The Voice of Dreher and his Commenters

What do you do with Dreher's commenters? I mean besides laughing at them after they leave the room. In our emperorography, those which agree with him play the parts of the townsfolk at the end of fable.

However there is a passage which may have even more applicability to the commenters on Dreher's blog. It comes from the second volume of Tolkien's Lord of the Rings trilogy, The Two Towers, and is a description of the attempt of the defeated, evil wizard Saruman to use the power of his voice to mesmerize his enemies.

Suddenly another voice spoke, low and melodious, its very sound an enchantment. Those who listened unwarily to that voice could seldom report the words that they heard; and if they did, they wondered, for little power remained in them. Mostly they remembered only that it was a delight to hear the voice speaking, all that it said seemed wise and reasonable, and desire awoke in them by swift agreement to seem wise themselves. When others spoke they seemed harsh and uncouth by contrast; and if they gainsaid the voice, anger was kindled in the hearts of those under the spell. For some the spell lasted only while the voice spoke to them, and when it spake to another they smiled, as men do who see through a juggler's trick while others gape at it. For many the sound of the voice alone was enough to hold them enthralled; but for those whom it conquered the spell endured when they were far away. And ever they heard that soft voice whispering and urging them. But none were unmoved; none rejected its pleas and its commands without an effort of mind and will, so long as its master had control of it.

I've often wondered if this is where George Lucas got the concept of the Jedi mind trick. It is very similar, especially in that the trick only works on the weaker minds, and there appears to be a certain magic which imbues the speaker's voice. It would explain why someone like Erin Manning continues to support Dreher even though he constantly bashes her religion and never once has pimped her books the way he has with Charles Featherstone. Maybe her nickname should be Wormtongue.

This analogy of some people being conquered by subtle writing also explains why people have become so irritated with us, going the whole way back to the Contra-Crunchies. When others spoke they seemed harsh and uncouth by contrast; and if they gainsaid the voice, anger was kindled in the hearts of those under the spell. We were stating long-form the words of Gimli the Dwarf who said of Saruman "The words of this wizard stand on their heads!" and we were receiving back insults not unlike "If we speak of poisoned tongues what shall we say of yours, young serpent?" which was Saruman's retort to Prince Eomer. (Except we were called incredible fools and nematodes rather than "young serpents".)

And, as always, we continue to receive the epitaph "obsessed" from people who show up over and over again to elaborate on their fierce agreement with Dreher's designer brand of paleoconservatism. And ever they heard that soft voice whispering and urging them...

The history of Dreher is also very much like the character Saruman the Wizard. He starts off as an up-and-coming "power" in the world of conservative commentating, but then he begins cashing in friendships and doing things secretly which are later exposed, arousing his anger. "When the plot is ripe it remains no longer secret," as Gandalf reminds us. He ends up stuck in an old "tower" called TAC—long deserted by the "greater men" of the West who built it—viewing wreckage all around him.

By no means should anyone think that I'm suggesting that Voice-of-Saruman analogy can only be applied to Dreher. Sullivan's minions act in much the same way, as if he himself has wound them up. You can almost see the keys sticking out of their backs. And reading the Daily Kos is revealing of how deep the brainwashing rabbit-hole goes. And I would be remiss not to mention our current President whose ability as an orator is probably his only real talent. It is just sad to see educated people who really should know better fall under this sort of wordsmith spell.

How the faux-conservative marketplace works

 At the risk of inducing Dreher Fatigue™, my little mini-series on TAC's year-end fundraising would be incomplete without this little gem courtesy of one of the rubes herself. A commenter calling herself grumpy realist tells us:

Rod, even though I’m totally on the other side from you I just donated as well. If I had more available would donate more. Mainly because I’m a cranky old bitch that appreciates great writing and thinks that we need to have good thinkers on all sides.

 I’m skeptical about conservatism because I see it used far too often as justification used by privileged people to keep themselves on top and not share the goodies. But if I argue with conservatives, I’d rather argue with conservatives who use reason and logic, rather than some screaming talk-show host who flails around and calls me a “feminazi”.

How iconoclastic! A dedicated liberal donates to a "conservative" blog! And what does she get for her donation?

Why, the faux-conservative Dreher immediately sells the watch she has just paid him to take right back to her again:

Best motivation for a TAC donor ever! From a reader of this here blog:

Rod, even though I’m totally on the other side from you I just donated as well. If I had more available would donate more. Mainly because I’m a cranky old bitch that appreciates great writing and thinks that we need to have good thinkers on all sides.

I’m skeptical about conservatism because I see it used far too often as justification used by privileged people to keep themselves on top and not share the goodies. But if I argue with conservatives, I’d rather argue with conservatives who use reason and logic, rather than some screaming talk-show host who flails around and calls me a “feminazi”.

Bless you, COB. You complete me. I know this was Beatrice Arthur from beyond the grave.

Oh - she does get an additional gift: he characterizes her as the dead Bea Arthur.

So let's break down the mechanics of the ideological daisy chain we've just witnessed:

• A liberal - here grumpy realist - wants to feel she is being diverse by engaging with conservatives.

• But the porridge served at true conservative sites is too hot and burns her lips.

• So she searches until she finds a site with the word "conservative" in it that conforms perfectly to her liberal needs and sensibilities - TAC, "The" "American" "Conservative".

• And gives them money, thus validating her perceptions with meaningful action. Certainly grumpy realist wouldn't donate money to a counterfeit conservative site, now would she. Of course not. As a critically discerning liberal she's just too smart for that.

• And as if her own donation were not proof enough for her, her "conservative" host further legitimizes her decision by selling her comment right back to her. Diversity and reason in action, head to tail!

So, here's how to make money online as a faux-conservative:

• Find out what your liberal and fellow faux-conservative marks want to hear - maybe something about "the arrogance of Seth Rogen" in not being sensitive enough to Sony Corp.'s potential bullying by Kim Jong-un. All good liberals and faux-conservatives always appreciate a bullying narrative anyway.

• Give them some resistance to overcome: in addition to making their commenting a hard-won privilege, frequently say stupid things deliberately so they will feel compelled to correct you. Let them comment, but shoot a Jew behind them in the field from your balcony every now and then both to keep them on their toes and to further validate their experience.

• Regularly sell their comments back to them as posts they or someone else has to pay for. As we've already noted, this has the mutually useful effect of making them feel their time has been well spent and validating your faux-conservative credentials as genuine - because you made them feel their time had been well spent, and only a fool would feel that way if the site were not genuinely conservative to begin with.

• Finally, urinate on their heads a little bit when you're finished - compare them to Bea Arthur - to keep them in their place. Because their whole underlying impulse to begin with is actually to serve you, they will never fell properly satisfied if they themselves are the finally or completely victorious parties in the engagement.

That's the way you do it: money for nothing and your clicks for free.

This Way to the Egress! =>