Type to search

Stop Calling It The ‘Alt-Right’ – It’s The Brat Right

Featured Post Media Politics Top News

Stop Calling It The ‘Alt-Right’ – It’s The Brat Right

alt-right meme pepe

Reprinted with permission from AlterNet. 

What does alt-right mean? Literally, it means an alternative version of right-wing politics; can’t get blander than that. The movement doesn’t deserve such a neutral description.

So should we call it a Nazi, fascist or extreme faction of the GOP? That may feel right and there’s nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade. Still I don’t think that nails it, and it’s not a strategically smart choice. Breitbart fans like it when we call it that. Name calling is useful but only when it lands and sticks, a bullseye at the target.

Breitbart, however fascist or Nazi, is not really about politics, morals, principles or beliefs. It’s about the fun of being naughty, the kind of puerile fun little bullies have. Our indignation at their naughtiness fills them with “we glee,” the glee of being part of their naughty little gang.

My guess is we should call them the brat-right and bratbart news.

Linguist and political analyst Geoffrey Nunberg nails a point that’s often overlooked by those I call the left’s “backfirebrands”—the leftist firebrands whose understandably passionate indignation backfires. This is from Nunberg’s Fresh Air commentary in 2006 about Ann Coulter’s comment that 9/11 widows were enjoying their husband’s deaths.

Coulter’s celebrity is a good measure of what has become of political discussion. You’d scarcely describe her as a political thinker, no more than you’d describe Simon Cowell as a critic of the arts. But like Cowell, she has an unerring gift for media theatrics. It isn’t just her penchant for making snarky or outrageous remarks. Plenty of people do that without being invited onto the Today Show, and in fact Coulter doesn’t get a lot of national attention for her run-of-the-mill ruminations about giving rat poison to Justice Stevens or fragging John Murtha. But the remark about the 9/11 widows was irresistible for its brazen tastelessness and the obvious pleasure Coulter took in the consternation she created.

Is Coulter sincere about the things she says? That’s a silly question, like asking whether schoolchildren are sincere in the taunts they throw at each other across the school yard. But that doesn’t make her a satirist, as her defenders like to claim, usually with the implication that her literal-minded liberal critics don’t get the joke.

It’s a formula: Say outrageously heartless things with the gleeful attitude that you’re “telling it like it is.” Don’t worry if you don’t mean what you say or haven’t even thought about whether you do. The point is to entertain enough to gain audience.

Audience will come for the entertainment but stay for the smugness. They won’t know that’s why they stayed. They’ll say “I thought it was entertaining but the more I listened to it, the more I realized that it what they were speaking truth.” They think they were drawn in by the content, but they may not have thought about the content any more than Coulter thinks about it. The audience really stays because they learned a new formula for feeling invincible. That’s what Coulter, Limbaugh, Trump and Bratbart really sell.

It’s a simple formula. Any idiot can use it:

  1. Dismiss and ignore any truth, facts, evidence and reality that challenge your confidence.
  2. Turn any challenge back on the challenger using a handful of rhetorical tricks for saying “I know you are but what am I?”
  3. Treat your confidence as evidence that you have graduated from debater to supreme judge presiding over all debates you enter.

The know-it-all formula is a drug. You come for the high; you stay for the addiction. The drug is deliverable wrapped in beliefs of any stripe. You can buy the drug from self-help, spiritual or religious gurus, from pundits on the right and on the left. The beliefs on the right happen to be a perfect wrapper for the drug since the right prides itself on faith in moral absolutism. But there are plenty of people on the right who aren’t addicted to the drug.

Many of us were addicted to the know-it-all formula in our teens or earlier as elementary school bullies back when we had little impulse control and little conscience, guilt or critical thinking skills that would make us nauseous when we used the drug. When conscience, guilt and critical thinking eventually kicked in, many of us kicked the habit. We sobered up out of childish self-certainty.

Some never kicked it. Some kicked it but returned to it as adults when life got too uncertain. Trump may have won because white middle-class Midwesterners feel trapped, frustrated and alienated. That’s true, but an incomplete account without noticing their solution. They bought the drug. For them, expedient self-certainty trumped thought.

Trump is the most successful drug-pusher of our age. Bannon is his enabler. He’s been made head of strategy as his reward for goading Trump to push the drug harder instead of softening toward electable sobriety. Bannon said in effect, When you’re in a hole, keep digging, and helped with the shoveling.

Our best strategy is to focus on their addiction to the bratty know-it-all formula. Bratbart supporters think they’re rebels with a cause but their cause isn’t the cause of their rebellion. The cause is the self-satisfaction of giving offense and dismissing the offense taken by others as a result, feeling like they’re standing up for what’s true, even though they’ve given what’s true as little thought as possible.

The know-it-all formula is the shortest, cheapest path to feeling like the expert, much shorter than actually gaining any expertise. It winds people up like a watch’s self-winding movement. No matter how the addict is shaken, their confidence gets wound up tighter and tighter. If people agree with them, it confirms them. If people disagree with them, it confirms them. They’re like drug addicts who take interventions as evidence that they should double down on their addiction. That’s why it’s useless or counterproductive to call them fascists. It’s not just that they have no shame, they take pride in having no shame. It’s all part of the know-it-all game.

Recognizing and understanding the know-it-all formula puts the right’s attacks on “political correctness” in context. What is it really? I’d define “political correctness as taking offense not because you’re really offended but because it’s fun to act offended. And “political incorrectness” is the reverse—giving offense not because the situation demands it, but because it’s naughty fun, an indulgence.

Among the rhetorical tricks for saying “I know you are but what am I,” one of the easiest is ambiguous name-calling you apply to others and not yourself. Political correctness is just that, an accusation that the right levels exclusively at the left. How is #boycottHamilton not an example of political correctness, taking easy, proud, indulgent offense? The left has had its share of indulgent punks over the decades, folks who gave offense for the glee of it like little brats. These days, the right is out-punking the leftist punks. Bratbart is just that. Punks without a cause pretending they have the cause that trumps reason once and for all.

Yes, what they’re doing is dangerous. Brats can gain enough power that you can no longer afford to call them brats. But we’re not there yet and to keep from getting there we’re best calling them names that are more likely to land and stick, getting them where they live, in their little fantasy of superiority, infallibility and invincibility.

Jeremy Sherman is an evolutionary epistemologist studying the natural history and practical realities of decision making. Read his work at Psychology Today.



  1. Thoughtopsy November 25, 2016


    Watch a Trump voter whine about political correctness.
    Then… Watch a Trump voter whine about being called a racist.

    It’s hilarious.

    1. Jim Samaras November 25, 2016

      So let me see if I have this right. If you’re against PC then you’re a racist?

      1. InformedVoter November 25, 2016

        Yep, that’s how the low information crowd operates. They’re open-minded, as long as you agree with them. Once you disagree, you get called all sorts of names. And when they don’t get their way, they resort to violence and worse. Yet they continue to claim that the ones on the right are bigoted and violent. Voters rebelled against all the PC crap that had been heaped on them!

    2. InformedVoter November 25, 2016

      You low information lefties just don’t get it. You claim you are open-minded, but only if someone agrees with your point. If someone argues against you, you immediately call them names and even resort to violence. Yet you continue to call the right violent. The voters voted against all the PC crap that was forced upon them. The real racists and bigots are the lefties who can’t stand to have their opinions questioned. Why? Because they know so little that they can’t even defend their positions.

      1. Bill P November 25, 2016

        Talk about low information people, you claimed recently that 3 million illegals voted in the 2016 election. All of your proof relied on one source – GreggPhillips@JumpVote, a man who offered no proof of his fictitious claim. As usual your comment is just more of your misinformed thoughts.

        1. InformedVoter November 26, 2016

          You close-minded lefties just don’t get it. 45% of college educated women voted for President Trump (sounds great doesn’t it!). So you are calling them sexists right? More blacks voted for President Trump (sounding better and better isn’t it!) than Romney. So you are calling them racists right? More Latinos voted for President Trump (don’t you just love that!) than Romney. So you are calling them bigots right?
          Don’t forget the 3 states that HilLIARy won and there may be a recount. Why? Because HilLIARy got more votes than there were registered voters! Gasp! What voter fraud!
          You lost and you’re in meltdown mode. Before the election, I claimed that the polls were wrong. You claimed I was in meltdown mode. Boy you were on target about as much as the fake polls were. This is a landslide and certainly a mandate to undo everything Obama (one of the worst presidents in history) did. His popularity numbers stay just above 50%, but that’s with the MSM pushing him up. His legacy? As Mike Moore said three years ago “Obama’s legacy will be ONLY that he was the first black elected president. He’s wasted his two terms”.


          1. Bill P November 26, 2016

            Hey Mr. “Read them and weep” where is your comment about the 3 million illegal votes and the comment claiming Trump lead in the popular vote 69 million to 62 million for Hillary? What was your source for that – “Faux News Website”? You have a great revisionist memory of what you said. I’m still waiting for you to provide real proof of you 2 afore mentioned claims. You disappeared after making them.

            Why are you comparing Trump to Romney, Romney wasn’t in this race.While you compare Trump versus Romney vote you don’t mention how Hillary won the total popular vote by 2 million and still counting. Women supported Clinton over Trump by 54% to 42%. Clinton held an 80-point advantage among blacks (88% to 8%). College graduates backed Clinton by a 9-point margin (52%-43%). Young adults preferred Clinton over Trump by a wide 55%-37% margin. Hispanics preferred Hillary (65%) to Trump (29%), Trump’s increase in Hispanic votes is mainly due to the Cuban vote not the other Hispanic groups.
            Once again you make a claim that 3 state Hillary won may have a recount. You seem to have a comprehension issue, the 3 states that may have a recount are – Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, all voted for Trump. As for being a landslide Trump is losing the popular vote by over 2 million vote, that’s 64+ million for Hillary to 62+ million for Trump, that’s is hardly a landslide or a mandate.
            Calling President Barack Hussein Obama one of the worst presidents in US history is one of your stupidest (and there were many) comments. He inherited the largest recession in US history, you do remember that GW Bush lost over 2 million jobs during his last 4 months in office, millions of houses were in foreclosure, 2 unfunded wars being waged, stock market tanking – DJIA down 22.2%, S&P 500 down 37.4%, Nasdaq down 45.4%, the US dollar $1.31 to the Euro, $1.45 to the British Pound, $0.011 to the Japanese Yen & $0.146 to the Chinese Yuan, unemployment at 7.8% (U3) and 14.2%. All these were as of 1/2009. Now there has been over 6 straight years of monthly private sector job growth (15+ million total), no combat forces in Iraq, housing market values have increased steadily since 2008, DJIA up 133%, S&P 500 up 163%, Nasdaq up 258%, US dollar worth $1.06 to Euro, $1.25 to British Pound, $0.0088 to the Japanese Yen, $0.144 to Chinese Yuan, U3 rate at 4.9%, U6 rate ate 9.5%. If this is being 1 of the worst I take President Obama for another 4 years. President Obama’s popularity is at 55%, yeah just the media doing that, you have more excuses for anything that went well during the Obama Administration. Of course you have no provable facts to back up your bullshit.
            Don’t look now but your ignorance is showing badly.
            As for your inaccurate map a lot of red states have more acreage than people (Wyoming, Montana, N & S Dakota, etc)

          2. InformedVoter November 26, 2016

            45% of college educated women voted for President Trump.
            I guess you’re calling them sexists or misogynist, right?

            Yes it’s fair to compare President Trump vote counts to Romney. The MSM claimed that President Trump was sooooo bad and compared him to Romney.
            Yep the economy is doing so great.
            You’re in self-denial and in meltdown mode. President Trump HAS a mandate. Read ’em and weep. I think I saw you in this link.

            HllLIARy won big in CA because President Trump didn’t campaign there. The popular vote means nothing so why spend time and money there? If he had, the results of the popular vote would have been better for President Trump.
            Sanders bemoaned the fact that the Dems lost the blue collar and working class vote.
            Here’s an interesting look at the vote results.

          3. Bill P November 29, 2016

            You keep repeating the same old #’s, Trump lost the female vote overall. I haven’t called anyone anything except you and that’s you should be called mis-informed voter. Romney wasn’t running in this election so these comparisons are worthless, the only relevant comparison are Hillary to Trump. Your link to fix the nation offers an article that provides no proof of it opinion.
            As for Trump’s alleged mandate he margin of victory way below the winner’s average total – in 2012 the total EC vote was 332, in 2008 is was 365, 1992 was 370, 1988 was 426. These #’s along with Trump losing the popular vote are hardly historic, a mandate or a landslide. Of the past 54 elections Trump’s supposed landslide ranked 44th, hardly epic. I don’t remember either of President Obama’s victories being called a mandate either though his margins of victory were larger than Trump’s “yuge” one. Your Ca. comment is only an opinion and not one worth anything, he lost Ca by millions. It seems your idol has a very thin skin and can’t handle moderate criticism, what’s going to happen when he actually is going to have to govern and rely on facts not conjecture?

          4. InformedVoter November 29, 2016

            Comparing President Trump to Romney IS a valid comparison. It’s to see how President Trump did compared to the prior GOP candidate. The MSM has published comparisons between Obama and HilLIARy. These comparisons showed that HilLIARy did much worse than Obama and that President Trump did much better that Romney.
            HilLIARy won the popular vote largely because of CA. If you back out the 3 million illegal votes, then President Trump would have won the popular vote even counting CA.
            No matter, the electoral college is what matters. If the election was based on popular votes, then President Trump would have campaigned in CA and HilLIARy’s margin would have been far less.
            As it turns out, HilLIARy did campaign in the swing states and she lost just about all of them. Even Dominck V., who lives in Florida expressed disappointment over her lack luster performance in FL. In addition, HilLIARy had negative coat tails. The GOP captured even more seats and retained the Senate and the House. In 2018, the Dems will have to defend many more seats and the results could be a disaster for the Dems. Try this link and weep.

          5. Bill P November 30, 2016

            Your comment of ” If you back out the 3 million illegal votes, then President Trump would have won the popular vote even counting CA.” Where is the proof, the only source for this fabricated claim is Gregg Phillips who hasn’t shown any proof of his claim. You will believe any extreme right wing website without doing any research on your own. You are either very lazy or totally ignorant and misinformed. Try referencing something other than fake news websites.
            As for your claim that Hillary did much worse than Obama here are some #’s for you to ignore – Blacks – Hillary got 88%, Latino – 65%, Asian – Hillary got 65% and Women – 54%.

          6. InformedVoter November 30, 2016

            Yes, the numbers you posted are the numbers HilLIARy got. ALL these numbers are less than the numbers Obama got in both 2008 and 2012. Hence HilLIARy under performed. Meanwhile, President Trump got higher percentages from all these groups that either McCain or Romney. Thus, President Trump over performed. Why? Because the blue collar working class was fed up with Obama’s crap for policies. Mandate for President Trump 306-232.

          7. Bill P December 2, 2016

            Compared to Obama’s #’s Hillary’s are a bit lower but not the much worse amounts you claim, check the total popular vote cast for her. There is no president Trump just president-elect. Still waiting for your proof of “HilLIARy won the popular vote largely because of CA. If you back out the 3 million illegal votes, then President Trump would have won the popular vote even counting CA.” You make claims then shrivel up when asked to provide proof. Gregg Phillips has already stated he didn’t complete his alleged analysis so his illegal vote statement is baseless.

          8. InformedVoter December 2, 2016

            HilLIARy did far worse in all demographics than Obama and President Trump did better than Romney.

            Proof HilLIARy won popular vote because of CA? Are you daffy? What was her margin of victory in CA? Was it more than 2.5 million? Duh!

            Illegals were voting. There will be an investigation after January 20. On Jan 21: Obamacare – gone; Planned Parenthood – defunded; HilLIARy – charged. The list goes on and on.
            “Donald Trump is absolutely correct that large volumes of illegal votes were cast in the 2016 presidential race predominantly for Democrat candidates and illegal immigrants were brought across the borders to reinforce Obama and Hillary Clinton in these elections,” said William Gheen, president of ALIPAC. “Obama himself admitted on video to Spanish language audiences comprised of illegal immigrants that illegals would face no scrutiny or hindrances registering to vote and voting, both of which are felonies and deportable offenses. We will work hard to ensure that American voters are never faced with their votes being stolen and muted by foreign nationals again. Let the contentious and historic 2016 elections be remembered as the point where Americans secured our borders and ballots from illegal immigration!”
            Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/11/everything-you-need-to-know-about-election-recount/#Y0yzUp7p2gJZ39TI.99

          9. Bill P December 5, 2016

            Actually Trump got less votes than Romney and McCain, once again you show your lack of knowledge. Your claim that Hillary won the popular vote because Ca has changed , you left out your bogus 3 million illegal vote claim. Hillary vote Ca the most populous state in the country along with over 56 million other popular votes. You should get help for your delusions, The ACA will not be repealed, a number of red states are realizing that there are 100’s of thousands to millions getting health care through it. Charging Hillary will just be another waste of gov’t taxpayer money. You haven’t a pray with this. Try reading a real news site and stop using the fake news sites like wnd, infowars, breitbart, etc.

          10. InformedVoter December 6, 2016

            You should probably tell Paul Ryan that his plan to vote on Jan. 21 to junk the ACA isn’t happening. Sure, the repeal won’t be retroactive so 2017, only small changes. With the federal funds cut off, come 2018 and a new day will occur.
            As for HilLIARy, Obama will pardon her, BUT even his pardon will not keep the investigations going on the Clinton Foundation, as that is beyond the scope of Obama’s pardon.

          11. Bill P December 9, 2016

            You may be right that Ryan will attempt to repeal the ACA but he will definitely meet resistance from a number of Republican HoR members since the people in their states like having medical care coverage that they are getting under the ACA. Even if it gets through the House the Senate can filibuster the vote and stop it or have the Republican Sen McConnell will have to employ the nuclear option.

            According to a new poll taken by the Commonwealth Fund, people enrolled in ObamaCare are satisfied. And yes, that includes Republicans: Overall, 73 percent of people who bought health plans and 87 percent of those who signed up for Medicaid said they were somewhat or very satisfied with their new health insurance. Seventy-four percent of newly insured Republicans liked their plans. Even 77 percent of people who had insurance before — including members of the much-publicized group whose plans got canceled last year — were happy with their new coverage.

            As for Hillary getting pardoned by President Barack Hussein Obama she would have to be charged, tried and convicted before 1/20/2017 for President Barack Hussein Obama to be able to pardon Hillary. It’s not going to happen.

          12. InformedVoter December 9, 2016

            First off, you are wrong about the pardon. Ford pardoned Nixon, who was never charged with anything wrongdoing/
            You are also wrong about the popularity of the ACA. Almost two thirds (65%) are in favor of completely junking or major overhauling it.

          13. Bill P December 13, 2016

            You are right the president can pardon someone before they are charged wit a crime. It’s called a preemptive or anticipatory pardon. Ford did for Nixon, GHW Bush did it for Caspar Weinberger, Carter did it for Gordon Liddy and Nixon did it for Jimmy Hoffa. So there is a precedent for President Obama doing this if he chooses to.
            No it’s you would are incorrect about the popularity of the ACA – according to a Kaiser-Health poll the favorable rating is 43% and the unfavorable rating is 45% not 65% as you erroneously claim.

          14. InformedVoter December 13, 2016

            When will you learn? Of course there are polls like the ones you quote from, but these are the same polls that showed HilLIARy winning by double digit numbers, even on the morning of the election!
            To refresh your memory, you and your low information crowd chided and mocked me when I showed polls that had President Trump leading. The polls I have seen show the ACA with 65% wanting it repealed or with MAJOR overhaul. And that was before the new premiums were announced, and that many areas will now have only ONE insurance company to choose from.
            Once more, your inaccurate posts have been shredded.

          15. Bill P December 15, 2016

            So every poll is the same, gee that’s a real intelligent reply. Then again why would I expect anything different from a troll like you. So Kaiser-Health conducted presidential election polls, can you show me a link to them. You truly are delusional, you always cite extreme right wing fake news sites and their polls that are not based in reality. The Kaiser poll is as of the end of 11/2016, your alleged poll is prior to the election. I can always tell when you trolls have nothing, you claim victory without earning it.
            By the way where is the new Republican health care program that they keep promising. Ryan will come up with one in a few years, maybe.

      2. Zengo November 26, 2016


    3. Zengo November 26, 2016

      I love how the trolls who respond can’t even grasp the point you just made!

  2. VirtualPapy November 25, 2016

    Excellent analysis. Thanks!

  3. Daniel Jones November 25, 2016

    Right Brat News.

  4. Dominick Vila November 25, 2016

    There is a lot of truth in this article. Those that believe that calling alt-right members racists or fascists is going to make their targets consider what they embrace, have news coming. The idea that people flying the confederate flag as they drive their F-350s to the grocery store are going to be offended if someone calls them racists is nothing short of comical. Of course they are racist…and they are proud of it.
    The only ones who may reflect on what is happening, are moderate Republicans whose objectives are limited to fiscal, social, and foreign policy changes. Unfortunately, it is too late for them to reverse what they helped create, and condemnation is likely to force them to move to the more radical wing of their party, not because they agree with their agenda, but because of political survival.

    1. itsfun November 25, 2016

      The only times the right loses elections is when they start bowing to the left and don’t stick to the ideas and values that got them elected in the first place. While the left move farther and farther left, the more the right will get elected. I don’t like the idea that we are almost becoming 2 nations in one. The far left and the far right are so far apart, they will never find a place to meet in the middle. I believe the word moderate has disappeared from both parties. It is becoming all or none. I see the left as wanting more and more government and regulations. I see them as punishing success and seeing the world as they want it to be, and not as it is. I see the right as wanting less government and more individual successes. I see the right as seeing how the real world is realizing that some hate the US and always will. Look at a religion that says to kill all infidels, we are the infidels and those people won’t change to loving us for any reason. They have their religious beliefs and that won’t change. Calling someone a racist because of the vehicle they drive is completely senseless and just adds fuel to the fires of racism and the idiots rioting like a third world country because they lost an election. You are better then just giving people labels and name calling.

      1. A_Real_Einstein November 25, 2016

        The American public and yourself will be getting a full dose of fascism for the next 4 years. They are not going to like it once they realize what is happening. The civil war that has been brewing since the election of Obama is coming soon. We are watching the end of the American empire. Greed kills. Buy a gun and learn to swim. This is not going to end well.

  5. Wolfesgang November 25, 2016

    Yes, it’s about ‘naughtiness’, but the destructive variety. You can find it nowadays all across Russia, in their attitude toward the “West”. It originates from an absolutely huge inferiority complex, and is made up of pure hatred — despite the fact that they scramble to get their kids into Western schools and universities, and themselves into mansions along the Cote d’Azur. It’s basically the same anti-‘establishment’ hatred that has been driving fascists, populists and their ilk in Europe, as well as the “alt right” in the U.S. If Trump cuddles up to the Russians, they’ll see it with glee, but don’t you ever believe that their bottomless hatred will be satisfied.They (including Putin and his gang of KGB/FSB operatives) have nothing constructive to offer. If we ignore it, we will do so at our peril.

  6. Theodora30 November 25, 2016

    “Yes, what they’re doing is dangerous. Brats can gain enough power that you can no longer afford to call them brats. But we’re not there yet ………….”????
    They have the Executive Branch of our government in their control and there are quite a few of them in the legislative branch too. The fact that the FBI New York office has been using Breitbart’s Peter Schweitzer’s screed “Clinton Cash” to justify an investigation of the Clinton Foundation makes me think a significant number of them are “alt right”, too. And I doubt that General Michael Flynn is the only military guy who thinks like that.
    So I want to know just how much more power do they need to gain before you would say we can no longer afford to call them “brats”??

  7. Buford2k11 November 25, 2016

    Do NOT normalize these people…they are FUCKING NAZIs….

    1. dtgraham November 25, 2016

      Oh this is getting better and better.

      January 20th should be something. I hear the dress code for Trump’s inauguration is extremely formal. Black suits with hats and tall boots. White hoods optional. Alt-white meat on the menu.

      1. Zengo November 26, 2016

        I hear brown shirts are okay too

        1. dtgraham November 26, 2016

          Extremely inclusive of Trump. Lack of diversity…ha! Even Hitler eventually disposed of the brown shirt SA’s.

  8. Jon November 25, 2016

    It’s interesting how Russian propagandists coordinated efforts with these fairyland news sites. How many were collaborators and how many were useful idiots isn’t entirely clear. What is clear are the parallels and timing of the reports originating in Russia and those on pixie party sites for the not so bright like not so Breit Bart wannabe news. Whether treasonous or merely useful idiots, the low functioning people who believe the nonsense vomited by these bitter and failed school fantasy journalists have to be presented with the truth to counter the lies whenever possible.

  9. Joan November 25, 2016

    The author makes some good points and provides an explanation for, what to many of us, is the inexplicable. That being said, brat does convey the juvenile and selfish nature of the alt right; it does not convey the willfull, gleeful ignorance. It does not convey that these are adults acting like schoolyard bullies alternating with hizzy fits seldom seen outside of a nursery school. Can we come up with a descriptor that indicates that most of them deserve to have their mouths washed out with soap before being sent to their rooms with no dinner? Glad I could get that off my chest so that I can once agin practice being compassionate to the “bubble people”.


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.