The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Self-Awareness, @AmandaMarcotte? Irony? Some Logical Coherence, Perhaps?

Posted on | April 18, 2014 | 129 Comments

Amanda Marcotte is one of the most wicked people in America today. Her bloodthirsty enthusiasm for abortion is such that she does not hesitate to imagine aborting her own hypothetical offspring:

“I don’t want a baby. . . . Nothing will make me
want a baby. . . . This is why, if my birth control fails,
I am totally having an abortion.”

What kind of deformed personality could write such thing? The same kind of deformed personality who could become a campaign blogger for Democrat presidential candidate John Edwards — hired, evidently, on the recommendation of Edwards’ wife — then get unceremoniously dumped after her controversial record becomes an issue. And then, when it is exposed that the candidate who hired and dumped her was a shameless adulterer, well . . . crickets chirping.

Zero recognition on Marcotte’s part that her “progressive” values made her the dupe of a hypocritical charlatan. No second thoughts are possible, because her career as a Professional Feminist is so important to her that the slightest flinch — any mere overt hint of uncertainty about her commitment to The Sacred Progressive Cause — would impair the status and prestige she has striven so hard to attain.

Years of humiliating herself on behalf of The Cause have extinguished whatever spark of conscience Amanda Marcotte may ever have possessed and her career of public self-degradation seems, also, to have made her blind to her own contradictions. So it is that we find the bloodthirsty abortion fanatic pretending to have moral qualms about the death of a fictional TV character:

That is the genius of this episode [Sunday’s episode of the HBO series Game of Thrones]. It serves up one example after another for you to judge of people sadistically enjoying the pain and suffering of others, and right when you’re in a full snit of self-righteousness, it puts you in a position to do exactly what you just spent the last hour judging others over.
You can argue until you’re blue in the face that it’s different, because Joffrey’s death is an objectively good thing, especially for the kingdom. But you’ll recall that Ned Stark advised his sons at the beginning of the series about the importance of not taking killing lightly. This, George R.R. Martin is arguing, is what war does to people: It makes them callous and petty and revenge-minded, which is why peace never lasts and violence begets more violence. Last night’s episode was a firm reminder of the fundamentally pacifist nature of the series.

Or, perhaps, “a firm reminder” of the ultimately amoral worldview that informs Game of Thrones. Not long ago, my friend Ali Akbar stayed a week at our house, during which I became temporarily addicted to Game of Thrones. I’d heard all the buzz about the series, but the professional necessity of having cable TV — not only to watch the news, but also because high-speed Internet service is part of the cable package — does not justify paying for HBO. Ali, however, has the “HBO Go” package, so that he could download all the episodes, and I watched the first two seasons in the span of a week.

The infamous “Red Wedding” scene that wiped out the Stark clan (except for Ned’s bastard son) was pretty much all the evidence you needed that there is really no “moral to the story.” One might argue that it is realistic to see the noble and courageous perish at the hands of the depraved and sadistic, but if the author had in mind some didactic purpose, the lesson taught is a very bad one.

Grant that Game of Thrones is eminently watchable, that the character development and plot twists are fascinating. Grant all this, and I still say the series is a poisoned confection, an invitation to the kind of puerile paganism that one might find among adolescent “goths” attending a Renaissance Fair or science-fiction convention.

A certain tolerance of moral ambiguity is necessary to film criticism, which is one reason why most evangelical Christian writing on the subject is so wretched. If your idea of film criticism is to count the cuss words and recoil in horror at any overt expression of sexuality, you should consider another line of work. It’s one thing to advocate wholesome, uplifting, family entertainment; it’s another thing to be permanently indignant that all movies are not wholesome, uplifting, family entertainment. For example, why wouldn’t pro-lifers embrace The Terminator as one of the most pro-life movies of all time?

The whole point of the story is that Sarah Connor, an otherwise unremarkable young woman from Los Angeles, must survive because she is destined to give birth to the future hero John Connor. And (spoiler alert) she becomes pregnant with John because of the time-traveling future soldier who has returned to the 1980s to save her. Spare me the Church Lady sermon about unmarried sex — how can a Christian possibly miss the pro-life theme here?

Well, we have wandered far afield from the topic of Amanda Marcotte’s tone-deaf reaction to the death of Evil King Joffrey. The point of that digression, however, is that effective criticism must be able to perceive in a dramatic work themes that are embedded in the subtext. Marcotte says she has read the books on which Game of Thrones is based, and if what she sees as most important is a pacifist message, I’ll take her word for it that this is the authorial purpose — and ultimately, a bad lesson.

Yes, war is a terrible thing that everyone should strive to avoid. However, as history as amply demonstrated, the pursuit of peace at any price — a cowardly refusal to risk war on behalf of principle — can lead to awful consequences. “Peace through strength” is not merely a slogan, but the only way that war can be deterred. But contra Marcotte, I think the author of Game of Thrones sees this.

One notices in Game of Thrones echoes of Sun-Tzu and Machiavelli, both insightful scholars of statecraft. And there is, certainly, a sort of moral framework evident: Characters who become obsessed with revenge ultimately destroy themselves. Yet weakness toward an enemy — a failure to utterly destroy a rival, and also to destroy any of his allies who might avenge him — always exposes a character to sudden and unexpected destruction. So a viewer can extract useful lessons from Game of Thrones, even while acknowledging that (a) it’s chiefly enjoyable as escapist fantasy entertainment, and (b) the series is ultimately a moral cesspool, where all the characters are fundamentally bad people in one way or another.

Here I think of film noir, my favorite movie genre.

You can’t be one of those League of Christian Decency types and a film noir fan, because the protagonist is invariably a deeply flawed man — “Oh, no, Mildred! He’s smoking a cigarette!” — who finds himself in a moral dilemma, usually involving a Woman of Questionable Virtue. The protagonist in film noir finds himself in a position where there are no “good” options, where survival requires him to do things that are unethical or illegal, because his own weakness or stupidity has led him into a situation where he is hopelessly trapped by evil.

Game of Thrones could be seen as a kind of medieval film noir, I suppose, but that’s about the best you could say for it, and Amanda Marcotte’s reading of King Joffrey’s death as a moral indictment of the viewer’s hypocrisy is . . . well, it’s weird:

The audience at home is made to endure Joffrey’s ugly and mean-spirited play where a bunch of little people do a comical re-enactment of the War of the Five Kings. Joffrey and his supporters chortle horribly at the deaths of their enemies for many long minutes, many more minutes than you would ever have to endure in most TV shows. After awhile, you start to squirm and actually feel the discomfort of Tyrion, Sansa, and the Tyrells at this unseemly display of pleasure in the deaths of [their] enemies. You can’t wait for it to end. It’s really terrible, all this gloating over death.
A few minutes later, half the people who were squirming over Joffrey’s unseemly pleasure in the deaths of his enemies are running to Twitter to celebrate Joffrey’s pathetic and painful death.

One can only view this criticism as evidence that Marcotte is one of those whose conscience has been seared with a hot iron. Can’t she see Joffrey’s death as a fate that he brought upon himself through his own sadistic cruelty? I haven’t seen the episode in question, so I don’t know if I would be gleefully cheering Joffrey’s death, but no one could dispute that the world of Game of Thrones would have been better off if Joffrey had been killed much sooner. But Marcotte’s reading of the “discomfort” at  the way Joffrey & Co. relish the deaths of their enemies seems to miss the fundamental question: Who has done wrong to whom?

In what sense has Joffrey ever been a victim of wrongdoing? Hasn’t Joffrey been a reliable perpetrator of wrongdoing? Why then should anyone wonder that we would be uncomfortable at watching him “chortle horribly” at the re-enactment of his wrongs? And why should we feel guilt at our enjoyment of seeing Joffrey finally receive the kind of violent death he has inflicted on so many good and innocent people?

We need not be surprised, however, by Amanda Marcotte’s inability to make obvious moral distinctions, her blindness to the difference between sadism and justice. Marcotte’s lack of moral insight begins with herself: How can such a murderously fanatical advocate of abortion be expected to discern Good from Evil?

It never even occurs to Amanda Marcotte that there is anything ironic in her position. “Then again, I could see how she could be in simpatico with an 18 year old psychopath.” Indeed, indeed.

 

 

Comments

129 Responses to “Self-Awareness, @AmandaMarcotte? Irony? Some Logical Coherence, Perhaps?”

  1. Anamika
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:03 pm

    The infamous “Red Wedding” scene that wiped out the Stark clan (except for Ned’s bastard son)…

    Nope. 4 of Ned Stark’s 5 children (along with his only bastard) are very much alive.

    His wife, eldest son (Robb) and most of his banner men were wiped out during the Red Wedding.

  2. Rubic's Cube
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:08 pm

    Amanda Marcotte keeps perpetuating the obligatory nonsense. As you know, attempting a vague imitation of a Internet troll.

    Luckily, one learns to close their ears at such trolls. But sadly, one can never close their ears enough.

  3. Anamika
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:09 pm

    Abortion is not murder. I know this is a sensitive issue for pro-lifers who believe that life begins at conception, but we can agree to disagree.

  4. Amanda Marcotte: High priestess of child sacrifice | Batshit Crazy News
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:20 pm

    […] TOM: Amanda Marcotte’s lack of self awareness… […]

  5. Julie Pascal
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:21 pm

    I think his wife lived as well. Actually.

    I haven’t watched much of the series and only read the first book (at which time I found out that it did not, in fact, have the whole series even though I bought three books… so I quit reading them because I don’t *do* that.)

  6. Rubix's Cube
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:22 pm

    Yes, I know proponents of the liberal view contend that the morally significant break in the biological development of the fetus is at birth. This means that it is morally permitted to have an abortion before birth and morally prohibited to kill the offspring after birth. The objection against this view is simple because there seems to be no morally relevant difference between a short time (say five minutes) before birth and after it. Factually, the only biological difference is the physical separation of the fetus from the mother.

  7. Amanda Marcotte notes the audience complicity in the fictional death of “child” King Joffrey on Game of Thrones, misses the irony of her position… | Batshit Crazy News
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:23 pm

    […] TOM: Amanda Marcotte’s lack of self awareness… […]

  8. Julie Pascal
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:24 pm

    Honest, I think that the moral of Game of Thrones is nothing more complicated than “fantasy settings are brutish in a way that you can not avoid unless you just want to die.”

  9. Kirby McCain
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:25 pm

    This, George R.R. Martin is arguing, is what war does to people: It makes them callous and petty and revenge-minded, which is why peace never lasts and violence begets more violence.Perhaps Marcotte cannot see the left’s politics of personal destruction in the same way. The sheer ugliness of the way they treat women like Palin or Malkin places them in a spot from which they can never retreat. So Amanda identifies with Joffrey to some extent.

  10. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:25 pm

    You are correct. Legally it is the lawful killing of a human being. That does not make it right.

  11. Anamika
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:26 pm

    Spoiler! That’s OK 🙂 Yes Catelyn lives, reanimated though decayed… brought back to “life” by the Lord of Light, and is out there to seek vengeance. I think we will see this by the end of this season.

  12. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:26 pm
  13. Julie Pascal
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:28 pm

    Stating something as an absolute is sort of the opposite of “agree to disagree.”

  14. Kirby McCain
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:28 pm

    Abortion for convenience is wrong and I couldn’t sleep with someone who took life so easily.

  15. jakee308
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:29 pm

    just dropped in to see if I’m banned here too.

    Crooks and Liars (and isn’t that an apropos name for a left leaning site) has apparently banned me from commenting.

    When your taking flak, you’re over the target.

  16. Phil_McG
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:34 pm

    ” I still say the series is a poisoned confection, an invitation to the kind of puerile paganism that one might find among adolescent “goths” attending a Renaissance Fair or science-fiction convention.”

    This is why I’ve never seen an episode of Game of Thrones.

    A lot of its fans look like the sort of people who decorate their homes with pewter dragons, describe themselves as psychic vampires, practice Wicca, and smell of social ineptitude and Doritos.

  17. Chris Smith
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:34 pm

    Cate is very dead at the end of the Red Wedding. Robb’s wife is too. Though, in the book, the Robb’s wife is far away from the site of the Red Wedding.

    I did the same thing with the Wheel of Time books. I read the first three, got to the end of the third and thought, “What the heck? I wonder how many books it’ll take to get this to the end?” (To answer, 13 books, the last 3 written by a different author with whom the original author hashed out the final parts of the story before he died.)

  18. Julie Pascal
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:37 pm

    As if there is something wrong with a pewter dragon!

  19. Julie Pascal
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:38 pm
  20. Anamika
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:41 pm

    @Rubic’s Cube @Julie Pascal @Evi L. Bloggerlady @Kirby McCain

    This is what I believe, in the words of PZ Myers:

    “I’ve tried very hard to see abortion from the perspective of the anti-choicers. The only way I can get even close is by assuming that a fetus is fully, 100% equivalent to a child or adult human being — that there is absolutely nothing to distinguish the fetus from its mother on a moral level. In that case, you could make an argument that the rights and happiness of the fetus deserve consideration — although even in this most optimistic case the best solution you can arrive at is a compromise, not an absolute prohibition of all abortion.

    “However, the equivalence of mother and fetus is an untenable proposition. A mouse has more complexity and autonomy than a fetus, and we don’t even hesitate when the choice is between the life of a mouse and a human being. We don’t even argue about it. And to argue that a single-celled zygote or even an embryo with a few dozen cells at implantation is anything but a negligible component of any moral equation is utterly absurd. It’s a fantasy of the deeply ignorant, the kind of people who think the babies on Pro-Life Across America billboards are actually accurate representations of the age-specific fetus, to think that there’s something cute, adorable, personable about a self-organizing mass of cells.”

  21. Chris Smith
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:45 pm

    Actually, George R.R. Martin simply applied real world examples of brutality to a fantasy world. The problem with Fantasy novels is that they’re too light on the actual cruelty of a medieval era world. Most fantasy stories allow fantastic creatures and monsters to be cruel, while most humans are portrayed as moral and beneficent, Mr. Martin has simply allowed his humans to be the monsters in the story.

    That said, judging from where the books are going, the moral of the story is that duty, faith, truth, knowledge and honor are important for the survival of humanity and those that only strive to fulfill their own petty needs above those virtues doom not just themselves but all of humanity.

  22. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:46 pm

    There may be some surprises in store too (those who read the books know what I am referring to).

  23. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:49 pm

    It is scientific fact that life begins at conception. But as a matter of “choice” the law gives the mother the unilateral right to decide whether or not to terminate that life. For the most part it is unrestricted right up to birth (although most cases are in the first and second trimesters).

  24. Anamika
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:51 pm

    @juliepascal:disqus @TheEBL:disqus et al

    The only abortion argument that counts

    “We can make all the philosophical and scientific arguments that anyone might want, but ultimately what it all reduces to is a simple question: do women have autonomous control of their bodies or not? Even if I thought embryos were conscious, aware beings writing poetry in the womb (I don’t, and they’re not), I’d have to bow out of any say in the decision the woman bearing responsibility has to make.”

  25. richard mcenroe
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:54 pm

    When it comes to ladies of film noir, if you’re talking of the likes of Bacall, Stanwyck and Beverly Garland, it’s not a question of “questionable” virtue but whether you can survive it.

  26. richard mcenroe
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:55 pm

    The first time a pregnant woman gives birth to a cocker spaniel, I will believe that a foetus is anything other than a human being.

  27. richard mcenroe
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:56 pm

    Nice to see Jason has rationalized his way out of any moral obligation towards any woman he might punish with a baby… or towards the baby.

  28. richard mcenroe
    April 18th, 2014 @ 3:56 pm

    Y’all need to read Glen Cook.

  29. Anamika
    April 18th, 2014 @ 4:06 pm

    I read/listened (most of) the books.

    If anyone’s interested in ebooks (about 5 MB pdf each), please feel free to email me at: [email protected]

  30. Rubix's Cube
    April 18th, 2014 @ 4:10 pm

    Sadly for him, consciousness and the ability to feel pain will develop after about six months. However the first brain activities are discernable after the seventh week so that it is possible to conclude that the fetus may feel pain after this date. In this respect, the ability to suffer is decisive for acknowledging a morally significant break.

  31. darthlevin
    April 18th, 2014 @ 4:17 pm

    The argument isn’t that an unborn baby is not a human being. That is objectively true. The argument in support of abortion is that an unborn baby is not a person.

    Myself, I don’t cotton to government deciding who is a person, with all the attendant rights of personhood, and who is not a person lacking said rights. After all, someday the government may decide I’m not a person. It’s happened before.

  32. FenelonSpoke
    April 18th, 2014 @ 4:24 pm

    Amanda Marcotte only has a few more years in order to have a baby (She’s about 38) and I thought she had already had had one abortion. I understand people not wanting to have children, but she is so vehement about having an abortion instead of having a kid (Plenty of people don’t want kids and then decide to keep a child when they become unexpectedly pregnant) that there’s probably something with in her past-some trauma in her past life- that the whole idea of motherhood is entirely disgusting to her. Best to pray for her emotional and spiritual healing.

  33. Adjoran
    April 18th, 2014 @ 4:27 pm

    There are certain things abortion proponents will not consider, cannot consider if they wish to maintain their illusion that it is not an evil and immoral act. So their thinking necessarily contorts to avoid these things.

    I assume Marcotte got her 25K followers because she’s a hard-left abortion cheerleader. Her writing has never been anything exceptional.

    Personally, I couldn’t care less about an HBO series, much less what Amanda Marcotte thinks of it.

    Frankly, and no offense intended, I don’t give a rat’s patootie what Stacy, Ali, or anyone else thinks about it either. Put the “HBO” stamp on it, and my interest has already waned to zero.

  34. Anamika
    April 18th, 2014 @ 4:29 pm

    Robb’s wife is too. Though, in the book, the Robb’s wife is far away from the site of the Red Wedding.

    Robb’s unborn child also dies. Let’s not forget that 🙂

    The wife’s character (& name) is totally different in the books, she still lives. Her own mother gives her birth control potion unbeknownst to her in secret dealings with the Lannisters.

  35. Cal Quelus
    April 18th, 2014 @ 5:12 pm

    Well, if today’s liberals have no qualms about murdering the unborn, they will certain have no qualms about murdering anyone else.

    Lose your religion, lose your country. It’s that simple, really. Liberalism is ☠

  36. Ben Franklin
    April 18th, 2014 @ 5:34 pm

    I don’t guess I should tell Phil that all of my pewter dragons smell of Doritos.

  37. Kirby McCain
    April 18th, 2014 @ 5:43 pm

    Poor Amanda, her passion is hate. Hate for Christianity, hate for those who are heterosexual, and hate for white men. She has no respect for the beliefs of others, unless they’re Muslims who treat women like cattle. A tormented soul given to a tunnel vision of the world, she can never retreat from her twisted vision lest the truth destroy every cannon of her belief. God have mercy on this empty heart that is Amanda Marcotte.

  38. maniakmedic
    April 18th, 2014 @ 6:04 pm

    I think it’s 14 books. I just started the series. I’m a sucker for a long series.

  39. Art Deco
    April 18th, 2014 @ 6:05 pm

    that there’s probably something with in her past-some trauma in her past
    life- that the whole idea of motherhood is entirely disgusting to her.

    Non ci credo. The broad is her own trauma.

  40. Mm
    April 18th, 2014 @ 6:06 pm

    “The only argument that counts?” According to whom? Was there a global meeting that I missed? “We can agree to disagree” that it is NOT “the only argument that counts.”

  41. Art Deco
    April 18th, 2014 @ 6:07 pm

    hate for those who are heterosexual, and hate for white men.

    Oh, she shacks up with one of those, though. He’s gap toothed and bald. He works as the IT tech at an abortion clinic.

  42. Rosalie
    April 18th, 2014 @ 6:13 pm

    And what if the father wants the child and would bring it up on his own? There are men who do and who would take full responsibility. Still, he would have absolutely no right to his own child.

  43. concern00
    April 18th, 2014 @ 6:18 pm

    The whole “autonomous control of their own bodies” is the most disingenuous straw man that exists in this debate.

    That the pro-abortion camp tries to distill their position down to this frankly non-intellectual meme is all that needs stating.

  44. maniakmedic
    April 18th, 2014 @ 6:20 pm

    I personally don’t get why these women won’t have themselves sterilized instead of having an abortion every time they get knocked up. I know many doctors are reluctant to sterilize young women because they might change their minds in the future, but surely somebody Marcotte’s age could find a doctor that would perform the procedure. And anyway, it shouldn’t be able to come back on the doctor if indeed later in life one of these selfish women decides she actually does want a kid. Too bad, should have thought of that before you decided you wanted to be able to whore around consequence free. And I’m thinking the world is probably better off if you’re that type of person and can’t have kids.

  45. concern00
    April 18th, 2014 @ 6:21 pm

    Do these people forget that were born and were once children? Though admittedly most of them still are children. Perhaps this why they haven’t matured in their views of having children.

  46. K-Bob
    April 18th, 2014 @ 6:28 pm

    I’ve read quite a few of the more famous Fantasy genre writers. Martin’s work never drew me in. It just seemed to go on and on and when you got to the end it was, “Oh well, at least it’s over.”

    I mean, it’s okay to read if you have nothing else. Not like those books you end up throwing against the wall when you realize how much time you wasted (like those Mars Trilogy books by KSR. Spoiler: almost every single character in those books is a total, unremittent asshole).

  47. K-Bob
    April 18th, 2014 @ 6:29 pm

    I’d pray she never, ever gets pregnant.

  48. K-Bob
    April 18th, 2014 @ 6:30 pm

    “What were you doing last night?”

    “Polishing my dragon.”

  49. K-Bob
    April 18th, 2014 @ 6:31 pm

    We had a Ronulan invasion over Bolton’s comments about Rand Paul last night. The ban hammer took hours to clean.

  50. K-Bob
    April 18th, 2014 @ 6:33 pm

    It doesn’t have to be “murder” to be wrong.

    I don’t want the state controlling women’s bodies, but women need to understand that killing the unborn is, in fact, killing the unborn.

    It’s not a consequence-free act.