Profit beats wokeness, GOP’s Trump focus could backfire and other commentary


Culture critic: Profit Beats Wokeness

Outside coders got denounced for removing Pride flags from a new Spider-Man video game — yet they’d only allowed US users to use an international version created by the “game developers themselves . . . in order to sell it to a wider audience” around the world, snarks Malcolm Kyeyune at Compact. Yet “the media storm . . . focused entirely on the morality of the modders.” The developers simply “wanted to sell the game in the Middle East, China, and other parts of the world where Pride flags wouldn’t be tolerated” (though “to say that openly is to grab the third rail with both hands”). Yes, “progressives are now seen on the right as a completely hegemonic force, drunk on power, knowing no moderation,” but “deference to the bottom line is a defining feature of the culture war.”

Libertarian: The ACLU vs. Free Speech

The American Civil Liberties Union appalls Scott Shackford at Reason with a new amicus brief “defending the authority of the state of Colorado to make a small web company host pictures of gay weddings.” Indeed, “the ACLU repeatedly treats refusing to host a particular image or message (a gay wedding) as discrimination against an individual or couple (a gay person or couple)” — when it’s “obviously not the same thing.” This “is an embarrassingly bad brief by the ACLU,” one that turns “its back on decades of protecting citizens against authoritarian demands.”

Elex watch: NY Dems’ Gerrymander Disaster

“With unified control of Albany during a redistricting cycle,” notes Jim Newell at Slate, New York Democrats “drew the House gerrymander of their dreams” that “protected each Democratic incumbent while giving several Republicans the boot.” This “would’ve secured Democrats 22 seats in the state to only four for Republicans — and could have wiped out Republicans’ overall national redistricting advantage.” But in April, a court tossed that map “as a violation of the state constitution’s ban against partisan gerrymandering” and a court-appointed special master then drew new lines where “Republicans could actually boost their numbers in New York by a couple of seats” and “created havoc among Democratic incumbents trying to keep their seats.” Key takeaway: “State constitutions are a pesky thing.”

Foreign desk: Six Months of Surprises

Six months into Russia’s Ukraine invasion, UkraineAlert’s Melinda Haring considers the “biggest surprises,” starting with the “utter failure of the international system to restrain Russia”: “Diplomacy failed, US threats flopped.” Then came the “sheer brutality of the Russian army toward ‘brotherly’ Ukrainians,” with “mass rape, torture and killing of civilians.” It’s jolting, indeed, “how little Moscow understands modern Ukraine,” thinking “Ukrainians would be glad to accept new leaders.” Russia’s war “will be long and drawn out,” with its outcome depending “on how long the West will sustain the effort with weapons and financial support. It all hinges on public opinion.” That’s why Team Biden’s “failure to communicate what the war is really about” is so bewildering. “Dashing off an op-ed for elites in the New York Times” just “isn’t enough.”

Strategist: GOP Focus on Trump Could Backfire

“While the GOP may benefit from increased turnout in 2022” thanks to the FBI’s search of Donald Trump’s home, “in the long run, the party’s continuing focus on Trump’s grievances . . . could be detrimental to their future political viability,” warns Douglas E. Schoen at The Hill. While Trump has been “politically resuscitated” by the raid of Mar-a-Lago, the party’s response to the search “isolates swing voters, Independents and moderate ‘never-Trump’ Republicans, who are concerned about addressing the challenges of today and, frankly, are eager to put Trump behind them.” The GOP’s “best path to remaining politically viable in the long-term” is to focus on “fiscal prudence, lowering taxes, increasing public safety, strengthening our Southern border, promoting individual liberties and empowering parents to have more control over their child’s education.”

Compiled by The Post Editorial Board


Source link

Comments are closed.