Via Emmett Rensin at Vox.com, The smug style in American liberalism:
In 2016, the smug style has found expression in…a foundational set of assumptions above which a great number of liberals comport their understanding of the world. It has led an American ideology hitherto responsible for a great share of the good accomplished over the past century of our political life to a posture of reaction and disrespect: a condescending, defensive sneer toward any person or movement outside of its consensus, dressed up as a monopoly on reason.
It’s so true, but liberals (actually, illiberal progressives would be more accurate) can’t see it; their unquestioning sense of moral superiority and their “Just Do What We Say” assumption of a right to dictate to others is the ocean they swim in.
More. George Will on the four key tenets of progressivism: (1) history has a destination; (2) progressives uniquely discern it; (3) politics should be democratic but peripheral to governance, which is the responsibility of experts scientifically administering the regulatory state, and (4) enlightened progressives should enforce limits on speech in order to prevent thinking unhelpful to history’s progressive unfolding.
Furthermore. Via The Atlantic, on why a high school senior feels alienated from activist groups that share causes in which he believes:
“I genuinely cared about these causes—still do,” he wrote, referencing everything from anti-racism to LGBT rights to reproductive health. “I believed I was doing something noble. At the same time,” he added, “a large part of me was not quite in agreement with some of the views and concepts espoused by social-justice groups. Their pro-censorship tendencies, fixation with intersectionality, and constant uproar over seemingly trivial and innocuous matters like ‘cultural appropriation’ and ‘microaggressions’ went against my civil-libertarian sensibilities.” …
“When I go off to college next year, I honestly don’t know where I’m going to fit in… The only political/social group accepting of my views are normally libertarians,” he wrote. “For the most part, these campus activism groups have my sympathies. I just wish that they didn’t have such a hostile attitude towards free speech and didn’t dismiss opposing viewpoints based on the person’s identity.”
And as for the next generation of progressive leadership, Protesters shouted obscenities in an effort to silence the speakers, saying they espouse “hate speech”. And they are utterly mystified when their hypocrisy is pointed out.
Plus, comedian Steve Crowder’s social justice warrior takedown.
34 Comments for “Liberalism: What Went So Terribly Wrong”
posted by tom jefferson 3rd on
Wow. Right-wing blog paints liberals in a negative manner – “smug” – …..up next: vegetarians think that meat eaters are cruel monsters.
posted by Houndentenor on
There is some nuttiness on the left. But it’s absurd to point out a few fringe nutjobs on the left while propping up the Republican party which is beholden to authoritarian religious extremists.
posted by Doug on
And I suspect that there are a lot more ‘fringe nutjobs’ on the right than on the left.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
Nutjobs abound on the right, particularly of late, and we’ve had them on the left in abundance, too.
But the article isn’t about nut jobs; it is the the old saw that the left is dominated by elitist, over-educated, snooty know-it-alls who think that they are better than the common masses.
There’s some truth to it, although Republicans seem to have no problem with the intellectual disdain of folks like William F. Buckley and George Will, and the raft of Ivy League types like the Bushes and Ted Cruz who rise to political dominance.
Its nothing new.
posted by Houndentenor on
Yes, those types are present on the left and they are ignored. I sometimes wonder if there are any subscribers to their academic journals other than right-wingers looking for nutty leftists to quote mine. Everyone else ignores them. The equivalent on the right are on tv and radio for hours a day with millions of followers. No Democrat has to go pander to a few leftist academics to hope to get the nomination, but no Republican can get past South Carolina without pandering to talk radio and Fox News hosts. Yes, there is siimilar nutter on the far right and the far left, but the far right is actually significant in electoral politics. The far left is irrelevant.
posted by tom jefferson 3rd on
A high school graduate who considers himself to b
posted by Tom Scharbach on
Rensin’s essay has its points, but his thesis isn’t original and he is, at least in my opinion, drawing a caricature.
The caricature that the liberals (not to mention social scientists and social reformers) think that they know better than the common man goes back at least to the New Deal, and has been at the heart of conservative populism for many, many years.
I don’t take the caricature too seriously, but then I don’t take simplistic thinking too seriously most of the time.
posted by tom jefferson 3rd on
If you are a political minority, I would not be surprised that if you went off to college with some worrying about how your views would received.
Now, quite a few teenagers get interested in what generally passes for libertarianism in American; i.e. Ayn Rand, Rand Paul and the like.
I imagine that young libertarians or young greens or young socialists have their own internal political disputes and young people prone to theatrics..they just may get noticed less than the standard young people in Red v. Blue political mode.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
More. George Will on the four key tenets of progressivism: (1) history has a destination; (2) progressives uniquely discern it; (3) politics should be democratic but peripheral to governance, which is the responsibility of experts scientifically administering the regulatory state, and (4) enlightened progressives should enforce limits on speech in order to prevent thinking unhelpful to history’s progressive unfolding.
George Will? In a post about how progressives are elitist, over-educated, snooty know-it-alls looking down their long noses at the common masses, George might not be the best source to quote.
posted by Mike in Houston on
Might as well quote often-wrong Kristol whose “conservatism” foisted Sarah Palin to the second spot on the party ticket.
posted by Houndentenor on
Bill Kristol is often so wrong that it saves time just to assume he’s never right.
posted by Kosh III on
“assumption of a right to dictate to others”
You mean like dicatating whom a person can and cannot MARRY?
The right has been the biggest Nanny of them all: what religion is proper, what social actions are good, who you can love/marry, women should be subordinate to men, minorities are lacking in the good qualities of WASPs.
The list is endless.
posted by Houndentenor on
I remember how people who asked questions about the run up to the Iraq War were treated. Will can see the isolated nuttery on the left but can’t see the ocean of the same tactics on the right.
posted by tom jefferson 3rd on
Yeah, when conservatives say they want limited government….they really mean less oversight of big business, less federal involement in civil rights, more tax loopholes for the snobby elite.
About the only time the buzz word applies to freedom, is when applies to gun ownership or something that conservative Christians want to do
posted by Mike in Houston on
This post is yet another symptom of brain-dead conservatism…
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/04/brain-dead-conservatism-i-tried-to-warn-you.php
posted by Mike in Houston on
Can’t wait for the next furthermore or post on Progressive Tyranny ™ — queue the violins:
http://www.9news.com/news/local/colorado-court-ruling-stands-that-baker-cant-cite-religion/152874638
posted by Tom Jefferson 3rd on
It is interesting how the religious freedom bills only apply to a baker with an objection to gay marriage, as opposed to a baker with an objection to any sort of gay or straight marriage. Religious freedom ain’t simply the freedom to agree with your neighbors church.
It is also interesting how these religious freedom bills seem to take the position that exempting self employed or small time bakers, means that we can’t have civil rights protections in other areas, like employment, housing, larger public accommodation, etc..
It’s not like the proponents of the bills don’t have people on hand to explain these things.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
… enlightened progressives should enforce limits on speech in order to prevent thinking unhelpful to history’s progressive unfolding …
I’m curious about any examples of proposed/enacted government restrictions on thought that Will might have in mind.
Other than that tired saw about “IRS suppression of conservative advocacy groups (which consists of a lot more wind than substance), Will gives no examples. The examples he gives are examples of elected officials criticizing opposing points of view, albeit sometimes in strong terms a “morally vacant.”
As far as I know, very little speech other than things like incitement is proscribed, and the restrictions, as often as not (legislation to ban flag burning and Westboro protests come to mind) are the product of conservative efforts to suppress thought/speech.
If Will is serious, and he seems to be, what happens to freedom of speech in this country if criticism is conflated with suppression as a violation of our free speech rights?
posted by Houndentenor on
So George Will gets to define “progressivism”? What a joke.
posted by Tom Jefferson III on
Some people — across the political spectrum — tend to love free speech the most, when they agree with what the speaker is saying….These people also tend to think that free speech also includes a shield against criticism.
Today, very little in the way of overt government attacks on freedom of speech occur in America. Most of it what people claim is free speech violations, really falls under the category of people lacking in civility/tact, or people getting upset that other people are getting upset.
Do free speech violations still occur? Yes, but they are rarely talked about much in depth.
I would argue that media consolidation — something that is actually a product of government policy — has hurt freedom of speech.
I would argue that restricting the election ballot to the two major party candidates — something that is actually a government policy matter — has hurt freedom of speech.
posted by Houndentenor on
Your addendum is hilarious. Unless the student is going to an elite school full of spoiled, obnoxious private school brats, none of that is going to be a problem. I teach college and the only time I ever hear about any of that is from right wingers who must work overtime looking for the handful of examples of regressive nuttery. It exists, but it’s also quite easy to avoid on most campuses. In fact, after reading and hearing a lot about it earlier this year, I looked for examples of these things on my campus and couldn’t find any. Of course students here are too busy trying to keep up with coursework and holding down two part time jobs to worry about microaggressions.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
Furthermore. Via The Atlantic, on why a high school senior feels alienated from activist groups that share causes in which he believes …
Young true believers acting out? I’m shocked.
I share this young man’s complaints young true believers across the board — political, liberal/conservative, religious — and I suspect that young people, without much real-world experience, are more likely than not to be fixated on a particular belief system and in a constant uproar over trivial and innocuous matters. It is a symptom of immaturity.
And, to be blunt, I run into way too many adult true believers who should have enough life experience to know better but exhibit the same characteristics. And again, it doesn’t seem to depend on ideology — I see it in “convicted” conservative Christians, libertarians, right-wingers and left-wingers, across the board. The common denominator seems to be immaturity of mind, however old the body.
“When I go off to college next year, I honestly don’t know where I’m going to fit in… The only political/social group accepting of my views are normally libertarians …”
Good luck to him, but I haven’t noticed that libertarians are sweetness and light, either. Piss one off even a little by challenging them and the next thing you know you are subjected to a flurry of bullshit about “sheeple”, “statists”, and a lecture on how stupid you are not to agree.
I don’t know this kid, but I think he would do better with a girl friend or boy friend than he will trying to get the rest of the world to conform to his expectations.
posted by Houndentenor on
How about he join some social groups and go to a party or two?
A whole college life centered around political interests? Sounds like a lot of fun. *eyeroll*
posted by Tom Scharbach on
Hound, I just hope that he grows up, falls in love, and experiences the joys and responsibilities of a family, and lives a long life. Time and maturityl, I think, give him a more balanced perspective. There’s a lot more to life than “causes”. He seems like a good kid, and I wish him the best.
I don’t think that the tendency of college activists to become strident and intolerant of other viewpoints is anything new. I went to college as a veteran, so I wasn’t wrapped up in college life, but I remember a lot of disparate groups shouting each other down a lot.
I also don’t think that stridency and intolerance is a characteristic of any particular political viewpoint, on college campuses or anywhere else. Certainly not in my experience. For all the shit I took years ago from the anti-Vietnam true believers, I took just as much from the so-called right-wing “patriots” who took exception to my views on Iraq I and Iraq II. As Jesus said (or would have, if he thought about it), “Assholes will always be with us.”
posted by Houndentenor on
Yes, you can find the shouty types on any campus. You can also find groups promoting a whole range of interests that are fun and where no one yells at you. I don’t remember a lot of yelling in my Italian club or even in my social fraternity. Balance is important at any stage of life. College age kids can get a bit out of kilter, but that makes it all the more important to have a variety of activities and friends and not just activism. (Or for that matter, not just parties either.)
posted by Mike in Houston on
The only shouty types I remember from college were the College Republicans who went out of their way to be obnoxious (low bar).
posted by Tom Scharbach on
On a side note, I am idly watching Trump’s speech tonight, and he just said “I consider myself the presumptive winner” of the Republican nomination, and waxed on and on about how easy it is going to be to beat Secretary Clinton in November after he unifies the Republican Party as it has never been united before. So, in deference to my Republican friends, I think I’ll start calling Trump “The President Presumptive”.
So does anyone have any thoughts on who The President Presumptive will pick as his running mate?
posted by Doug on
Trump doesn’t like to be upstaged so I’m guessing he will choose someone with less knowledge that himself. A scary thought, indeed.
posted by Craig Howell on
In today’s GOP, finding “someone with less knowledge than himself” will not be difficult.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
I think that it will be a woman, since that’s the only thing that Hillary has going for her, according to The President Presumptive, and mostly like a woman who will enhance the Trump brand. So I’m guessing Elizabeth Halseth of Nevada, Mande Wilkes of South Carolina, Pam Bondi of Florida or Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington.
posted by tom jefferson 3rd on
What? You dont think that Sarah Palin would be on Trumps “binder” full of women VP candidates.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
I think that Palin tried to upstage The President Presumptive in the days immediately after she endorsed him, and I suspect that we’ve seen the last of her this election cycle, except for a few surrogate appearances.
posted by JohnInCA on
There’s a joke in here about Trump not liking sloppy-seconds, but I don’t actually know if any of his wives were divorced *before* they married him.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
And as for the next generation of progressive leadership …
The chance that any of the handful of UM-Amherst protestors — in particular the one young woman who had a meltdown — will rise to become “the next generation of progressive leadership” without growing up and maturing is subminimal.