Hard to give a clear-cut answer, you only know about someone’s leanings if they seep obviously through their prose, or you don’t, and this piece information is acquired externally.
That’s the reason for adding “probably” in that sentence.
…insisting? It’s just the one post.
I don’t disagree, though on point 2, I have no contractual obligation to keep liking someone’s work as they get older - in fact, it’s fairly common for artists’ work to become more convolute, less accessibly brilliant as they age, regardless of their political leanings, if they have them.
What I just said is also, like the previous post, highly situational and decided on a case per case basis, not a precise mathematical theorem.
The remark itself was essentially a literary declination of that oft-agreed upon thing, about the conservative side sliding off the right edge and into madness.
Generally speaking, though, and like mentioned before, I want to know the least possible about an author, so chances are I’m not going to notice if there’s no sliding.
I don’t think that latter part is obviously true, FWIW. I would think instead the majority thinks a certain degree of violence, including war, can be an acceptable tool to solve certain situations in some instances.
It would seem, for instance, a large enough part of the Western population believes that to be the case about ISIS.
Of course this belief generally rests on the notion of never being involved in the war directly, and the war being someplace else, ideally far away.