GAMERS RISE UP

A while ago, I was engaged in a familiar morning ritual – drowning in a mixed-gender harem of proletariat nymphomaniacs, then grabbing a cup of delicious cafeteria coffee and checking The Morning Watch for content. To my surprise, I found a new opinion piece written by one Joseph Gendron entitled “An Open Letter to the New Religion of Intersectionality”. With this piece, Gendron has filled an important need for The Morning Watch – a true manifesto. While there is a mission statement on their website, it reads like ad copy, and as we’ve tried to show through our first set of articles, the pursuit of truth tends to elude them. I feel that this article is a truer expression of the mind of the young conservative found at The Morning Watch. This is conservatism for the TikTok Age, an expression of a group victimized by a huge leftist mob despite everyone around them being conservative.  

The genesis for this manifesto is the incident at the recent March for Life in Washington D.C. involving students from Covington Catholic High School and a Native American man named Nathan Phillips. An image showing a student named Nick Sandmann staring at Phillips with a large smirk on his face was distributed widely and critiqued, both on social media and major network news. Sandmann was wearing a MAGA hat and was in front of many classmates similarly decked out in Trump gear. Gendron appears to think that because there were many conservatives and one non-conservative in that picture, that logic applies to all of Gen Z.

The most recent survey I can find of Gen Z’s political leanings shows Gen Z is especially liberal on social issues. This is important, because Gendron’s sole reason for feeling that they are conservative are hot-button cultural issues for extremely young conservatives – namely, the “censorship” of certain media figures by “leftist media” such as CNN and the Wall Street Journal. As a leftist, I feel completely exposed by this allegation. How did Gendron find out we had taken over the Wall Street Journal? We were trying to keep that one a secret by publishing 3 articles a week about how to more effectively abolish unions!

Anyway, here’s the cultural icons and touchstones of Gen Z that Gendron notes were censored by mainstream media:

  • Joe Rogan, who as of this writing has one of the ten most popular podcasts on iTunes.
  • PewDiePie, who has the most subscribers on YouTube outside of YouTube’s generic “Music” channel.
  • Kevin Hart, who lost his Oscars hosting gig but is still one of the most bankable comedy stars on the planet.
  • “Gamers”, a large group of people who are difficult to define outside of their shared hobby, but who have definitely not gone away since they were “targeted”.

It sounds like none of these people were censored. Kevin Hart lost his gig hosting the Oscars, but who wants to do that? If anything else, he got released from a job that ensured a status as an old man’s comedian. How much Gen Z appeal does Billy Crystal have? PewDiePie’s “persecution” by the Wall Street Journal for various racial controversies probably increased his cultural relevance by giving him exposure to an older audience (shame he couldn’t stop having “heated gaming moments” though). Joe Rogan’s podcast numbers will probably be fine regardless of who cancels him on Twitter. The most that any of these people have received is a slap on the wrist from the media, a kind of halfhearted “uhh this person did a racism I guess”. If this constitutes censorship, then I guess this article is censoring The Morning Watch and I feel better for writing it.

Joseph Gendron, having been officially censored by me, has nothing else to say in his article.

– K. Sins & B. Bunny

Climate Change Deniers are Munted

Munted:

(1) adj. refers to the property of an object (or person) as broken, ruined, significantly damaged, disfigured or deformed, often to the extent that it is not reversible or repairable.

(2) adj. an extreme state of intoxication by way of drugs or alcohol such that the subject’s ability to perform basic tasks such as walking and talking are significantly impaired.

Source: Urban Dictionary

Have you ever met someone so munted they adamantly deny the earth’s climate is changing? They tend to justify this with arguments such as:

  • Winter still exists
  • New York isn’t underwater, so it can’t be happening
  • Even if it were, only yuppie-liberal “intellectuals” would die so it’s not that bad
  • Sun cycles

Or possibly:

  • The earth is only 5000 years old, so your “science” is bullshit

If these arguments grind your gears as much as mine, then prepare to lube up.

I know that it feels about as difficult to reason with climate change deniers as it is to get turned on by someone wearing a Nixon mask, but the editors of The Evening Look are here to help. With bleeding edge techniques tested on our interns, we’ve discovered a slew of effective means by which to explain climate change to “independently minded folks,” aka “Head-asses.”

1. Take a statistics class

If your friend uses the argument that “it still gets cold in Michigan so how could the globe be getting warmer,” then I would strongly advise them to take a stats class. Within the first week or so they should learn about the concept of averages, assuming they don’t drop the class due to the syllabus being too hard. It is by learning this concept that your friend will hopefully realize that, if you take the aggregate of all temperatures on the globe, we can still have equally cold winters in Michigan while Indonesia increases in temperature causing the entire globe to warm.

Alternatively, if the concept of averages is too galaxy-brain for them, you can just start using the term “climate change” while they’re trying to figure out standard deviations and hope it confuses the fuck out of them. This is easily the most entertaining option.

2. Teach them about the diversity of New York

Many climate change deniers are those blessed to live in “Real America” (the middle of fucking nowhere), so the concept of a coast seems foreign and scary to them. Thus, they willingly believe the false narrative that the coasts are hedonistic orgies of liberals and Jews on Broadway. Now I am blessed to live in New York and, while all the above is true, I am ashamed to say that there are in fact degenerates in this city. If you start educating your friend about the glorious bastion of backwards-thinking that is Staten Island you may find them gaining a little sympathy for the East Coast and maybe making a couple friends. They may also be marginally more willing to fear rising sea levels, given that Staten island is probably going to be the first part of NYC to go. (Thank God)

3. Astronomy

Yes, I must admit that I had to ask my STEM-major friends about this one, but at least I checked with a reliable source unlike most deniers would. The sun does in fact have cyclical patterns of increased and decreased sunspot quantity, but the conclusion that sun cycles are causing our current warming is not only false but reveals that the skeptics do in fact believe that the earth is currently warming. The problem with this is that the current sunspot trends are showing a decline in activity, while the earth is still as hot as Ryan Gosling. If the deniers made it past averages in their statistics class, then they might be familiar with the concept of correlation, which hopefully means they should see that the solar cycles and global warming are not correlated and thus this argument is munted as hell. It’s so bad that scientists at Stanford had to dispel repeated miscalculations of data to show that “the apparent strong correlations displayed on these graphs have been obtained by incorrect handling of the physical data” (Damon, Laut 2004). Case fucking closed.

4. BuT tHe BiBlE saYs sO

The earth is not 6000 years old. So help me God if I hear one more “biblically literate” fuck cite this as “proof” that modern earth science is bullshit I will mount a new crusade. Given the thousands of years of archeological evidence, million-year-old fossils, and the billion years of geological data we have, the earth is definitely NOT 6000 years old, and Adam and Eve definitely WERE monkeys. To those who still feel that their opinions are stronger than hurricane Harvey: even if the earth was only 600 years old, we’d still have fucked it up so bad due to our ancestors undying addiction to gasoline and cows. I honestly don’t know how to convince someone who believes in this to do otherwise, as that might only be achieved through non-consensual CTE.

In conclusion, the excuses for ignoring the slow death of our earth stem from the common root of attempting to justify the past instead of looking at the here and now or *gasp* looking toward the future. The fact of the matter is that the earth is dying and it’s our fault. We will also be one of the first species to go in the long run, so fixing this is wholly in our best interest. If convincing non-believers of this fact was as simple as enrolling them in a stats class and taking them on a trip to Staten Island, then we would be in a much better situation right now.

I am excited to live in a world where significant number of people across the aisle recognize the importance of stopping climate change, but there still remain certain individuals who are too blinded by ego, religion or money to see the truth. This is a problem. What we need in these times is to have enough character to take ownership of what we’ve done and have the courage to move forward together to fix this. Debates may be had on how to go about this process but should never be had on why.

– B. Bunny

My citation because I am competent:

Damon, Paul E., and Peter Laut. “Pattern of Strange Errors Plagues Solar Activity and Terrestrial Climate Data.” Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union 85, no. 39 (September 2004): 370-74. doi:10.1029/2004eo390005.

Take “The Watchdog” Out Back

My new favorite output from The Morning Watch is “The Watchdog,” a bizarre new series focused on going to minority-themed events and asking stupid questions. Host Sergei Kelley has released two episodes, each of which fits squarely in The Morning Watch’s confusing canon.

The first episode sees Kelley traveling to a February 2 “Black Empowerment Festival” held by the Black Student Alliance and the African-American Student Mentorship Program. As the episode’s description puts it, “The new series ‘The Watchdog,’ asked multiple attendees of the event multiple questions,” proving that Kelley and Co. understand the basic idea of interviews but fail to grasp how a goddamn comma works. Those multiple questions elicited “mixed opinions,” according to Kelley; “one interviewee thought that the current presidential administration was a benefit to black empowerment,” he writes.

Here’s what that attendee actually said:

“Yes. Because I think—because this is such a polarizing time, and at this moment you can really see how people think. And people are being very bold and truly expressing how they feel. And as soon as we can get everyone being honest about how they feel, whether their views are ‘problematic,’ or whether they’re radical, we can, like, finally address the problems that are there for what they are.”

At least we know who the racists are, in essence. That’s a nuanced take. But it’s a far cry from simply portraying the attendee as thinking Trump is a boon to black empowerment, and it’s not fair to say that the opinions at the event were therefore mixed. If that opinion was the closest one to a “yes” that Kelley could get, that should tell him a good deal about the relationship between the African-American community and the President’s base.

The Watchdog followed up this ham-fisted attempt at hard-hitting journalism with a second episode, this time turning Kelley’s watchful eye toward the North American Indigenous Student Organization’s February 23 Native American Pow-wow. Worry not, Kelley is quick to assure us that “attendees of the event were asked multiple questions.” So that’s good.

This awkward minute-and-a-half features Kelley asking three white people and one Native American what “some of the problems are facing the indigenous community today.” The first three say they aren’t sure, and the indigenous man gives a thought-provoking answer about the isolation of indigenous communities in the North. Is it possible that the one of the problems facing the indigenous community is widespread ignorance by white people? Uh, yeah, probably. You know what doesn’t remotely solve that? Asking three white people that question at a Native American Pow-wow! Way to squander an actual opportunity for education.

Speaking of a need for education, Kelley asks a young man to define “Native American,” to which the interviewee apparently responds, “I don’t know what that is.” Bullshit. I refuse to believe that this kid has just never heard of Native Americans. But assuming for a second that the clip isn’t selectively and deceptively edited, The Watchdog/The Morning Watch has a journalistic responsibility to release the full clip of Kelley’s interview with that person. If you’re going to make him look like a dumbass—which you did—then you better do it fairly.

Having stomached exactly as much of this series as I could take, I was relieved to find there were no more episodes to watch. But I fear there will be more. So I am calling on MSU’s conservative voice to better itself. The Morning Watch should either improve the quality of The Watchdog (and replace its shitty PowerPoint logo) or else give this fucker the “Old Yeller” treatment.

– N. Credulous (Guest Contributor)