Christopher Rufo recently thanked John Oliver for trying to ridicule him, saying it amplifies his message. Wolf discusses how both Rufo and Oliver are playing on the poor thinking skills of their audience. Watch this episode on YouTube here: https://youtu.be/puiY4YnH0M4
When I started this podcast, and now this video series, I promised that I wanted to make episodes on subject that were timeless; that people would still learn from many years from now; and that in general I would avoid commenting on the 24 hour news cycle.
There are a couple problems with trying to keep myself that “pure”.
First: the 24 hour news cycle is a rich source of examples of bad thinking passed off on the public as either profound on one hand, or legitimate satire on the other; and by choosing to avoid talking about it I’m missing the chance to reach an audience that might relate to what I have to say about learning to think better in light of current events. I think understanding what’s going on in the world, “sensemaking” is one of the best uses of critical thinking.
Second: by trying to hold myself “above it all,” I’m actually missing out on finding my audience: not simply people with whom I might be ideologically aligned, but people of any set of beliefs and opinions who are interested in learning to think better, and understand that having their thinking challenged is an important part of that process.
And third: everyone has biases including me, and I don’t think that trying to hide one’s beliefs and biases from the world is the best way to make a positive impact on it. So, whether you agree with my opinions or not, if I can get you to think about what you believe and why, then I’m accomplishing my mission. So, when I do pieces like this, like what I'm about to do here, I’m going to do you the courtesy of being very up front about my opinions and biases, and you can take that into account when you hear my actual arguments.
One more thing I’ll come back to over and over again: just because I say I agree with someone doesn’t mean I agree with everything they say. And just because I say I disagree with someone doesn’t mean I disagree with everything they say. I think every opinion has to be judge on its merits.
So when I say that I think that Chris Rufo is doing good work, that doesn’t mean I think everything he does or says is stellar. And when I say that John Oliver has become an unfunny political hack, that’s not to diminish the occasional funny thing he does say, or that he actually used to be funny a long time ago.
So a few days ago Megyn Kelly interviewed Christopher Rufo:
(Clip begins, Christopher Rufo speaking:)
"What I'm looking at, and it's kind of an on-going series, I just started it, is to take that same system of reporting that same style of reporting that I did with critical race theory, but now taking a look at gender identity. What's happening right now are parents are feeling that. They're feeling the, 'Oof, that's kind of weird, I'm kind of uncomfortable with this. But I'm scared to speak out.' So what we have to do, we have to give them the kind of media narrative, a justification or validation or substantiation of their concerns. To say, hey, these are the kinds of things they're teaching in schools, and then we have to give them the language where they can speak about it with confidence. They can speak about it directly. And they can speak about it with the requisite level of aggressiveness that it's going to take to say 'Hey wait a minute, we have to stop this...'"'
(Clip ends, Wolf continues:)
Oliver then goes on the attack.
(Clip begins, John Oliver speaking:)
"Yeah, he's [Rufo] basically giving them a script to repeat. That's not what you want from Chris Rufo. For instance, that he's a fear-mongering troll who looks like what would happen if someone made the recipe for Ryan Gosling but forgot to add the hotness."
(End clip, Wolf continues:)
Oliver calls Rufo a “fear-mongering troll,” which is the start of his rhetorical thrust: Rufo is making a big deal out of nothing, “fear-mongering.” By following up such a statement with a joke about Rufo’s looks, he’s using laughter to “anchor” his audience in state of agreement with what he’s about to say.
(Clip starts, John Oliver speaking:)
“He’s very deliberate in how he tries to influence public opinion.”
(Clip ends, Wolf continues:)
Oliver though, is the same; he’s not simply there to tell jokes, he’s there to influence public opinion. And for that matter, so am I.
(Clip starts, John Oliver speaking:)
"Rufo suggested branding the discussion of trans issues under the umbrella of 'radical gender theory.' He tweeted out that 'Conservatives should start using the phrase 'trans stripper' in lieu of 'drag queen.' It has a more lurid set of connotations and shifts the debate to sexualization.'
(Clip ends, Wolf continues:)
Notice how Oliver has carefully chosen this example of Rufo’s rhetoric to attack. When you’re going to attack an enemy you should attack their weakest spots. Why is this weak? Because it’s easily dismissible, and that’s what Oliver wants the public to do to Rufo: dismiss him as ridiculous. Unfortunately, Rufo set himself up for this, because anyone who actually knows anything about “drag queens” knows that the vast majority of them are neither trans, nor strippers. Rufo chose this phrase because yes, it’s happened that in 2019 Seattle hired a trans stripper to perform at a conference on solving homelessness, and video of that went viral.
But Oliver wants to drive his point home: he wants his audience to dismiss Rufo’s rhetorical misstep and in the process dismiss everything he says entirely.
(Clip begins, John Oliver speaking:)
"And sure, anything can have a more lurid and sexual set of connotations, if you just rename it. I'll show you. Rain? Sky jizz. There, much worse. Emulsion blender? Soup vibrator. Spaghetti sauce? Noddle lube. See, this works on anything."
(Clip ends, Wolf continues:)
Oliver finishes by telling us what he thinks is the flaw in the conservative argument:
(Clip begins, John Oliver speaking:)
"But in the conservative playbook, that tactic is a really big one. Linking discussion of gender identity to sexual predation and teachers 'grooming' students."
(Clip ends, Wolf continues:)
He says conservatives want to spuriously link between discussion of gender identity with sexual predation. And unfortunately, he has played against Rufo’s weakest gambit.
Now, Rufo goes on to thank Oliver for amplifying his message with his hit piece. This is also true; in this sense Oliver has played into Rufo’s hands because the actual clip he played of Rufo talking to Megyn Kelly will strike many parents as quite reasonable, and it gets Rufo’s name out there. To the extent that Oliver was preaching to his choir, nothing will change. But Rufo no doubt picked up some followers from seeing this.
Unfortunately both Rufo and Oliver are pinning their hopes on strawman arguments. Rufo is insisting that drag queens are something that they are in general not, and Oliver is hoping that by attacking this that his audience will dismiss everything else that Rufo might have to say.
Of course, it’s also possible that Rufo is playing 4D chess and deliberately throwing out the occasional over the top tweet to deliberately invite such attacks. When threatened with bad publicity P. T. Barnum once quipped, “Say anything you like about me, but spell my name right.”
Following Barnum’s lead, Rufo tweeted, “The most liberating thing you can do … is to stop caring about the approval of people who hate you. I’ve learned to see these media fights as accelerants to my campaigns, rather than personal judgements on me. They do not matter in my day-to-day life at all.”
Sounds like good advice to me, but what do you think? Let me know in the comments below, like the video, share it with a friend, and I also hope you’ll subscribe. See you tomorrow!