I don’t believe for a minute that Tucker got fired because of all the corporate intrigue and his strong opinions. He got terminated because he pushed the limits of the “pain – change” continuum,” which postulates that the pain inflicted on an audience, must be balanced with a proposed change that offers the possibility of some relief. Tucker’s positions, and brutally honest analyses may (depending upon your politics) have some intellectual validity and can be woven, at times, into arguments for the moral and ethical bankruptcy of our current leadership, across the board.
The problem was his relentlessness in creating a contemporary (and future) feeling of hopelessness – that anything could change. When all you do is inflict pain, you overwhelm people’s ability to manage their feelings, and want to continue to engage with the culture.
Given this dilemma, people are left with two choices: 1.) Disengage from your culture; or 2.) Eliminate the messenger.
In these last few months, I have heard from an increasing number of clear-headed, balanced critics of our society, that even they have “had enough” and they have been looking for alternatives to Tucker. I see his situation as sad. Like a number of very bright, incisive, and articulate thinkers, I have known and worked with, Tucker paid much too little attention to his impact on his audience, and, ironically, let his unrestrained brilliance undermine his support.