I just gore the right ox, is the way I usually put it. That’s what I usually say when people write to me, indignant and passionate, to tell me that they’ve canceled their subscriptions. They will frequently rattle off a list of things they liked about me, principally independence or a synonym of it. Sometimes they say “I thought you were independent/heterodox/iconoclastic” etc. This might be because I believe, to pick an example, that the verdict against Amber Heard was a disaster for free speech, or because I think a negotiated settlement is the only way to avert catastrophe in Ukraine, or because I defend the rights and identities of trans people. These are all, you will notice, opinions that are more consonant with regular left politics than with what is now frequently called “heterodoxy.” Many of my readers are lefties who endorse these values, despite what some in media will tell you; many read me because they value the architecture of my mind and my command of my instrument as a writer. But yes, a meaningful portion of my readership hates the righteousness of the social justice approach to left-wing politics and pays me to scourge it.
What a terribly boring world it would be if everyone agreed with you. You would never be surprised, for one thing, unless it was something like a raccoon lunging at you from a trash can.
People who cancel a subscription because a writer produces a piece they disagree with are looking for affirmation, not intellectual stimulation. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
What fun is it to only hear from those with whom you agree? I enjoy pushing back in comments when I disagree and hope the expressions of opposition maybe change a mind or two. Alternatively they provide a largely unfiltered sounding board and maybe my mind gets changed. When did debate and argument change from a celebration of articulate to getting you branded a hater?
For some, whether support for Israel vs. Palestine is establishment or not is less tied to actual power (e.g. American support, Wall Street support, Hollywood support) and more to what feels ascendant in the cultural spheres they truly care about. It directly parallels conservative grievances about feeling marginalized and disrespected despite holding a commanding win-loss record vs. their opponents when it comes to actual policies, litigation, funding, etc. Yeah, but who gets more likes on IG and TikTok?
The risk is being reflexively contrarian. And/or the leftist resistance to the idea that any minority group can be the primary author of their own misfortune.
Freddie, I subscribe to you precisely because I don't always agree with you. What's the point in only reading people who agree with me? What would I learn from that?
I disagree with you on Israel and particularly on some of your posts regarding private vs.public school and wealthy New Yorkers where I think you don't have the necessary domain experience. But when it comes to perfect symmetry of belief between me and another, I always think of the Ed Koch quote below.
"If you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, see a psychiatrist."
I think this intervention and your earlier statement were useful interventions into a fraught and toxic discourse produced by intolerable and dehumanizing events. I hope you stay the course and stay afloat, however incomprehensible I find some of your political commitments.
I'll admit it: I originally signed up for your newsletter because you go after social justice yellers better than anyone.
But I stuck around because I like a lot of your other pieces too. Your writing on mental health, your thoughts on various movies and shows, your thoughts on education, etc.
Variety is the spice of life. Newsletters that write ONLY anti-woke bangers and nothing else get both unhinged and kinda boring at the same time. We've all seen it.
"I don’t know of a historical figure who really would satisfy the concept of true moral independence, genuine rejection of all convention and conformity. Maybe GG Allin."
Are you sure you wouldn't rather be a cat?
And Bari Weiss was all in favor of cancelling critics of Israel. It was only when the cancel gun got used on her that she decided she didn't like it so much then.
your on your own in these comments, if someone violates the Substack terms of service, report it to them
Whatever Freddie. Doctrinaire Marxist antisemitism is hard to get rid of.
What a terribly boring world it would be if everyone agreed with you. You would never be surprised, for one thing, unless it was something like a raccoon lunging at you from a trash can.
People who cancel a subscription because a writer produces a piece they disagree with are looking for affirmation, not intellectual stimulation. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
What fun is it to only hear from those with whom you agree? I enjoy pushing back in comments when I disagree and hope the expressions of opposition maybe change a mind or two. Alternatively they provide a largely unfiltered sounding board and maybe my mind gets changed. When did debate and argument change from a celebration of articulate to getting you branded a hater?
For some, whether support for Israel vs. Palestine is establishment or not is less tied to actual power (e.g. American support, Wall Street support, Hollywood support) and more to what feels ascendant in the cultural spheres they truly care about. It directly parallels conservative grievances about feeling marginalized and disrespected despite holding a commanding win-loss record vs. their opponents when it comes to actual policies, litigation, funding, etc. Yeah, but who gets more likes on IG and TikTok?
The risk is being reflexively contrarian. And/or the leftist resistance to the idea that any minority group can be the primary author of their own misfortune.
If you can't handle Freddie at his punching right, you can't have him at his punching left
Freddie, I subscribe to you precisely because I don't always agree with you. What's the point in only reading people who agree with me? What would I learn from that?
What % of your subscribers who are complaining discovered you because of your initial appearance on Bari's podcast?
I disagree with you on Israel and particularly on some of your posts regarding private vs.public school and wealthy New Yorkers where I think you don't have the necessary domain experience. But when it comes to perfect symmetry of belief between me and another, I always think of the Ed Koch quote below.
"If you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, see a psychiatrist."
robertsdavidn.substack.com/about (No Paywall)
I think this intervention and your earlier statement were useful interventions into a fraught and toxic discourse produced by intolerable and dehumanizing events. I hope you stay the course and stay afloat, however incomprehensible I find some of your political commitments.
I'll admit it: I originally signed up for your newsletter because you go after social justice yellers better than anyone.
But I stuck around because I like a lot of your other pieces too. Your writing on mental health, your thoughts on various movies and shows, your thoughts on education, etc.
Variety is the spice of life. Newsletters that write ONLY anti-woke bangers and nothing else get both unhinged and kinda boring at the same time. We've all seen it.
You do you, boo.
"I don’t know of a historical figure who really would satisfy the concept of true moral independence, genuine rejection of all convention and conformity. Maybe GG Allin."
Are you sure you wouldn't rather be a cat?
And Bari Weiss was all in favor of cancelling critics of Israel. It was only when the cancel gun got used on her that she decided she didn't like it so much then.