Taibibi is good at resonating when you are predisposed to agree with him. Mostly because he is good at finding funny sounding insulting but still right below line sentence.
He is good at emotional level, but less good with actual rational arguing.
He is good at emotional level, but less good with actual rational arguing.
Also, lol at the very same circular reasoning the above mentioned whereby agreeing with his ideas is wrong because the people his ideas attract are already wrong.
The only one that I think he really really should not write was one about civility and discourse.
And I am not asking for statistical analysis either. All I am saying is he resonates with those who agree with him, because his whole thing is insulting common ennemy while being funny.
I think this is a fair point. I’ve noticed this myself as someone who agrees with him. He’s clearly a talented writer; I wish he would wed that talent with reasoned critique instead of being a mere cathartic voice. The primacy of catharsis is a distinguishing feature of cancel culture and moderates getting their own cathartic voices risks creating a moderate counter-mob. Moderates’ strength is reason and tolerance and we should stick with those virtues even if it demands emotional strength and moral courage.
That's what "resonates" means. I agree though that he's putting words to collective frustrations and not arguing in a persuasive form. I wish he did more of the latter, but nevertheless, this excerpt resonated for me.