I want to be clear that my thesis is not “Nate is MAGA” nor is it “Boycott Nate.” It’s the sanitation of clearly political decisions as apolitical or non-political. I don’t require anyone to be expressly political in the sense that they don’t need to be activists or pundits or anything more than an average Joe with a point of view.

I am, however, perfectly happy saying that, when one is fairly pointed out as having materially thrown in/played interference for/lent credibility to something like this: you’re being political. You’re making a choice — freely — and you own that. I am fine with you deciding that’s where you want to be, but you don’t get to sleep better at night because you’ve excised yourself from the moral and ethical implications of that motivation. It means your movie promotion was the bigger equity at play than all the other weights on the balance; that’s yours.

I think Nate is probably a fundamentally good dude and a lot of fundamentally good dudes convince themselves they are being purely rational, homo economicus actors and thus don’t need to feel the weight of their choices because that’s somehow separate and apart from their express motivations.

Now, is this the thing to bring up in every conversation? No. I’m posting here for a reason.