Courting Reaction

Andrew Sullivan writes:

Subject young white boys to critical race and gender theory, tell them that women can have penises, that genetics are irrelevant in understanding human behavior, that borders are racist, or that men are inherently toxic, and you will get a bunch of Jordan Peterson fans by their 20s. …

Many leftists somehow believe that sustained indoctrination will work in abolishing human nature, and when it doesn’t, because it can’t, they demonize those who have failed the various tests of PC purity as inherently wicked. In the end, the alienated and despised see no reason not to gravitate to ever-more extreme positions. They support people and ideas simply because they piss off their indoctrinators. And, in the end, they reelect Trump.

None of this is necessary. You can be in favor of women’s equality without buying into the toxicity of men; you can support legal immigration if the government gets serious about stopping illegal immigration; you can be inclusive of trans people without abolishing the bimodality of human sex and gender; you can support criminal-justice reform without believing — as the New York Times now apparently does — that America is an inherently racist invention, founded in 1619 and not 1775.

7 Comments for “Courting Reaction”

  1. posted by Mark Johnson on

    I once enjoyed Sullivan’s writings. His books, his essays, his blog.

    But now he is just that angry old white guy sitting on the porch yelling at the world to get off his lawn.

    “[Y]ou can support criminal-justice reform without believing — as the New York Times now apparently does — that America is an inherently racist invention, founded in 1619 and not 1775.”

    Because apparently, Sullivan thinks that slavery was just a thing of the past by 1775? There are no words, Andrew. Just sadness for what was once such an interesting mind.

    Reply
  2. posted by Mike King & David "TJ" Bauler on

    1775? Wasn’t the Declaration of Independence signed in 1776?

    Reply
    • posted by Jorge on

      There’s a minority perspective that highlights the Battle of Lexington and Concord in 1775 as the beginning of the Revolutionary War.

      Reply
      • posted by Mike & David on

        Interesting. However, if you are going to argue that the American revolutionary war was ‘revolutionary’, it would seem logical to focus on the Declaration of Independence.

        Reply
  3. posted by Mike King & David "TJ" Bauler on

    Wow! “Subject young white boys to [cultural diversity education and women’s history], and they are not responsible for their own actions.” Yet another sad rant from someone living a cozy life inside a safe space.

    “tell them that women can have penises.” Most don’t. Although some do. Transsexuals are not a new concept by any means.

    Yes, genetics are important. But, they do not tell the entire picture.

    Reply
  4. posted by Jorge on

    “This, it strikes me, is one core divide on the right: between those who see the social, cultural, and demographic changes of the last few decades as requiring an assault and reversal, and those who seek to reform its excesses, manage its unintended consequences, but otherwise live with it.”

    Andrew Sullivan has a rather annoying and in my view silly belief that the 2016 election is truth. Whether or not someone right-leaning supports Donald Trump is as much a function of tactics as it is ideology.

    My problem is not the changes in the last “few” decades. It’s the changes and lost opportunities in the last decade.

    “Many leftists somehow believe that sustained indoctrination will work in abolishing human nature, and when it doesn’t, because it can’t, they demonize those who have failed the various tests of PC purity as inherently wicked.”

    The right isn’t immune to that kind of thinking, either. Maybe the left and the right are onto something. Oh, right, he’s talking about the difference between eliminating and reducing behavior.

    Because apparently, Sullivan thinks that slavery was just a thing of the past by 1775?

    Uh, wha? You must be one of those card-carrying leftists Mr. Sullivan is talking about.

    Reply
  5. posted by JohnInCA on

    Remember back before DADT repeal, how straights kept assuring us that straight soldiers just could not handle knowing that another soldier was gay, that our men and women in uniform were so fragile and pathetic that hearing “I’m a man who likes men” would just break them?

    This sounds like that. “White straight men are just so fragile, not treating them with privilege will turn them into terrorists and Trump voters!”

    I for one don’t believe it. I think straight white men are made of sterner stuff, just as I believed that our soldiers in uniform were made of sterner stuff.

    It’s interesting that those claiming to be their advocates, however, think so little of them.

    Reply

Leave a Comment