivermectin, and school closures. Each of these would have made for a fascinating debate, but not for Times readers. They must be spared any arguments not strictly in accord with the comfy confines of America’s “complete newspaper of record’s” loony ideology, which for some inexplicable reason has elevated Fauci to hallowed secular sainthood.
Read more Minnesota’s MyGenderDolls, coming soon to a school near you?
As insane as that is, it gets worse. The Times routinely refers to those who question climate change orthodoxy as “climate deniers.” And it calls those who question 2020 election results “election deniers.” The term “deniers” clearly references brain-dead, frequent Tucker Carlson Show guests who deny the Holocaust (and denying that well-documented historical event is where the term, as used, originated).
By using that term against those whose politics offend the Times, the Times preemptively strikes against even the possibility of there being rational counterarguments. Again, it would make for a far more interesting read if these issues were thrown open to debate, but, alas, that’s the last thing the nothing-to-see-here Times wants for all its overeducated, affluent readers.
All of this explains why when your lefty friends and relatives confront you about your “fascist” opinions on climate change, Covid’s origin, election integrity, et al., your fact-based responses are met with trillion-yard stares: The Times has settled these issues for them. There can be no debate.
In 1984, Orwell explained that the Ministry of Truth’s purpose was to change the whole climate of thought: “In fact there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking—not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”
Read more Six justices just told schools to ask first
The New York Times induces unconsciousness. Damn them.
Image created using AI.
Peter Merkl blogs at pmerkl.co