In my neck of the woods—beach adjacent LA area—Trump bashing is a local sport. And among my social set—I’m a career environmental lawyer mostly for nonprofits—Trump is evil incarnate.
I myself am pretty politically homeless here because my classical liberal values have been largely superseded by a more illiberal progressivism. Here I’m actually perceived as right wing for the simple crime of not demonizing anyone who doesn’t share their views.
In short, these folks (including most of my friends) will never change no matter what you write.
And turning everything into a morality play is a major reason why Dems refuse to examine their priors and understand just how whacked out and out of touch progressive policies have become.
Not quite. All these progressive folks with whom I disagree about their demonization of Trump supporters are still my friends. And it is progressive policies I take issue with. Certainly I’m frustrated but it’s the water I swim in.
You dont know what social transistion means? Its just the basic first step of gender transition. The step that a lot of people stop at. Changing your name, pronouns, dress....that sort of thing.
Okay I get you, but hear me out. And I'm not saying this is the case definitively, but could it be that the reason why you are still able to be friends who hold progressive politics that you don't support while those people are not able to maintain friendships with people who hold MAGA politics or even sympathies for MAGA politics is that those progressive politics just aren't as objectionable even if you don't agree.
And again, I'm not arguing that this is the case, but couldn't that be a possibility?
Like maybe its just easier to disagree but remain cordial with someone who believes that kids should be able to socially transition than it is to disagree but remain friendly with someone who believes in race science.
I dont think I missed the point. But this article, this comment, and most of the replies are of the opinion that there is something wrong with left political expression that invites backlash....im asking if anyone can concieve of the opposite being true.
I think there are largely miserable very online people at the extremes of both camps who make literally everything political and another more moderate group in both camps who prefer not to corrupt everything in their lives including relationships by conditioning everything on the “right” politics.
Sure, I understand that. On some level I even envy it. But I do think it's a luxury to view politics as something that can be kept separate from your personal life.
2024 was 14 months ago. These kinds of things don’t change that fast. But yes the vibe is different. I detest the MAGA GOP but I don’t think the Dem establishment has fully internalized just how just plain stupid its earlier ideological positions were. I’m hopeful, but we’re far from getting back to a less elitist driven postmodern epistemic ideology. Certainly not in academia nor in philanthropy and nonprofits where I live.
Well in my view the murders by masked federal goons would not have happened without Trump. And Trump almost certainly would not have been reelected if the Dems did not alienate millions of Independents and moderates with all the Progressive insanity of the Biden years. Try as she did, Kamala Harris could not shake off her they/them past because she’s an empty vessel.
Hopefully by 2028 we’ll get a Dem party that acts less like an elitist activist group and more like the trad left which I miss terribly.
This dynamic of shame and defining self-worth is very old. Read "Loving: Interracial Intimacy in America and the Threat to White Supremacy" and you will see that one reason for white supremacy and segregation was to keep poor whites and blacks from becoming a coherent political force. Elites gave the poor whites self-worth, in part by saying "you're better than those people", even while keeping them down.
Today, elites use race and an array of other issues to separate people; the shaming of today is just a variant of the original playbook. What, you don't think trans women are women? Transphobe! You think we should deport people? Bigot! And it is still about keeping the masses from realizing that they have common problems that could be addressed if people united.
Dr. King was killed when he started talking about poor people, not when he was focused on civil rights. Uniting America has long been the greatest fear of economic elites and remains their greatest fear.
I totally agree with this. Have you come across any hard evidence of this modern-day playbook or are you piecing it together based on what you've observed? I assume most contemporary "anti-racists" are in earnest and don't want to be doing that at all but are they being manipulated by others?
It is what I see and it makes sense given who funds some of these organizations. And you are correct to see the irony; anti-racists typically emphasize racial differences in ways that separate people, just like racist ideology used to do.
Also, consider this: Imagine you were the elites in 2015. Gay marriage is legalized and one of the biggest culturally divisive issues of the last 50 years has been settled and people have come to accept gay people. You are totally bummed. But you realize you can divide people again with trans issues and make money off it too (lots of lifetime medical care!) It doesn't work that way--the Bohemian Grove didn't plan this out--but groups fall into the trap of harming themselves all the time.
This was the argument Freddie DeBoer made in How Elites Ate the Social Justice Movement -- NGO mission-creep once their original goals were achieved. I'm not sure if I buy it or not. I 100% think a lot of social justice goals and ideologies are far outside the mainstream and damage the Left. I'm just not entirely sure yet why this is happening. Jen Pan also has a very good book out called "Why the Rich Love Anti-Racism"
You mentioned several books i want to check out. I appreciate your smart writing.
On the NGO issue, one of the first articles you often read in a grad level interest groups course is about how the NAACP basically collapsed after the passage of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. Today's NGOs have internalized that lesson, which is why nothing can get better and everything expands.
Useful as always. Sadly, much activism is driven by dysfunctional impulses. My son despaired at college when it became clear that 95% of the participants in the University green activist group were just performative, wanting to feel good about themselves and like they were in the superior crowd as opposed to actually doing something useful, or at least not generating a bunch of unnecessary waste as part of a protest against waste. The new "liberal" movement on line is rife with people looking to out-virtue everyone who makes an actual useful suggestion by trying to connect it up with white privilege or whatever and therefore reject it. I have pointed out elsewhere https://laboristmovement.substack.com/p/protest-without-more-is-the-opiate that the bulk of recent protests have been performative feel-goods rather than anything designed to serve an actual purpose.
I do think that part of this is actually intentional evil. The East German Stasi records reveal that this was an explicit tactic of theirs to undermine action organizations, using plants to derail useful efforts by raising a bunch of pseudo-virtue demands that stifled progress. I would be amazed if it was not true that many of the attacks one sees on line are done by PR firms trying to suppress useful activity, knowing that other people will then pile on because joining the attacks makes them feel good about themselves.
I think a proper laborist movement would need to be strongly dedicated to your advice, understanding that toxic shaming is not helpful and that it is important to regard other people as human beings. One can focus, for example, on factually criticizing leaders like Lindsey Graham without criticizing the people who voted for him, allowing them the mental out of saying "yeah, he was sure a disappointment." One can recognize that views on immigration and affirmative action and crime and lots of other things are properly complicated and human and have genuine humility in talking through them, trying to find common ground (of which I think there is A LOT, and that most of us can agree on most things if we get off the ramparts and listen to each other) rather than trying to feel superior.
By the way, I should note that I have at least one case where the other path worked. My father in law was a big-time watcher of Fox News and reader of the Washington Times and other propaganda rags. We got together with him every Friday and he liked to talk politics and world events, and he would try to accuse us of supporting various Democrats he hated despite our repeatedly pointing out that we hate the Wall Street warmongering neoliberals as much as he did and had voted against all of them, albeit mostly 3rd party. But I engaged with him in the discussion, and when he gave me stuff to read I actually read it and then discussed it with him. It was mostly propaganda tripe but it included a number of pretty interesting factual things. Because I gave him the respect of listening to what he said and reading what he offered, he listened, too. While he was never willing to acknowledge that Fox News was globalist financier propaganda, when we got down to "wouldn't it be best if the government did X and didn't do Y?", we almost always got to agreement, and that agreement was pretty much in line with what traditional liberal philosophy - back when "liberal" meant liberty from both government and corporate/financier oppression and exploitation - would have favored. I have encountered other cases that are so into the game of wanting to be anti that they will just escalate the craziness when you try to engage, because it makes them feel good. But I think most would still be more like my father in law if given the chance.
Yes. TLDR; I am Jewish, fairly educated (state school undergrad, Chicago grad), lived in DC, Chicago, NYC and now Paris. I am conservative. 3x Trump voter.
I used to be a liberal Democrat.
So many times I have been in book clubs, Shabbat dinners, cocktail parties, where people feel comfortable openly insulting me, every conservative, my family, etc.
If I am being honest, it somewhat contributed to how I see the world (that and reading Milton Friedman, Toqueville, Commentary, etc.)
I am open to hearing someone's different perspective. But holding me, Ellie, personally accountable for everything Tucker Carlson says or whatever does sorry little to change my mind.
From the Unwoke side it looks as though the Progressives are addicted to virtue signaling, preening as the Compassionate Ones, and self-aggrandizement. Not a good mix.
From my perspective it seems like the "unwoke" are more interested in delegitimizing any and all ideas perceived as coming from a "woke" ideology than they are in fostering a better conversation and a true market place of ideas.
There are plenty of things to criticize wokeness on that could be constructive, but we never get there because people just straight up lie about what woke are saying and trying to do.
Sure, Matthew Yglesias recently admonished democrats that if they want to start winning elections again, they should "moderate" on race. And the example he gave of democratic politician demonstrating an position on race in need of moderation was a tweet by libs of tik tok about a Texas state rep named Gene Wu who had said "white people are oppressors and non-whites are the majority now and should take over the country".
Except thats not what he said.
What Wu was actually saying was that Latino and Asian voters have been told that their political interests are at cross purposes and thus have been politically divided when in reality many of their issues overlap and the cause of the problems they face is rooted in the republican party. He did not once say that white people are oppressors, or that non-whites should take over the country.
Where he did mention white people was earlier in the interview where he noted that fears of becoming a demographic minority have pushed some white people into white nationalist politics or the belief that this country is reserved for white cultural hegemony. Now you can disagree with this perspective, although I’d find it hard to argue against given the current reaction to Bad Bunny’s Superbowl show and the calls to denaturalize Wu over his speech, but its a legitimate position to take and one that should have its fair shake in the marketplace of ideas….if that is what we still believe in when liberals say things.
Well no, Yglesias isn't a lefty. He's a centrist moderate. And he didn't generate the lie. Libs of Tik Tok (and End Wokeness) lied about what Wu said and Yglesias uncritically repeated the lie because his first principle in understanding politics is that everything is always the left's fault first and foremost.
And of course what Wu was actually saying and why gets lost in the shuffle because everyone to the right of Bernie Sanders has a vested interest in pretending there's nothing worth actually debating with the left.
Aha. I tend not to follow these types, had to look them up. So you are saying that the woke-criticals Libs of Tik Tok lied about Wu. Yeah. I can believe it. Happens all the time -- on both sides. Very frustrating. And idiots who don't check end up amplifying it.
I have been trying to debate with progressives for some time, and it has been a very unproductive enterprise... despite the fact that I have some sympathies with some of their points. My sense of it is that we live in different realities, and their reality is hitched to tribalism and ideology -- truth and reality on the ground be damned.
When we consider social media, could it be that people are venting rather than shaming? I won't pretend I don't know what you're talking about. Believe it or not, in some of my group chats *I'm* the one who gently suggests someone not send a condescending text to their uncle (this is why people hate Liberals!) I think many people are angry and frustrated and they're signaling to others in *their own group*. Commiserating, not trying to influence or persuade the other side. Trying to stage manage this tendency seems like an exercise in futility to me.
Also, I feel compelled to point out it's not like conservatives are making an effort to reach out and persuade libs. Find me the equivalent of 'Libs of TikTok' on the left. It's a big emotional lift to be on my best behavior when videos of the Obamas as apes are coming out of the White House, not some rando on Twitter. It's not easy being high-minded when you're confronted with a firehose of poison, aggression and nastiness almost daily from the ruling class.
Open hostility, denigration, and being told in a million ways big and small, 'You're not a REAL American,' also engenders defensiveness.
It does feel like there is no equivalent of these type of arguments on the right.
Lately it seems like the MAGA right has jumped the shark a bit so Ive seen a few Free Press article with headlines that appear as an admonishement to the right....but usually these are couched by still blaming the left for inspiring such overboard reactions.
Im waiting for someone on the right to make the connection between the comical racism directed at Barack Obama and the rise of peak woke.
What you said was all true and good, but you’ve missed one key matter.
.
The point you missed is that it is always best for you to show love to others. By showing others love - whether they “deserve” it or not - you will always feel better within yourself. Giving love to others is even better for you than receiving love - once you become an adult.
There's also a strong "your boos mean nothing, we've seen what makes you cheer" aspect for a lot of people. I'm a center right guy, and I'm absolutely not going to be shamed by people who tried to pass Joe Biden off as coherent, or apply identity based double standards when assessing the morality of something, or who destroy every city unfortunate enough to be governed by them. I'm mostly talking about progressives here, but enough liberals will go along with them that I feel justified in treating them the same.
I'm genuinely curious what you'd make of my account of the Jodi Shaw saga. I don't know if you've heard of what happened with her and Smith College but I was at ground zero of that particular culture war and it informed my current views on how these culture debates are bit skewed in how we view both sides:
In my neck of the woods—beach adjacent LA area—Trump bashing is a local sport. And among my social set—I’m a career environmental lawyer mostly for nonprofits—Trump is evil incarnate.
I myself am pretty politically homeless here because my classical liberal values have been largely superseded by a more illiberal progressivism. Here I’m actually perceived as right wing for the simple crime of not demonizing anyone who doesn’t share their views.
In short, these folks (including most of my friends) will never change no matter what you write.
And turning everything into a morality play is a major reason why Dems refuse to examine their priors and understand just how whacked out and out of touch progressive policies have become.
Dont you think you're doing something similar in this comment?
Not quite. All these progressive folks with whom I disagree about their demonization of Trump supporters are still my friends. And it is progressive policies I take issue with. Certainly I’m frustrated but it’s the water I swim in.
You dont know what social transistion means? Its just the basic first step of gender transition. The step that a lot of people stop at. Changing your name, pronouns, dress....that sort of thing.
Okay I get you, but hear me out. And I'm not saying this is the case definitively, but could it be that the reason why you are still able to be friends who hold progressive politics that you don't support while those people are not able to maintain friendships with people who hold MAGA politics or even sympathies for MAGA politics is that those progressive politics just aren't as objectionable even if you don't agree.
And again, I'm not arguing that this is the case, but couldn't that be a possibility?
Like maybe its just easier to disagree but remain cordial with someone who believes that kids should be able to socially transition than it is to disagree but remain friendly with someone who believes in race science.
OMG to miss the point like this.
I dont think I missed the point. But this article, this comment, and most of the replies are of the opinion that there is something wrong with left political expression that invites backlash....im asking if anyone can concieve of the opposite being true.
It's always different when they do it, isn't it?
What do you mean?
I think there are largely miserable very online people at the extremes of both camps who make literally everything political and another more moderate group in both camps who prefer not to corrupt everything in their lives including relationships by conditioning everything on the “right” politics.
I’m the latter type of person.
Sure, I understand that. On some level I even envy it. But I do think it's a luxury to view politics as something that can be kept separate from your personal life.
It’s not a luxury; it doesn’t cost anything. And it’s a better way to live. Trust me.
Socially transition? Huh?
This feels like a letter from 2024. The world has changed. Time to move with it.
2024 was 14 months ago. These kinds of things don’t change that fast. But yes the vibe is different. I detest the MAGA GOP but I don’t think the Dem establishment has fully internalized just how just plain stupid its earlier ideological positions were. I’m hopeful, but we’re far from getting back to a less elitist driven postmodern epistemic ideology. Certainly not in academia nor in philanthropy and nonprofits where I live.
14 months ago we didn’t have Americans getting shot on city streets by masked federal officers. Things change fast.
Well in my view the murders by masked federal goons would not have happened without Trump. And Trump almost certainly would not have been reelected if the Dems did not alienate millions of Independents and moderates with all the Progressive insanity of the Biden years. Try as she did, Kamala Harris could not shake off her they/them past because she’s an empty vessel.
Hopefully by 2028 we’ll get a Dem party that acts less like an elitist activist group and more like the trad left which I miss terribly.
This dynamic of shame and defining self-worth is very old. Read "Loving: Interracial Intimacy in America and the Threat to White Supremacy" and you will see that one reason for white supremacy and segregation was to keep poor whites and blacks from becoming a coherent political force. Elites gave the poor whites self-worth, in part by saying "you're better than those people", even while keeping them down.
Today, elites use race and an array of other issues to separate people; the shaming of today is just a variant of the original playbook. What, you don't think trans women are women? Transphobe! You think we should deport people? Bigot! And it is still about keeping the masses from realizing that they have common problems that could be addressed if people united.
Dr. King was killed when he started talking about poor people, not when he was focused on civil rights. Uniting America has long been the greatest fear of economic elites and remains their greatest fear.
I totally agree with this. Have you come across any hard evidence of this modern-day playbook or are you piecing it together based on what you've observed? I assume most contemporary "anti-racists" are in earnest and don't want to be doing that at all but are they being manipulated by others?
It is what I see and it makes sense given who funds some of these organizations. And you are correct to see the irony; anti-racists typically emphasize racial differences in ways that separate people, just like racist ideology used to do.
Also, consider this: Imagine you were the elites in 2015. Gay marriage is legalized and one of the biggest culturally divisive issues of the last 50 years has been settled and people have come to accept gay people. You are totally bummed. But you realize you can divide people again with trans issues and make money off it too (lots of lifetime medical care!) It doesn't work that way--the Bohemian Grove didn't plan this out--but groups fall into the trap of harming themselves all the time.
This was the argument Freddie DeBoer made in How Elites Ate the Social Justice Movement -- NGO mission-creep once their original goals were achieved. I'm not sure if I buy it or not. I 100% think a lot of social justice goals and ideologies are far outside the mainstream and damage the Left. I'm just not entirely sure yet why this is happening. Jen Pan also has a very good book out called "Why the Rich Love Anti-Racism"
You mentioned several books i want to check out. I appreciate your smart writing.
On the NGO issue, one of the first articles you often read in a grad level interest groups course is about how the NAACP basically collapsed after the passage of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. Today's NGOs have internalized that lesson, which is why nothing can get better and everything expands.
Useful as always. Sadly, much activism is driven by dysfunctional impulses. My son despaired at college when it became clear that 95% of the participants in the University green activist group were just performative, wanting to feel good about themselves and like they were in the superior crowd as opposed to actually doing something useful, or at least not generating a bunch of unnecessary waste as part of a protest against waste. The new "liberal" movement on line is rife with people looking to out-virtue everyone who makes an actual useful suggestion by trying to connect it up with white privilege or whatever and therefore reject it. I have pointed out elsewhere https://laboristmovement.substack.com/p/protest-without-more-is-the-opiate that the bulk of recent protests have been performative feel-goods rather than anything designed to serve an actual purpose.
I do think that part of this is actually intentional evil. The East German Stasi records reveal that this was an explicit tactic of theirs to undermine action organizations, using plants to derail useful efforts by raising a bunch of pseudo-virtue demands that stifled progress. I would be amazed if it was not true that many of the attacks one sees on line are done by PR firms trying to suppress useful activity, knowing that other people will then pile on because joining the attacks makes them feel good about themselves.
I think a proper laborist movement would need to be strongly dedicated to your advice, understanding that toxic shaming is not helpful and that it is important to regard other people as human beings. One can focus, for example, on factually criticizing leaders like Lindsey Graham without criticizing the people who voted for him, allowing them the mental out of saying "yeah, he was sure a disappointment." One can recognize that views on immigration and affirmative action and crime and lots of other things are properly complicated and human and have genuine humility in talking through them, trying to find common ground (of which I think there is A LOT, and that most of us can agree on most things if we get off the ramparts and listen to each other) rather than trying to feel superior.
By the way, I should note that I have at least one case where the other path worked. My father in law was a big-time watcher of Fox News and reader of the Washington Times and other propaganda rags. We got together with him every Friday and he liked to talk politics and world events, and he would try to accuse us of supporting various Democrats he hated despite our repeatedly pointing out that we hate the Wall Street warmongering neoliberals as much as he did and had voted against all of them, albeit mostly 3rd party. But I engaged with him in the discussion, and when he gave me stuff to read I actually read it and then discussed it with him. It was mostly propaganda tripe but it included a number of pretty interesting factual things. Because I gave him the respect of listening to what he said and reading what he offered, he listened, too. While he was never willing to acknowledge that Fox News was globalist financier propaganda, when we got down to "wouldn't it be best if the government did X and didn't do Y?", we almost always got to agreement, and that agreement was pretty much in line with what traditional liberal philosophy - back when "liberal" meant liberty from both government and corporate/financier oppression and exploitation - would have favored. I have encountered other cases that are so into the game of wanting to be anti that they will just escalate the craziness when you try to engage, because it makes them feel good. But I think most would still be more like my father in law if given the chance.
Here, here. So many people are wasting their time trying to mock the GOP. It can't and won't work.
https://imnotyourechochamber.substack.com/p/the-real-trump-derangement-syndrome?r=2ddaj4
Yes. TLDR; I am Jewish, fairly educated (state school undergrad, Chicago grad), lived in DC, Chicago, NYC and now Paris. I am conservative. 3x Trump voter.
I used to be a liberal Democrat.
So many times I have been in book clubs, Shabbat dinners, cocktail parties, where people feel comfortable openly insulting me, every conservative, my family, etc.
If I am being honest, it somewhat contributed to how I see the world (that and reading Milton Friedman, Toqueville, Commentary, etc.)
I am open to hearing someone's different perspective. But holding me, Ellie, personally accountable for everything Tucker Carlson says or whatever does sorry little to change my mind.
From the Unwoke side it looks as though the Progressives are addicted to virtue signaling, preening as the Compassionate Ones, and self-aggrandizement. Not a good mix.
From my perspective it seems like the "unwoke" are more interested in delegitimizing any and all ideas perceived as coming from a "woke" ideology than they are in fostering a better conversation and a true market place of ideas.
There are plenty of things to criticize wokeness on that could be constructive, but we never get there because people just straight up lie about what woke are saying and trying to do.
Thank you for engaging. What do you mean by it? By "delegitimizing" and "lies"? Can you give an example?
Sure, Matthew Yglesias recently admonished democrats that if they want to start winning elections again, they should "moderate" on race. And the example he gave of democratic politician demonstrating an position on race in need of moderation was a tweet by libs of tik tok about a Texas state rep named Gene Wu who had said "white people are oppressors and non-whites are the majority now and should take over the country".
Except thats not what he said.
What Wu was actually saying was that Latino and Asian voters have been told that their political interests are at cross purposes and thus have been politically divided when in reality many of their issues overlap and the cause of the problems they face is rooted in the republican party. He did not once say that white people are oppressors, or that non-whites should take over the country.
Where he did mention white people was earlier in the interview where he noted that fears of becoming a demographic minority have pushed some white people into white nationalist politics or the belief that this country is reserved for white cultural hegemony. Now you can disagree with this perspective, although I’d find it hard to argue against given the current reaction to Bad Bunny’s Superbowl show and the calls to denaturalize Wu over his speech, but its a legitimate position to take and one that should have its fair shake in the marketplace of ideas….if that is what we still believe in when liberals say things.
So... I am confused. You seem to be saying a leftie lied about another leftie saying stuff. Um?
Well no, Yglesias isn't a lefty. He's a centrist moderate. And he didn't generate the lie. Libs of Tik Tok (and End Wokeness) lied about what Wu said and Yglesias uncritically repeated the lie because his first principle in understanding politics is that everything is always the left's fault first and foremost.
And of course what Wu was actually saying and why gets lost in the shuffle because everyone to the right of Bernie Sanders has a vested interest in pretending there's nothing worth actually debating with the left.
Aha. I tend not to follow these types, had to look them up. So you are saying that the woke-criticals Libs of Tik Tok lied about Wu. Yeah. I can believe it. Happens all the time -- on both sides. Very frustrating. And idiots who don't check end up amplifying it.
I have been trying to debate with progressives for some time, and it has been a very unproductive enterprise... despite the fact that I have some sympathies with some of their points. My sense of it is that we live in different realities, and their reality is hitched to tribalism and ideology -- truth and reality on the ground be damned.
When we consider social media, could it be that people are venting rather than shaming? I won't pretend I don't know what you're talking about. Believe it or not, in some of my group chats *I'm* the one who gently suggests someone not send a condescending text to their uncle (this is why people hate Liberals!) I think many people are angry and frustrated and they're signaling to others in *their own group*. Commiserating, not trying to influence or persuade the other side. Trying to stage manage this tendency seems like an exercise in futility to me.
Also, I feel compelled to point out it's not like conservatives are making an effort to reach out and persuade libs. Find me the equivalent of 'Libs of TikTok' on the left. It's a big emotional lift to be on my best behavior when videos of the Obamas as apes are coming out of the White House, not some rando on Twitter. It's not easy being high-minded when you're confronted with a firehose of poison, aggression and nastiness almost daily from the ruling class.
Open hostility, denigration, and being told in a million ways big and small, 'You're not a REAL American,' also engenders defensiveness.
It does feel like there is no equivalent of these type of arguments on the right.
Lately it seems like the MAGA right has jumped the shark a bit so Ive seen a few Free Press article with headlines that appear as an admonishement to the right....but usually these are couched by still blaming the left for inspiring such overboard reactions.
Im waiting for someone on the right to make the connection between the comical racism directed at Barack Obama and the rise of peak woke.
Tom Friedman changed his card about 10 years ago from “Foreign Affairs Columnist” to “Humiliation and Dignity Columnist.”
What you said was all true and good, but you’ve missed one key matter.
.
The point you missed is that it is always best for you to show love to others. By showing others love - whether they “deserve” it or not - you will always feel better within yourself. Giving love to others is even better for you than receiving love - once you become an adult.
There's also a strong "your boos mean nothing, we've seen what makes you cheer" aspect for a lot of people. I'm a center right guy, and I'm absolutely not going to be shamed by people who tried to pass Joe Biden off as coherent, or apply identity based double standards when assessing the morality of something, or who destroy every city unfortunate enough to be governed by them. I'm mostly talking about progressives here, but enough liberals will go along with them that I feel justified in treating them the same.
I'm genuinely curious what you'd make of my account of the Jodi Shaw saga. I don't know if you've heard of what happened with her and Smith College but I was at ground zero of that particular culture war and it informed my current views on how these culture debates are bit skewed in how we view both sides:
https://onone.substack.com/p/on-anti-racism-part-one-a-failure?r=8oq07
https://onone.substack.com/p/on-anti-racism-part-two-validation?r=8oq07
https://onone.substack.com/p/on-anti-racism-part-three-enemy-at?r=8oq07
https://onone.substack.com/p/on-anti-racism-part-four-fight-with?r=8oq07