Matt Walsh is developing a reputation for bad media takes. This time, Matt railed against violent video games by saying that, even if a person who plays a video game doesn’t commit a violent act, there’s still some part of their mind where they’d entertain such a fantasy.

Which sounds similar to another bad take he spilled out about anime.

By now, people are starting to figure out that Matt Walsh is more Conservative than Libertarian. And to those who are starting to figure out the difference between the two, that’s great, because that’s the kind of thing people need to know.

Matt Walsh is still problematic. For one thing, it’s already obvious that Matt doesn’t care for anime, and has no idea why anyone would. He also seldom plays video games, and can only guess what motivates anyone who plays them.

What Matt Walsh does is a great job of representing a brand of Conservatism that is insular and only grudgingly participates in culture, preferring instead to piss all over it when he can do so in a way that’s consistent with the image that he made for himself, which is akin to a stodgy old curmudgeon whose idea of entertainment is sipping an Old Fashioned while watching some non-interactive form of entertainment that’s so ancient that any surprise and every point of trivia has been thoroughly raped from it, leaving behind a desiccated film on the musty reel that hosts it.

Conversely, the left has no problem with making culture. The culture may be debased and a sad debauchery of what has already been established, but they still have no problem with making culture. And for their efforts, they now have an entire team of Avengers which, while they inspire no confidence, will parrot all the DEI talking points that the consultants lurking at Marvel and Disney would have them say.

Matt Walsh is out of touch and more willing to complain about culture than pull it in any particular direction. Unless you were to call Johnny the Walrus a sincere attempt to influence culture.

If you’ve been following along, you’d know my position when it comes to violence in entertainment media: that any depiction of violence in media that someone consumes does not indicate a sincere desire to act out the violent acts depicted. And even if the person did harbor such fantasies, I’d prefer that they keep it limited to their fantasies. I wouldn’t consider them guilty of a crime that they haven’t committed.

But if you disagree, then go ahead and call me a dragon slayer, because I’ve killed a bunch of those. And died a lot. But for that matter, can we talk about the time I saved spacetime by slaying a reality-devouring parasite? Or captured and cataloged over 1000 cryptids, and currently have living samples of each?

What’s that? That didn’t actually happen? Exactly. It’s just made-up stuff, and nothing to get worked up over.

But while we’re at it, let’s talk about the time I studied mountains of math and physics, and only ended up making slightly more per hour than someone at a nearby gas station.

As we consider culture, it helps to keep in mind that culture doesn’t form in a vacuum. Culture always forms in response to something. Aboriginal culture came about in a particular time and place, that is, recent Australia, which contrasts with the Inuits of northern Canada. Considering what these cultures are in response to, it should be obvious why these cultures would not be expected to continue in their new homes if the people were to swap geographies.

California has a particular culture in its densely-populated coastal areas, which came about as a consequence of a willingness to explore new paradigms, which they were more willing to do as the area became wealthy, in no small part due to the richness of the land and climate. Because of their wealth, it appeared as though the consequences of traditionally-unwise behaviors would be blunted, emboldening the people to continue in them. At the same time, relative ease allowed for people to become more creatively involved, and an industry grew in the midst of this.

Normally, the particulars of a culture would be localized, and thus any failures of that culture would be specific to the location in which the culture developed. However, because California has a far-reaching influence by reason of its tech and entertainment sectors, its culture has reached far beyond California’s coast. This allows for the consequences for the failures of its culture to be felt far outside its point of origin. Thus, there’s a new problem, which will result in a new culture that seeks to solve the problems caused by California culture.

One of humanity’s greatest attributes is the ability to adapt to changing circumstances, either over the long term through adaptation, or on an individual basis by reason of the plasticity of our minds.

Matt Walsh, however, is characterized by a certain rigidity of mind that makes him poorly suited to adapt to changing circumstances. This is a huge shortcoming, and contrasts with the real manly men throughout history who have been nimble, quick to adapt, and diligently sought solutions to problems.

The fact is, times are changing. While it’s true that humans are motivated by the same things they historically have been, the technology and the means available to them have changed, and those who insist on remaining in the past are likely to do just that.

But hey, perhaps Matt Walsh can change. I remember that my mom wasn’t fond of video games either, but she became more accepting of them when she saw that they didn’t negatively affect my grades, among other reasons.

As far as politics goes, Conservatives are not that great. Where one party insists upon radical change, the Conservatives are little more than the ones that mildly resists. Sure, they slow the other side’s agenda, but they can’t be counted on to reverse direction.

If Libertarians prove to be more proactive in their advocacy for limited government and personal freedoms, they’d be an excellent replacement to the Conservatives, who have largely proven themselves useless.