The Tulsa Massacre? Really? I hadn’t realized in condemning the mass murder of an entire community, we were voicing a “slanted perspective on American history.”
The only viewpoints the Right and Center-Right DON’T find interesting and compelling enough to engage with are any viewpoints that promote egalitarianism and acknowledge the full rights and humanity of everyone. They always regard those ideas as commie trash that is beyond the pale.
“I’m sure there’ll be an article in the Times this week about how Chris Christie and Larry Hogan are the future of the party. They never seem to catch on.” -- my longtime pet theory has been that wunderkind conservative intellectual Paul Ryan excused himself to go lurk in the weeds while the GOP Trumpwar raged, only to step fit’n’ready on the bloodied battlefield. But now I think he made a bad bet, his Nazi bona fides are too mild and long forgotten, and we shall never see a President Ryan.
Did you know Republicans are moving away from anti-woke messaging and back to law and order while simultaneously attacking the FBI and DOJ? This is the type of cognitive dissonance you get when you let your party incise your corpus callosum so your right brain can hold a position contrary to your left brain. Toss in the equivalent of a frontal lobotomy and you have the perfect Republican voter: id-driven reactions to leaders who practice deceit and projection with the skill of a fencer wielding a broadsword.
"... as much as he’d like, for example, and that “historical tragedies should not be used in the service of a political agenda that has a slanted perspective on American history and the modern causes of urban blight” in reference to, get this, the Tulsa Massacre."
I have some notes for Hanania fils (taped, sans doute, across my fist): atrocities like the Tulsa Massacre were hardly terrible exceptions to the norm in the early 20th century. They actually were shamefully, horrifyingly common in the USA. Usually the scene of the crime has been concealed under a reservoir and there are an awful lot of those all over Appalachia & the South...
(The brilliant Tony Earley short story "The Prophet from Jupiter" seems to be about one of these massacre site/reservoirs.)
"I’m old, and retain dim memories of the Young Republicans of the 20th Century"
Hey, I'm old too! And what I remember about young Republicans at that time (I mean the ones who weren't working for the Nixon campaign ratfucking his opponents) was "C'mon, America's not so bad, stop being such a Grumpy Gus, OK?" A tendency which reached its peak with the performance of Up With People at the Nixon White House. So yeah, they're... um... different now.
BTW, I am sitting here in the airport terminal waiting to board the flight to Chicago where we have a FOUR FREAKING HOUR layover before continuing on to Fairbanks. Keep a good thought for me as I will the plane to stay in the air 😵💫
How do so many Dipshit Centrists (h/t Atrios) and garbage people like Matthew Yglesias not only get taken seriously, but keep failing upward? Maybe credulous, dewy-eyed Ezra Klein could do a think piece about it.
The linked Dreher piece is comedy gold. He calls Freddie de Boer a “brilliant maverick of the Left” and later plays school psychologist: “…it seems clear to me that [Hanania is on the autism spectrum], and that this has something to do with his intellectual style, and the substance of his writing. He lacks the inner sense that tells him, ‘You shouldn’t go there.’”
So I read an article in the Atlantic, "How Bronze Age Pervert Charmed the Far Right." One of the leading "edgelords" unless I'm mistaken. Being old-fashioned, I think a real intellectual strives for consistency. There's no coy "look I'm Chomsky, or maybe I'm not! Are you hip enough to 'get it?' Or are you a dowdy old square? I must obfuscate to protect myself, because I'm a brave teller-of-truth-to-power."
I'm no thinker but I've read a few things, and I've noticed that real intellectuals don't have time for this sort of nonsense. They have practical problems not shared by dilletantes, because they take in a great deal of information, criticize, synthesize. For real! Faced with confusing, complicated ideas, they value a type of earnestness. Tell them what you really think. Aim for clarity all the more because your problems may be intractable and your materials abstruse. Give yourself and your fellows at least a chance to think, for fuck's sake.
Matthew Y., quite a guy. I read a few of his economic pieces on Substack and decided he was muddled in the mind.
Too many people can't follow their own motivations. They actually believe they are engaged in rational discourse, when they are, as you say, following their desire for attention and doping their brains on rage and reactions.
People who want to win arguments are usually silly.
"pre-verbal ululations" or "Ian Killjew" one of those is the best thing ever. Maybe both! I can't decide. And am I lucky to have choices like this?
Of course I am.
Great column!
"it’s important to be generally tolerant of intellectuals who may hold some immoral views"
But of course we can't be tolerant of the alphabet people, nosirree, that's going Too Far.
Fuck you, Rod.
The Tulsa Massacre? Really? I hadn’t realized in condemning the mass murder of an entire community, we were voicing a “slanted perspective on American history.”
The only viewpoints the Right and Center-Right DON’T find interesting and compelling enough to engage with are any viewpoints that promote egalitarianism and acknowledge the full rights and humanity of everyone. They always regard those ideas as commie trash that is beyond the pale.
“I’m sure there’ll be an article in the Times this week about how Chris Christie and Larry Hogan are the future of the party. They never seem to catch on.” -- my longtime pet theory has been that wunderkind conservative intellectual Paul Ryan excused himself to go lurk in the weeds while the GOP Trumpwar raged, only to step fit’n’ready on the bloodied battlefield. But now I think he made a bad bet, his Nazi bona fides are too mild and long forgotten, and we shall never see a President Ryan.
Did you know Republicans are moving away from anti-woke messaging and back to law and order while simultaneously attacking the FBI and DOJ? This is the type of cognitive dissonance you get when you let your party incise your corpus callosum so your right brain can hold a position contrary to your left brain. Toss in the equivalent of a frontal lobotomy and you have the perfect Republican voter: id-driven reactions to leaders who practice deceit and projection with the skill of a fencer wielding a broadsword.
"... as much as he’d like, for example, and that “historical tragedies should not be used in the service of a political agenda that has a slanted perspective on American history and the modern causes of urban blight” in reference to, get this, the Tulsa Massacre."
I have some notes for Hanania fils (taped, sans doute, across my fist): atrocities like the Tulsa Massacre were hardly terrible exceptions to the norm in the early 20th century. They actually were shamefully, horrifyingly common in the USA. Usually the scene of the crime has been concealed under a reservoir and there are an awful lot of those all over Appalachia & the South...
(The brilliant Tony Earley short story "The Prophet from Jupiter" seems to be about one of these massacre site/reservoirs.)
If Trump falters only Greg Abbott is hateful and cruel enough to step in. https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/8/5/2185513/-If-Trump-falters-only-Greg-Abbott-is-cruel-and-hateful-enough-to-step-in. With Hanaia et al as his warped brain trust.
"I’m old, and retain dim memories of the Young Republicans of the 20th Century"
Hey, I'm old too! And what I remember about young Republicans at that time (I mean the ones who weren't working for the Nixon campaign ratfucking his opponents) was "C'mon, America's not so bad, stop being such a Grumpy Gus, OK?" A tendency which reached its peak with the performance of Up With People at the Nixon White House. So yeah, they're... um... different now.
BTW, I am sitting here in the airport terminal waiting to board the flight to Chicago where we have a FOUR FREAKING HOUR layover before continuing on to Fairbanks. Keep a good thought for me as I will the plane to stay in the air 😵💫
How do so many Dipshit Centrists (h/t Atrios) and garbage people like Matthew Yglesias not only get taken seriously, but keep failing upward? Maybe credulous, dewy-eyed Ezra Klein could do a think piece about it.
The linked Dreher piece is comedy gold. He calls Freddie de Boer a “brilliant maverick of the Left” and later plays school psychologist: “…it seems clear to me that [Hanania is on the autism spectrum], and that this has something to do with his intellectual style, and the substance of his writing. He lacks the inner sense that tells him, ‘You shouldn’t go there.’”
Yeah, about that “inner sense.” Oh, Rod…
I went to college in the 60s and the Young Republicans were dicks.
So I read an article in the Atlantic, "How Bronze Age Pervert Charmed the Far Right." One of the leading "edgelords" unless I'm mistaken. Being old-fashioned, I think a real intellectual strives for consistency. There's no coy "look I'm Chomsky, or maybe I'm not! Are you hip enough to 'get it?' Or are you a dowdy old square? I must obfuscate to protect myself, because I'm a brave teller-of-truth-to-power."
I'm no thinker but I've read a few things, and I've noticed that real intellectuals don't have time for this sort of nonsense. They have practical problems not shared by dilletantes, because they take in a great deal of information, criticize, synthesize. For real! Faced with confusing, complicated ideas, they value a type of earnestness. Tell them what you really think. Aim for clarity all the more because your problems may be intractable and your materials abstruse. Give yourself and your fellows at least a chance to think, for fuck's sake.
Matthew Y., quite a guy. I read a few of his economic pieces on Substack and decided he was muddled in the mind.
Too many people can't follow their own motivations. They actually believe they are engaged in rational discourse, when they are, as you say, following their desire for attention and doping their brains on rage and reactions.
People who want to win arguments are usually silly.
Great column.