→ Michel Houellebecq: I don’t care about Ukraine
Michel Houellebecq has been accused of many things: pornography (of both the literary and the literal kind), misogyny, Islamophobia, and — most damagingly for him, perhaps — banality. Now the French writer has revealed another stick with which his critics can beat him: Ukraine realism.
Michel Houellebecq: ‘People who have humanitarian ideas are a catastrophe’ https://t.co/yfLkkRmqgE
— Financial Times (@FT) September 13, 2024
In a new interview with the Financial Times, the author of Atomised and Submission also reaffirmed the support for Donald Trump he previously expressed in a 2019 essay. “Trump won’t start wars,” Houellebecq told the FT, adding that it would be “good” if the Republican candidate stopped supporting Ukraine once in office. “What do I care?” he responded when told that Ukrainians want to liberate their own territory. “At the start of the war, I was surprised because I thought Ukraine was Russian. It’s better for nature to take its course.” This is followed by a Houellebecquian bon mot: “People who have humanitarian ideas are a catastrophe.” Nihilistic as ever…
→ Young women more liberal than ever — survey
The political opinions of American women have become significantly more liberal since the turn of the century, especially in relation to men. New analysis from Gallup has looked at surveys from the period and found that from 2017-2024 an average of 40% of young women identified as liberal, 15 points higher than young men. This is compared to the years 2001-2007, when an average of 28% of women aged 18-29 identified as liberal, only three percentage points higher than young men. Meanwhile, young men’s views have been much closer to moderates’ than to liberals’ views over the same period.
Since the beginning of Donald Trump’s presidency, young women have been: 16 points more likely to support stricter gun laws, 20 points more likely to say human activity causes global warming and 19 points more likely to choose protection of the environment over economic growth. All good news for Kamala Harris…
→ Antiracist leaders respond to Matt Walsh mockumentary
America’s leading antiracist thinkers have finally spoken out against Matt Walsh’s documentary Am I Racist?
The conservative commentator, cloaked in wire-rimmed spectacles and a man-bun wig, infiltrated one of Saira Rao and Regina Jackson’s famous dinner parties, during which they berate white women and accuse them of racism over Chardonnay. He also scored an interview with White Fragility author Robin DiAngelo, at one point successfully convincing her to give some of her own money to a black producer on the film as a form of reparations.
Many on the Left are criticizing the tactics we used to make our film. Notice how they made no such criticisms about Borat. The difference is that Borat was meant to embarrass normal working class Americans. Our film embarrasses DEI grifters, academics, and upper class liberals.
— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) September 13, 2024
DiAngelo has come out with a statement explaining how the Daily Wire spent thousands of dollars duping her into the interview, and said the documentary was “designed to humiliate and discredit anti-racist educators and activists”. Rao called the movie “Nazi shit” during a recent call co-hosted with Jackson. Rao and DiAngelo have both nuked their X accounts as well. Surely all press is good press.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe