Hey Sarah, just curious. What about the article was “factually untrue?”
Braden East
22

To answer that question well would take hours. Here’s the thing about that. When it came out, the day after the election, it stung because Trentbro’s antithinking-thinking, was itself, precisely why dems lost the election. It encapsulated everything that is frightening about the alt left, and so it was popular among those who believe the Democratic party should align itself to precisely those people who screwed the pooch this election (they should not). So I immediately wanted (and should have) crafted a scathing rebuttal piece. I did not have the energy, because I spent about ten days after the election in tears. For the record, I wasn’t shocked, either. I had spent a solid year leading up to the election warning of the very real possibility of Trump’s win.

As Trent’s piece gathered momentum among the alt left, I waited for someone fully qualified to take him down. His statements were so egregiously false and so childish in the light of a much more complicated political reality, that surely someone would come along to take him to task. But when that didn’t happen, I suddenly realized why. Everyone qualified would no sooner spend their time on trentbro than they would take down a random YouTube troll making equally false proclamations. There are thousands of Trents out there, and you don’t send a lion to kill a pest. Medium is a small pond. Only someone within that pond will care enough to take him down. Some tried. Wil Wheaton tried valiantly but focused too much on Trentbro’s perceived failings as a person, rather than sticking to the falsehoods in the piece itself. This allowed Trentbro to respond with You don’t know me how dare you ad hominem blah blah. Which allowed Trentbro to ignore the better arguments therein against his piece, while he focused on his perceived victimization.

When I wrote this piece, I thought I would make a “Part 2" that delved into why Trentbro was not being factual, line by line. But it felt like indulging a troll precisely for the same reasons that fully qualified person I mentioned would ignore him, as the king of a small and deeply ignorant pond. When people comment on my writing, for instance, in general I respond to the ones that disagree well; the ones who make good arguments and demonstrate that they are trying. I do not respond to the others. Taking down Trentbro requires someone patient enough to spend a few hours explaining the obvious, to a group of children who just got into politics. I might still do it, but if I do so, I will most likely go after that bigger fish — the problem with the thinking and tactics of the alt left itself, not one of their many tiresome false prophets.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.