The Exhaustion of American Liberalism

[lovedogs]

OP posted an article. Why should one have to read a book in order to understand or comment on an article by the same author? The article should stand on its own.

For exactly the reason that the article doesn't speak for itself. It's not correct about how "us liberals" see the world, and it fundamentally misunderstands the liberal point of view. Obviously some people in this thread are upset by that, so their defense is "READ A BOOK".

THEY CAN SEE RIGHT THROUGH US

#deepthoughtsbyjackhandey

AM I EVEN REAL!?!? THEY CAN SEE THROUGHHHH MEEEEEEE

 

[ruby59]

Personally, my connection to this piece is the fact I have been admonished for not having enough moral outrage at issues which liberals deem important. This kind of admonishment will lead to further closed ears by those on the receiving end.

Bonfire I ordered the book from Amazon and am looking forward to reading it.

You should order the book for every PSer liberals...

I do think it should be required high school reading.

Impossible! b/c liberalism is being taught by teachers starting at grade school level.

Is it bad to teach or reinforce inclusivity in grade school? Maybe things wouldn't be the way they are now, or to the same extent, if people learned and lived that practice.

Inclusivity - would that include parents in New York who would pull their children if one of the Trump grandchildren went there. And one of our fine PS jewelers said she would not want her children going to school with him either- a 4 year old.

 

[mary poppins]

Personally, my connection to this piece is the fact I have been admonished for not having enough moral outrage at issues which liberals deem important. This kind of admonishment will lead to further closed ears by those on the receiving end.

Bonfire I ordered the book from Amazon and am looking forward to reading it.

You should order the book for every PSer liberals...

I do think it should be required high school reading.

Impossible! b/c liberalism is being taught by teachers starting at grade school level.

Is it bad to teach or reinforce inclusivity in grade school? Maybe things wouldn't be the way they are now, or to the same extent, if people learned and lived that practice.

Inclusivity - would that include parents in New York who would pull their children if one of the Trump grandchildren went there. And one of our fine PS jewelers said she would not want her children going to school with him either- a 4 year old.

There were a number of reasons cited for that in the thread on that topic, some of which had nothing to do with the presence any Trump, per se, and others that were concerned about potential physical harm / security. No need to rehash here.

 

[redwood66]

We all should work to teach our children inclusivity but also teaching them that people vary is just as important. If one has convictions one should know (and accept) the motivation behind them.

These concepts are not mutually inclusive. It could even be said that inclusivity requires learning, and thus understanding, that people vary.

I don't believe I said they were. Some people just find the second part difficult to practice.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

I read the article this morning and thought it did have a point. I believe Bonfire and I may be of the same general generation, and I do remember the difference in feeling, facts, and follow through that we had then, compared to now. We really didn't sit around congratulating ourselves on what we were doing to integrate. We did it. I bought a house in an integrated neighborhood, A friend adopted a black child, we integrated our white churches, and of course our schools. And I don't think we did it out of a sense of guilt,we did it because there was a recognition that we had to be a part of what I will call the "the right thing to do. No one that I knew would give others grief if they didn't agree.

Now, we get PC verbiage we must follow, or be challenged at every turn. Liberals have become that Moral Majority that we hated during the Nixon Era. The moral superiority of liberals is astounding. The hard work and sacrifice was done back then. You need causes to try to keep your moral superiority and thus your self esteem. Liberals are a tiresome group.

To me, one of the newest causes that I see is the attention given to the treatment of animals. I see this as a new moral cause that has seen the light of day. Wonderful thing for those who do it.

But white guilt is done. Womans issues may require some re-working. But PC is just annoying and not helpful, even to the causes that it thinks it is addressing.

The article has a point, not the whole of an issue. It is not all or nothing.
Annette

 

[mary poppins]

We all should work to teach our children inclusivity but also teaching them that people vary is just as important. If one has convictions one should know (and accept) the motivation behind them.

These concepts are not mutually inclusive. It could even be said that inclusivity requires learning, and thus understanding, that people vary.

I don't believe I said they were. Some people just find the second part difficult to practice.

Your use of "but", which indicates something to follows contrasts, led to misunderstanding. Upon clarification, it seems you meant "and".

 

[redwood66]

We all should work to teach our children inclusivity but also teaching them that people vary is just as important. If one has convictions one should know (and accept) the motivation behind them.

These concepts are not mutually inclusive. It could even be said that inclusivity requires learning, and thus understanding, that people vary.

I don't believe I said they were. Some people just find the second part difficult to practice.

Your use of "but", which indicates something to follows contrasts, led to misunderstanding. Upon clarification, it seems you meant "and".

And you actually meant mutually exclusive correct? That is what my brain read and I understood what you meant - even though that is not what you typed.

 

[Bonfire]

Hi,

I read the article this morning and thought it did have a point. I believe Bonfire and I may be of the same general generation, and I do remember the difference in feeling, facts, and follow through that we had then, compared to now. We really didn't sit around congratulating ourselves on what we were doing to integrate. We did it. I bought a house in an integrated neighborhood, A friend adopted a black child, we integrated our white churches, and of course our schools. And I don't think we did it out of a sense of guilt,we did it because there was a recognition that we had to be a part of what I will call the "the right thing to do. No one that I knew would give others grief if they didn't agree.

Now, we get PC verbiage we must follow, or be challenged at every turn. Liberals have become that Moral Majority that we hated during the Nixon Era. The moral superiority of liberals is astounding. The hard work and sacrifice was done back then. You need causes to try to keep your moral superiority and thus your self esteem. Liberals are a tiresome group.

To me, one of the newest causes that I see is the attention given to the treatment of animals. I see this as a new moral cause that has seen the light of day. Wonderful thing for those who do it.

But white guilt is done. Womans issues may require some re-working. But PC is just annoying and not helpful, even to the causes that it thinks it is addressing.

The article has a point, not the whole of an issue. It is not all or nothing.
Annette

 

[AnnaH]

OP posted an article. Why should one have to read a book in order to understand or comment on an article by the same author? The article should stand on its own.

For exactly the reason that the article doesn't speak for itself. It's not correct about how "us liberals" see the world, and it fundamentally misunderstands the liberal point of view. Obviously some people in this thread are upset by that, so their defense is "READ A BOOK".

THEY CAN SEE RIGHT THROUGH US

#deepthoughtsbyjackhandey

AM I EVEN REAL!?!? THEY CAN SEE THROUGHHHH MEEEEEEE

It's because you are transparent. The article explains it.

 

[lovedogs]

OP posted an article. Why should one have to read a book in order to understand or comment on an article by the same author? The article should stand on its own.

For exactly the reason that the article doesn't speak for itself. It's not correct about how "us liberals" see the world, and it fundamentally misunderstands the liberal point of view. Obviously some people in this thread are upset by that, so their defense is "READ A BOOK".

THEY CAN SEE RIGHT THROUGH US

#deepthoughtsbyjackhandey

AM I EVEN REAL!?!? THEY CAN SEE THROUGHHHH MEEEEEEE

It's because you are transparent. The article explains it.

Like this????? I AM ADORABLE!

 

[redwood66]

OP posted an article. Why should one have to read a book in order to understand or comment on an article by the same author? The article should stand on its own.

For exactly the reason that the article doesn't speak for itself. It's not correct about how "us liberals" see the world, and it fundamentally misunderstands the liberal point of view. Obviously some people in this thread are upset by that, so their defense is "READ A BOOK".

THEY CAN SEE RIGHT THROUGH US

#deepthoughtsbyjackhandey

AM I EVEN REAL!?!? THEY CAN SEE THROUGHHHH MEEEEEEE

It's because you are transparent. The article explains it.

Like this????? I AM ADORABLE!

Isn't that more opaque?

Actually translucent is closer.

 

[lovedogs]

OP posted an article. Why should one have to read a book in order to understand or comment on an article by the same author? The article should stand on its own.

For exactly the reason that the article doesn't speak for itself. It's not correct about how "us liberals" see the world, and it fundamentally misunderstands the liberal point of view. Obviously some people in this thread are upset by that, so their defense is "READ A BOOK".

THEY CAN SEE RIGHT THROUGH US

#deepthoughtsbyjackhandey

AM I EVEN REAL!?!? THEY CAN SEE THROUGHHHH MEEEEEEE

It's because you are transparent. The article explains it.

Like this????? I AM ADORABLE!

Isn't that more opaque?

...I know I tried for a good 60 seconds to find a cute "transparent person" picture. But all I got were unsafe for work images of people in see through clothing. It was unfortunate.

 

[AnnaH]

OP posted an article. Why should one have to read a book in order to understand or comment on an article by the same author? The article should stand on its own.

For exactly the reason that the article doesn't speak for itself. It's not correct about how "us liberals" see the world, and it fundamentally misunderstands the liberal point of view. Obviously some people in this thread are upset by that, so their defense is "READ A BOOK".

THEY CAN SEE RIGHT THROUGH US

#deepthoughtsbyjackhandey

AM I EVEN REAL!?!? THEY CAN SEE THROUGHHHH MEEEEEEE

It's because you are transparent. The article explains it.

Like this????? I AM ADORABLE!

Yes, just like that.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I am curious - for the non-U.S. members: how many of you/your countries have experienced the same 'periods of social transition' in terms of going from slavery being 'the norm' to prohibiting it ... women not having the same rights as men, then arriving at a level of equality, etc. In other words: have your countries ALWAYS (since the dawn of time) had equal rights/treatment for every single citizen in your country, or did you evolve through similar 'transitions' over time as the U.S.?

And I apologize in advance if my wording choices seems 'off'; I have not yet had enough coffee and my brain is still waking up a bit; hopefully you get what I am asking.

 

[lyra]

We evolved much faster because early on we separated church from state. We were always inclusive, and we grow up glad that we were born in a country with so much freedom and choice. We don't have warring political factions. They disagree but still act with respect most of the time. We as individuals don't always vote for one particular political party. We vote out individuals regardless of party based on their actions while in power. We are okay with paying more taxes than in the US, because we cherish things that benefit everyone, like our free healthcare. No, of course we didn't start out with equality, but we definitely moved much faster toward achieving it.

 

[redwood66]

We evolved much faster because early on we separated church from state. We were always inclusive, and we grow up glad that we were born in a country with so much freedom and choice. We don't have warring political factions. They disagree but still act with respect most of the time. We as individuals don't always vote for one particular political party. We vote out individuals regardless of party based on their actions while in power. We are okay with paying more taxes than in the US, because we cherish things that benefit everyone, like our free healthcare. No, of course we didn't start out with equality, but we definitely moved much faster toward achieving it.

Hi Lyra. Can you tell me where you are from? It sounds like UK maybe?

 

[OreoRosies86]

Lyra's sig line says Canada.

 

[redwood66]

Lyra's sig line says Canada.

For some reason I cannot see any sig lines if I am logged into PS - not even mine. If I log out they appear. I can't remember if I even have one.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Lyra's sig line says Canada.

For some reason I cannot see any sig lines if I am logged into PS - not even mine. If I log out they appear. I can't remember if I even have one.

You may have them turned off in your 'Board Preferences' settings.

 

[redwood66]

Lyra's sig line says Canada.

For some reason I cannot see any sig lines if I am logged into PS - not even mine. If I log out they appear. I can't remember if I even have one.

You may have them turned off in your 'Board Preferences' settings.

Well I feel silly. Thank you!

 

[telephone89]

I am curious - for the non-U.S. members: how many of you/your countries have experienced the same 'periods of social transition' in terms of going from slavery being 'the norm' to prohibiting it ... women not having the same rights as men, then arriving at a level of equality, etc. In other words: have your countries ALWAYS (since the dawn of time) had equal rights/treatment for every single citizen in your country, or did you evolve through similar 'transitions' over time as the U.S.?

And I apologize in advance if my wording choices seems 'off'; I have not yet had enough coffee and my brain is still waking up a bit; hopefully you get what I am asking.

[from Canada]
Of course we haven't been perfect since the dawn of time. If you want to ruin the rest of your day, read about the residential schools. This was actually celebrated by a lot of Canadians. Many people who were part of it have towns/bridges/monuments named after them. But it was a really terrible thing. I'm (a small) part native, and my grandfather would NOT speak about them. It was horrible.

That said, in my generation, we were always taught about the rest of the world. We learned from an early age that Canada is multi-cultural (NOT a melting pot) and our differences should be celebrated instead of stamped out. I think a lot of this actually came from what happened with the residential schools, and how horrifically they failed. Residential schools are how a number of my colleagues look at the US. Run by a church, trying to control what people think, feel, what they can do with their own bodies, trying to stamp out their individualism.

I think this feeling of multi-culturalism and celebrating ALL people of Canada is ingrained into most citizens. We also see the huge benefit of our tax system. There are still issues (schooling, while a fraction of the cost in the US is still expensive, there are healthcare gaps), we see the benefit. I will admit, I'm not 100% versed in the ACA, but I know before it, I've had friends travel to the US, fall ill and then be handed a $10,000 bill for something minor. One of my colleagues was travelling in Florida on vacation, had his appendix burst, and FLEW HOME instead of dealing with the systems down in the states. I think it's hard for us to understand how so many people are willing to 'leave them behind' because its slightly inconvenient for you. That's not how we work, and it's in stark contrast to what we know.

Even something as simple as maternity leave. We get 1 year, partially paid (usually topped up by the employer). You get 6 weeks unpaid, and only in certain circumstances (company size, etc). That's appalling, only because I barely think a year is enough! I don't have kids, and will likely never take a mat leave, but I could not imagine going back to work 1.5 months after pushing a baby out of your vagina. And then add in the extra cost of daycare for the rest of the year.

Okay this turned into a bit longer than I was hoping LOL. I [used to] love travelling to the states, but I would never move there. And right now, we aren't travelling there anyways. Spending our money elsewhere until this shit gets sorted out lol.

 

[partgypsy]

I guess my response is that the article, and most likely the book it gets it wrong. And it's not even accurate (for example the pussy hats have "cat ears" not genitalia). It misremembers the present and history. the womens march was one of the largest, well-organized marches in history. In contrast civil rights marches were often marred by violence. Yes there was rioting in the 60's (I guess some don't remember civil rights were hard fought and hard won). It is a cartoon perception of liberals written by conservatives. For the many Democrats who are African American or from other countries, are they also suffering from white guilt? Maybe you can use another word. I remember one that used to be popular, "uppity". Agree to disagree.

And conservatives believe the reason why Obama got the democratic ticket and even won the election was due to white guilt? I am embarrassed for the writer. The white guilt was so strong he even was re-elected!

 

[partgypsy]

Personally, my connection to this piece is the fact I have been admonished for not having enough moral outrage at issues which liberals deem important. This kind of admonishment will lead to further closed ears by those on the receiving end.

Bonfire I ordered the book from Amazon and am looking forward to reading it.

You should order the book for every PSer liberals...

I do think it should be required high school reading.

Impossible! b/c liberalism is being taught by teachers starting at grade school level.

Is it bad to teach or reinforce inclusivity in grade school? Maybe things wouldn't be the way they are now, or to the same extent, if people learned and lived that practice.

Inclusivity - would that include parents in New York who would pull their children if one of the Trump grandchildren went there. And one of our fine PS jewelers said she would not want her children going to school with him either- a 4 year old.

And do you remember why she said that? She wouldn't want to deal with the headache of the security, and the publicity, and other headaches from the prez' son being there. The fact that you even think this is remotely relevant to say public schools no longer being segregated I find hilarious. Or that fact I simply don't care about poor ol Barron shows I'm not PC enough to worry about his "cause". Just like the snowflakes who want to boycott starbucks, Macys, various newspapers, etc. Oh wait, those are the conservatives.
Seriously, the right-wingers are the ones who are "sensitive". Heck, they want to defund the EPA which protects are air, ground and drinking water, because they don't want to read the scientific reports about climate change.

 

[AGBF]

red-

Don't know if you saw my love note in "March gets violent". I wanted to be sure you did. Hope you are reading here.

Deb