“The same people that voted for Trump ran into burning buildings and saved whoever.. no matter what color they were, no matter what religion and they would do it again tomorrow.... So, if you want to sit and tell me that those people are giving tacit approval to an exploitative system ― I say, 'OK, and would you put your life on the line for people who aren’t like you? Because they did.”
Good point, but I also have to note the implicit assumption that people who vote Democrat aren't also giving tacit approval to an exploitative system. As an excuse for smug rudeness towards one's political opponents on either side of the aisle, that one stinks.
ReplyDeleteI'm always glad when they get even one of the points, these days. :)
ReplyDeleteI think this is where you see who are, in their hearts, more of the classical liberal, and who are more of the Gramscian Leftist. Apparently, Stewart is more liberal than leftist. The problem I see is that the agitators don't seem to be backing off at all, and they will continue to push the Democrat party leftward, and in doing so, maintain a kind of legitimacy and continue to push the culture leftward, true to their plan.
ReplyDeleteI think you're right, douglas, except I think of it in terms of the left-liberal and the left-anti-liberal. Or the left-sane and the left-psycho.
ReplyDeleteIt's really unfortunate that the left in general has been called liberal; they are anything but.
I always organize these disputes on the control axis. Given that there has to be some kind of order if we don't envision the ideal life as disconnected individuals grubbing for worms, what are the nature and origin of the order? What kind of consent should be involved? How do we decide things collectively, and what do we do about the fact that decisions are practically never unanimous? I like courts and law and predictability, but I agree with Grim's frequent admonition that each of us is still a kind of 24-hour ubiquitous policeman for any situation that needs immediate or informal attention. I believe in laws to rein in fraud and violence, but to the extent humanly possible I favor letting each pair of people work out a deal between them, and I think all charity has to be voluntary. I don't think a government can wave a wand and change physical reality, but I'm content to ignore most categories of race and gender until it's been solidly proved to me that we need a rule that treats their members differently; until then I'd rather let everyone compete and see what they can do. Those beliefs put me squarely in what would have been called a liberal camp at one time, but the terms are shifting.
ReplyDeleteI have written very negative things about Stewart and believe he epitomises much of the Smirker vs Worker divide. Yet I have seen him hit some targets pretty squarely, and this is one of them.
ReplyDeleteThe example that usually comes to my mind on this is Darryl Worley's "Have You Forgotten?" Country musicians don't always have nice things to say about New York and New Yorkers, but the song included the line We had neighbors still inside going through a living hell. He said neighbors, and my bet is not many New Yorkers would have said that about tragedy in Tennessee. In fact, there's been some hate-speech about Gatlinburg this week hasn't there? Jon Stewart seems to have seen this more clearly than many TV liberals do in their whole lifetime this week.
Then again, first responders aren't being given the authority of the United States.
ReplyDeleteIt is the King that rules, not the peasants that decide which class should be favored.
Humans elevate Stewart and Trum to positions of authority. That is not because they are the best but precisely because they are not.