I read a lot of batshit crazy RWNJ “news”. I got on somebodies email list and am now a “true patriot”. I get email from Mike Pompeo, Kellyanne Conway, Nancy Mace, Nikky Haley, Candace Owens, Hillsdale College, Lila Rose, Rand Paul, and, of course, Donald Trump. Most consider me a friend, some consider me a good friend. Me and Donald are Besties.
I also get teaser emails a couple times a day about the outrageous things the Libs are doing. Often a tantalizing headline like “Democratic Does This and Parents are Shocked”. (Shocked! I tell you. Shocked!) Then there’s a link to the story at some site like — I kid you not — Blabberbuzz. You have to click the link to find out what the “This” is.
Often the writing is abysmal, occasionally not so bad. Generally there is a nugget of a fact followed by wild speculation and what passes for “sarcasm” in a third grade classroom. Often the “news” demonstrates a poor grasp of statistics or, sometimes, a willful ignorance. Sourcing is generally spotty with other biased news sources, or even some guy in the same office (Senior Editor for Important Stuff) being quoted.
Studies cited are frequently from obscure, foreign, or obscure foreign sources. By now we’re all familiar with the Cochrane Library Study or whatever. But how many of us have heard of The Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. To be fair, though, SUAS is probably a fine university and the actual quote from SUAS was academic pablum of a cautionary nature (little evidence to suggest) and hence only worthy of inclusion if you want to appear scholarly without actually saying anything. Also, to be fair, the Cochrane study was useless for any purpose other than propaganda which the study itself cautioned against. But I digress.
The inspiration for this diary was a quote I found in an article at “Right Vs. Left News” which purports to present both sides (See? It’s there in the title.) but the left side has about 5 articles from 2019. At least it did last time I checked, but now the menu doesn’t work anymore so I can’t verify that.
The article itself was about a middle school writing assignment in which students were asked to argue for the environmental benefits of eating insects instead of Cows. The headline is:
Ew Gross! Utah Middle School Teacher Makes Students Do Abhorrent Things In The Name Of The "Climate'
That’s just a cut and paste. Not to be petty or anything but it’s my diary so I do what I want. Yes, the quotes are mismatched in the headline. And Yes, the clear implication is that some teacher is forcing children to to do something awful. Once you read the article, however, it’s clear that an alternative topic was also offered and the gross thing — actually eating a bug — was optional. And the bugs were from a commercial site not just something the teacher found out on the playground during recess.
Apparently one parent objected anyway and that made the news on — big surprise — Fox. Here’s that quote.
Amanda Wright, the mother of one of the students, condemned the assignment, claiming it was part of a concerted effort to indoctrinate children into a "dark climate change religion."
That was a new one on me. The “dark climate change religion” sounds scary. It’s dark, like Dark Brandon, scary stuff. And certainly if there is a “concerted effort to indoctrinate children” that can’t be good. I would expect some supporting information at this point. What other efforts are underway to indoctrinate our children? Who all is in on the conspiracy? Do they also worship Satan? Or just climate change? Or just dark climate change? Is Dark Brandon the pope?
But no supporting information is forthcoming. Apparently the principal and another teacher said eating bugs would help the environment. Nobody opined that the bugs were tasty. SUAS said raising bugs at a commercial scale might lead to unintended consequences. But, as noted above, they just don’t know. That’s kind of the nature of unintended consequences.
A journal article from 2019 also said there might be a problem. I can tell you with great certainty right now there definitely might be a problem. Maybe I should start writing articles about things that might be problematic. Apparently there is a market.
A few more people are cited as being pro bug eating as a way to reduce greenhouse gasses and help to save the planet. Then there was this quote, that I just had to share, and that is the entire reason I felt called to write this diary.
It appears that alarmists and technocrats are increasingly pushing the masses to abandon real beef in favor of lab-grown cancer-based synthetic meat and bug-eating advocacy.
That is fantastic! I love a good turn of phrase and I’m actually jealous. It is so completely out to lunch. It’s totally batshit crazy while still being tenuously connected to the actual topic. I assume the four or five people cited are the alarmists and “technocrats”? This is the first and only mention of synthetic meat, so that’s out of the blue. “Cancer-based” certainly sounds bad so I’d like to read more about that. But “bug-eating advocacy” just sounds silly. Those goofy bug eaters.
One word stands out and that word is “alarmists”. I kinda think, maybe, the author is a climate change denier so anything that aims to reduce greenhouse gasses is “alarmist” And I guess I can see where promoting bug eating might be considered a little extreme. And maybe it’s not time for extreme measures … yet. But none of the sources cited expressed any alarm. Some just said we should look at the idea. Others promoted beans and seeds as an alternative to meat and said nothing at all about bugs.
Who did express alarm is Amanda Wright, the parent who “condemned the assignment”. Claiming a “concerted effort to indoctrinate children” without evidence and citing a "dark climate change religion" that doesn’t exist.
Personally I don’t care if people eat bugs or beans or seeds or cows. Maybe fewer cows would be good. I don’t eat many cows myself, but I do eat some. Some cows. Okay, three.
But if there is a concerted effort to indoctrinate the children I am alarmed. School is meant to teach children how to think for themselves, not indoctrinate them. One way to teach children how to think for themselves is to teach them how to see both sides and evaluate both sides. Getting children to argue for a position they may not normally agree with is one way to do that. A pedagogical tool if you’re into fancy words.
One last quote:
Nebo School District's recent assignment has sparked debate, with some raising questions about the ethics of forcing children to advocate for a certain lifestyle. Despite the District's statement that students were offered an alternative topic if they felt uncomfortable, the fact that the District offered extra credit for consuming bugs remains concerning
This is the second to last paragraph so we’re revisiting the thesis. Now the assertion is stronger. It’s no longer a single assignment at a middle school. Now it’s the entire district and there are ethical questions. The headline said the children were “made” to do something gross. Now it seems the children were “forced”. But wait! They weren’t forced to do something gross. Just forced to endorse an idea they might not agree with. And then the second sentence of the paragraph even walks that back. They weren’t actually forced. They had options. But still the author has concerns. As conclusions go it started out pretty strong and then quickly faded into mush. Also, since when is bug-eating a lifestyle?
Sheesh. That’s a lot of words for a stupid bug eating article from a fifth rate RWNJ “news” site. I really only wanted to share that one quote. But then I had to put it in context and one thing lead to anther and here we are. I find this somewhat therapeutic.
There are a lot of fact checking sites out there. Tucker Carlson’s latest spew generally gets a lot of clapback. MTG, Cruz, Jordan, and the rest of the usual suspects get rebuffed when they grab for headlines with incendiary, or absurd, rhetoric. But then there are these little stories that create a constant trickle of ridiculous nonsense aimed at painting the left as ridiculous and nonsensical. Those don’t get much attention, and maybe they shouldn’t.
But maybe they should. The “opinion” side of Fox is all in the news these days for being big fat hairy liars, but even if the “news” side doesn’t lie about the election everything is so slanted it amounts to the same thing. Meanwhile the other RWNJ sites keep up the mesmerizing drumbeat of silliness turning non stories into sweeping indictments of the loony left . It’d be comical except there is an audience.
I have no doubt Amanda Wright is sincere in her beliefs. There are lots of these little sites with lots of these little stories and they get money from somewhere. Perhaps it’s just a guy in his parents basement having a lark. Or perhaps it’s someones project for their sophomore sociology class. Or perhaps it’s just those wacky Russian Trolls. But I doubt it. The mountain of right wing grievance is built of all these little pebbles
What is your favorite RWNJ site?
What is your favorite RWNJ site?
Comments are closed on this story.