There is nothing hugely constructive about watching Tucker Carlson get owned by a Dutch historian to the point that the Bowtie-American starts screaming insults at the academic and ultimately refuses to air the interview. In these perilous times, however, you've got to enjoy the things you can.

It will not solve many problems, unless it convinces a few of Carlson's devoted viewers that they are being sold snake oil every night and they decide to stop buying it. Because that is what Rutger Bregman ultimately exposed in Carlson: that he is, in the historian's words, "a millionaire funded by billionaires," tasked—along with the other talking heads of Fox News—with protecting the political and economic structure of the status quo while distracting the audience with propaganda that demonizes immigrants as criminals and liberals as kooky zealots who are destroying The America You Know and Love.

Sometimes, like the president he pretends it is not his job to support, Carlson adopts the aesthetics of "populism," where he bills himself as looking out for the common man against the powerful global interests represented at, say, Davos. That's where Carlson caught wind of Bregman, who spoke the truth to billionaire faces at the conference: that they simply need to stop dodging their taxes and pay more. Carlson thought Bregman would come on and pretend that he, Tucker Carlson, is not an instrument of that same order who moonlights as a Man of the People. That is not how things went.

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

Watch Fox News host Tucker Carlson call one of his guests a 'tiny brain...moron' during an interview. NowThis has obtained the full segment with historian Rutger Bregman that Fox News is refusing to air. pic.twitter.com/kERYPUaGLY — NowThis (@nowthisnews) February 20, 2019

Here is the real jam session:

BREGMAN: So I think the issue really is one of corruption, and of people being bribed, and of not being—not talking about the real issues. What the family—what the Murdoch family basically want you to do is to scapegoat immigrants instead of talking about tax avoidance. So I'm glad you're now finally raising the issue, but that's what's been happening for the last couple of years.

CARLSON: Uh huh. And I'm taking orders from the Murdochs, that's what you're saying?

BREGMAN: No, it doesn't work that directly. But I mean, you've been part of the Cato Institute, right? You've been a senior fellow there for years? You've been taking their dirty money—

CARLSON: Well, how does it work?

BREGMAN: They're funded by Koch billionaires, you know?

CARLSON: Wait, why don't you tell me how it does work?

BREGMAN: Well, it works by you taking their dirty money, it's as simple as that. You are a millionaire funded by billionaires, that's what you are.

And there it is. This is a thing of beauty. It brings to mind Andrew Gillum's simple destruction of Ron DeSantis at a Florida gubernatorial debate—one which, incredibly, did not prevent DeSantis from getting elected. The video, which Bregman was clever enough to have recorded on his end knowing Carlson might spike it, was published today by NowThis. (Carlson's producer said they "respect our audience's time too much to consider airing it.") Anyway, Bregman finished the job on Twitter today:

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

2/ I stand behind what I said, but there’s one thing I should have done better. When Carlson asked me how he’s being influenced by Big Business and tax-avoiding billionaires, I should have quoted Noam Chomsky. — Rutger Bregman (@rcbregman) February 20, 2019

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

3/ Years ago, when he was asked a similar question, Chomsky replied: ‘I’m sure you believe everything you’re saying. But what I’m saying is that if you believe something different, you wouldn’t be sitting where you’re sitting.’ — Rutger Bregman (@rcbregman) February 20, 2019

Carlson is no disruptor of the status quo. But lately, he is constantly reinventing himself to adopt the aesthetics of anti-establishment movements. He was a Bowtie Debate Team Conservative for most of his career, a reflection of his silver-spoon roots. But then he was suddenly a Trumpist "populist" spouting anti-immigrant propaganda on Fox News. That earned him rave reviews from the Daily Stormer, the neo-Nazi site that called him "literally our greatest ally." Now he can suddenly be found in Salon talking about putting labor before capital and insisting he loves Jacobin, a leftist publication. Maybe he really is evolving all the time. Certainly, he's getting paid all the time.

Update (2/21/19): Carlson promised on Twitter Wednesday night to address the incident, but it appears he did not do so on Tucker Carlson Tonight. A Fox News spokesperson who emailed a clip where Carlson does respond to the episode confirmed it did not air on Fox News and was only posted online. Here's the response:

This content is imported from YouTube. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

Similar to the original clip, Carlson suggested "it's not clear that Bregman has ever seen Fox," despite the existence of the Internet—where this clip was posted. He then said it was "too much" for Bregman to suggest his "corporate masters" tell him what to say on the show. Bregman specifically said it did not work so directly. Then Carlson said that once he, Carlson, had used a vulgar word—fuck—"there was no airing the segment." Obviously, it could have been bleeped or edited out.

Clearly, Carlson is not interested in his TV viewers knowing about the interview, which is why he once again did not mention it on-air. The Fox News spokesperson provided the following statement from Justin Wells, the senior executive producer on the show, explaining why the response clip did not air. It appears to be the exact same statement the network issued when Bregman first tweeted about the unaired interview:

“Tucker is someone who appreciates many points of view. Sadly, the guest turned an opportunity to have a substantive, informative discussion into an obviously calculated personal insult campaign. We were disappointed in the segment and respect our audience’s time too much to consider airing it.”

Jack Holmes Politics Editor Jack Holmes is the Politics Editor at Esquire, where he writes daily and edits the Politics Blog with Charles P Pierce.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io