monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Bret Stephens’s Opinions Aren’t the Problem
Ideological diversity doesn't justify lowering argumentative standards for conservatives, or anyone else.

...But this creates a dilemma, because a standard that would exclude Stephens, and everyone to his right on the issue of climate change, would come perilously close to excluding all conservatives from the Times’ editorial pages. It is paradoxical to support the concept of ideological diversity while insisting on a standard that excludes everyone on the right. The way to resolve the paradox is to eschew ideological litmus tests and insist on rhetorical ones instead. What matters isn’t that Stephens is a conservative, but how he argues for conservatism.

“People can go to the state that they want to live in,” Rep. Robert Pittenger (R-NC) told reporters Tuesday morning when asked if people with pre-existing conditions could be charged much more under the American Health Care Act.

“States have all kinds of different policies and there are disparities among states for many things: driving restrictions, alcohol, whatever,” he continued. “We’re putting choices back in the hands of the states. That’s what Jeffersonian democracy provides for.”

"People get in their lives what they deserve" is a short-hand for this set of notions.

Of course, if Brooks' child is hit by a drunk driver and made a cripple, he's not likely to apply this formula to that child. Or if his portfolio is knocked sideways by some economic catastrophe, he's not likely to conclude fault lies with him. There is a deep "us/them" conceptual framing in all of this.

One element in this package is theological - God, being Good, will (must) reward the righteous and punish the sinner. Thus those who are healthy and wealthy are clearly on the right path and those who are beset by "misfortunes" have brought it on themselves. In a Godly universe, no other outcomes are possible.

Another element is class. As one wag put it when Bush Jr was running for the Presidency, "He was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple".

Another element is race or, more properly, racist ideas. We white folks run the show out of natural processes unfolding. If the coloreds were superior, they'd be running the show.

Each of these, individually or wrapped together, provide a convenient conceptual framing which justifies and validates the maintenance of power and privilege where it already sits. And that is the function of this ideology.

Aren't you happy that a majority of Americans don't think this way?

Those that do are a shrinking minority and that is a good thing.

No thanks to conservatives. I grew up under Jim Crow, which was defended by William Buckley Jr. and nearly all other leading conservatives. Jim Crow was set up by white Southern conservatives. Most conservatives activists and politicians opposed civil rights legislation and federal court rulings against racial discrimination. It's a matter of record. Can you name a single conservative who was one of the Freedom Riders or who participated in any of the civil rights marches in the Deep South during the early 1960s? Name one. Growing up in the staunchly Republican congressional district that was once represented by George H. W. Bush, I witnessed a lot of racial bigotry on the part of classmates and adults. So, I repeat, no thanks to conservatives. The fact remains that if conservatives had had their way during the period from the mid 1940s through the 1970s, we would still have Jim Crow today.

Oh, you think so? Well, that's really sweet. I can remember all the white conservatives who condemned the civil rights movement. So, why did the Ku Klux Klan and David Duke and all other leading white supremacists endorse Trump?

Why has there been an upsurge of antisemitic activity in this country since Trump was elected?

Of course, there's also Charles Murray, a leading conservative writer who frequently says that blacks are genetically inferior to whites. I don't know whom he voted for, but I can guess. (Incidentally, he also says that women are intellectually inferior to men -- another wonderful human being who happens to be on your side.)

Baldimo, your smugness is too great to bear. You seem to be completely incapable of realizing that conservatives -- like all other ideologues, left and right -- are sometimes wrong.

I never knew there was a group of human beings who were infallible. Here's a fact of life that you'll probably never be able to accept: Neither side has a monopoly on morality and truth. Conservatism probably takes the place of God for you.

Brandon9000 wrote:

The Chinese, although they often behave badly, are sane and pursue risk averse policies. I certainly don't believe that they will launch a nuclear attack against anyone out of paranoia.

They are, Trump is not. They may well consider a preemptive strike the most sensible option. You already believe a load of paranoid nonsense, so I don't think your opinion on China is based on anything substantive.

Unless they are running start of the art subs they aren't going to get close,

Quote:

Unless they are running start of the art subs they aren't going to get close,

Do you have an empirical understanding of truth or reality? Could you be wrong about your understand like you are about the spelling of "STATE"

Another element is race or, more properly, racist ideas. We white folks run the show out of natural processes unfolding. If the coloreds were superior, they'd be running the show.

“The grievance in their minds — the animus, the anger — they hate white people, because white people are successful and they’re not,”