By John Q. Hosedrinker 
At a Turning Point USA event at the University of Mississippi, J.D. Vance was questioned by a supporter about potential abuses of power, specifically regarding the deployment of the National Guard. The fan expressed concern over how such actions could be used by a future “tyrant” against right-wing protests. Vance responded by stating it’s essential not to refrain from actions due to fear of the left’s potential misuse, as he believes the left will act regardless. He referenced the actions of a hypothetical Joe Biden administration.
Read the original article here
Teen MAGA superfan… the very phrase raises eyebrows, doesn’t it? It immediately conjures images of a young person deeply entrenched in a political ideology, a situation that often carries a certain unease. Thinking about the potential for indoctrination is what stands out. The idea of children, so impressionable and still developing their own perspectives, being fed a specific narrative – it’s concerning, especially when that narrative appears to promote views that are, at best, divisive and, at worst, harmful. It makes me question the motives of the adults involved.
One particularly disturbing aspect is the apparent justification of potentially harmful actions by pointing fingers at the “other side.” This is a classic example of what’s known as “accusation in an mirror,” a rhetorical tactic designed to deflect criticism and paint opponents in a negative light. The core of this strategy lies in suggesting that the “other side” is already planning or executing the same undesirable actions. If the other side hasn’t done it and isn’t doing it, it’s just a tactic to divert attention from whatever you are actually doing.
The conversation between the teen MAGA superfan and J.D. Vance highlighted this very problem. The superfan’s question, essentially, was about the potential for future political overreach by the left. Vance’s response, however, seemed to sidestep the actual issue and, instead, embrace the idea that conservatives should not be afraid to do something because the left might do it later. This is a very disturbing way of thinking. It’s a justification for preemptive action, even if that action is itself questionable.
This type of thinking is not only flawed in logic, but also inherently dangerous. It suggests that morality and ethical considerations are secondary to the goal of political dominance. The idea of doing something because “they might” is the same rationale used to justify violations of civil liberties. It is a dangerous path.
The kid seems to be at a stage where the seeds of doubt could be planted. He seems to be starting to question the idea of whether the actions of those he supports really make sense as a way toward a better world, or if they’re merely those born of greed and lust for power. This critical self-reflection is essential for any young person.
The response from Vance is the key point in the whole situation. It is essentially an admission that the current actions are indeed questionable but are justifiable because of the actions of the “other side.” This is a classic whataboutism, a way of deflecting criticism by changing the subject to a perceived wrongdoing by someone else. The argument isn’t a defense of the action, but just a whataboutism. Nice!
One of the more unsettling aspects of the whole situation is the normalization of the “other side” boogeyman. The claim that the left “is already going to do it, regardless of whether we do it” plays on people’s fears.
The irony here is almost too much to bear. The teenager, wearing a freedom shirt, raises concerns about potential tyranny. This is where the core problem is – the lack of critical thinking. The failure to apply the same standards to both sides of the political spectrum, the tendency to view the world through a lens of fear and suspicion, and the willingness to accept justifications for actions that undermine the very values they claim to uphold – it is a recipe for disaster.
The situation is a testament to the power of indoctrination. It’s a wake-up call, a reminder that the stakes are high, and that we must remain vigilant in our defense of truth, reason, and ethical behavior.