What JD Vance's comments means for us

[Artaxerxes II]

I’m not sure if you’ve heard of it, but there was a leak of the Young Republicans’ local leaders group chat where they posted the kind of stuff that you’d expect on 4chan’s /pol/ and /b/ rather than on a conventional boomercon GOP chat:

Anyway, I’m not talking about the group’s racism or sexism as much as how starting with Vance, there has been a bizarre effort to infantilise the people involved, as shown by how those adults are referred to by Vance and other contards as “kids”:

https://xcancel.com/allenanalysis/statu ... 3302200564

https://xcancel.com/bchepren/status/1979691641180188892

I’m not sure if Vance knew what the ages of those users were, or if he is just lying as usual, but the fact that he didn’t even push back against the attempts at cancelling them or brought up free speech as a defence and instead opted to infantilise them is very telling. This tells me two things:

1. The promised Trumpian revolution, far from ushering America into an era of free speech, has actually tarred the first amendment to an even greater degree than Biden. Say what you will about Biden, but he didn’t coerce universities into going along with DEI-type crap, something which Trump actually did wrt Israel. Combine that with how not only has Musk been more censorious on Twitter than Jack ever did, but also how the right tried to push cancel culture after Kirk’s death and you’ll see what I mean. So the fact that Vance didn’t feel compelled to bring up the first amendment either tells me that he doesn’t care about free speech anymore than the standard antifa goon does, or knows that it would be hypocritical of him to talk about free speech as he stood by whilst his supporters called for a dictatorship to protect Kirk’s hagiography.

2. This infantilisation of men in their 20s and 30s is by far what fascinates me the most, given that usually the infantilisation of adults is typically limited for those under 18. So to see this shift in real time isn’t just important in terms of analysing “childhood innocence”, but also how the concept of adulthood is socially constructed. To explain further, ever since the financialisation of western economies, but accelerating during the Covid lockdowns, we have seen adults regressing towards their more infantile stage, and it seems that the effects haven’t worn off as shown by how popular escapist media (particularly anime) has been lately. Indeed, during the lockdowns the ideas of personal responsibility and “being an adult” were thrown out of the window in order to mark space for government intervention in people’s personal lives in ways that would be deemed unacceptable before 2019. In a sense, “childhood” as a stage has been extended well beyond the popular definition as a result.

While of course we can discuss the politicisation of “childhood innocence” to avoid personal responsibility as Vance seems to do, it’s also noteworthy how it comes at the cost of depriving the “protected” target of its agency, as shown by how the concept of “grooming” is founded upon the notion of “childhood innocence” (really, just glorified ignorance) that deprives children’s agency.

Tying back to the Young Republican leaders chat leaks, the response by Vance and MAGApedes is symptomatic of not just a society that doesn’t value free speech, but also of how the infantilisation of adults is being both recognised (as shown by how childhood is being extended to include adults too) and weaponised (as shown by the selective application of “kids” to cover for the users involved in the leaks).

In a sense, I think it’s a good development for us since it not only undermines the antis’ argument regarding “mental maturity” but also makes it easier for us to underscore that the modern experiments of “adolescence” and “childhood innocence” aren’t just BS, but also politically expedient social constructs.

After all, I doubt Vance would defend an 18 yo who got caught owning CP as “kids being kids”.

[Liyowo]

I have seen this, definitely a deliberate strategy to downplay the gravity of what was said.