I wonder what Candace Owens would have to say about this. Would she find a justifying argument.
I really like her and I watch her a lot - but I actually think she probably would. The one Tate die hards throw around in those cases is that he's purposefully saying controversial stuff to stir the pot, because that's how you get internet famous. So he's just playing the game by its rules.
I have to admit that I remain impressed with the speed and creativity with which these lot come up with a cover story. He doesn't even need to lift a finger, they'll do that for him.
Yet again I'm reminded of the types of denial listed in The Wave:
- Literal denial: "no, it didn't happen"
- Interpretative denial: facts are not denied - but interpreted or rationalised
- Implicatory denial: there's no attempt to deny the facts or their interpretation. What is denied is the psychological, political or moral implications that follow.
As for Candace, I bumped into the below short earlier today. For those who don't have Instagram and can't view it, she talks about not being able to fully trust Elon Musk because little is known of his views. She explains that, as a Catholic conservative, his support for transhumanism conflicts with her values. Additionally, she finds his personal life - having 13 children with multiple women - raises questions about his values and morality.
Seriously? She really can't see the similarities between Elon and Tate in that respect? At least Musk has never been accused by any of his baby mamas (or a government body) of abuse, rape, violence, or sex trafficking. I can understand having sacred cows, but dang girl

This is from a few days ago:

Last edited: