mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
self-congratulation
“Fake News” Is the New “Bregret”
Features Icon
Features
show comments
  • (((kingschitz)))

    Facts do not penetrate the bubble. Those of a certain age may recall the occasional stories (as late as the 1960s) of crazed SS cabals plotting to restore the Reich or what were politely called Japanese “nationalists” seeking the return of the Co-Prosperity Sphere.

    Margaret Mitchell’s Gone With The Wind is defective as history on several counts, but one theme—that 1865 brought the end of a certain type of Southerner—is indisputable.

    American liberal leftists are now left with their Ghost Dancing rituals. The chant includes Comey, fake news, Wikileaks, stupid racist voters, Putin, sexists, and old white people.

  • Anthony

    Pundits, experts, opinion makers, journalists, et al are trying to explain (make sense of) forces at play (both home and abroad). However, all of it may be short-sighted in that it focuses on personalities – Trump, Duterte, Marine LePen, et al – and isms – nativism, populism, protectionism, nationalism, etc. On the other hand, there are both structural and generational long-term forces at play that require focus also to better understand dynamic alluded to vis-a-vis West (though it’s not just the West) cf. Reva Goujon.

    Meanwhile, the New Yorker profile, though extensive, hardly focuses on “Fake News” – the quote above is part of a wide-ranging David Remnick interview. David Remnick may be Obama inclined but the interview is not an attack on Trump voters. And there is a leap in logic to go from “new media ports of entry” to establishment liberals decry faux misinformation sites as precipitating Trump victory (hasty generalization perhaps) – TAI, what’s that you write about “Revisionist Powers”?

    Above that, yes, “the public has lost faith in the media broadly” redounds to the dissemination issue and that certainly is an institutional issue that requires rigorous examination by all citizens interested in fair and balance news (information) delivery. Indeed, there ought to be no blame on public inadequacy but on a compromised/segmented media establishment riven itself by interests beyond public (civic) enlightenment.

    Be that as it may, Fake News is the New Bregret is on to one point and that is the counter-productive liberal tendency to minimize certain political leanings of Trump supporters as uninformed or illegitimate. Liberals ought to take away from this election “telling people they’re not allowed to think certain things or prefer certain policies, or calling them names for doing so, doesn’t eliminate those thoughts and preferences.” In any event, the media, more so than a culpable, uninformed public, has failed (for at least twenty-five years now – a generation, no less) in providing our Democracy the kind of airing of ideas and arguments that may have precluded much of our current acrimony in a closely divided country. There ought not be “self-satisfied assurances” on either side of divide.

  • LarryD

    Our modern elites have a serious reality-checking deficiency. And that’s why they fail.

    • Terenc Blakely

      “Our elites aren’t elite but they are elitists.”

  • Disappeared4x

    Chicken or egg? Did 2008 candidate Obama trigger the descent of the MSM into propaganda ?

    The July 18, 2008 issue of The New Yorker was, in my view, a turning point for the MSM. The public ‘outrage’ was over the cover art. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3c6265d5807547de4dfd3ff244c52dd48ab0506d6316495d3c7304bc0e8c85f6.jpg

    My epiphany was in reading Ryan Lizza’s profile of candidate “Making It: How Chicago shaped Obama ” http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2008/07/21/making-it

    The 2008 Obama campaign banned Lizza from the European trip.

    In July 2008, Obama supporters in Brooklyn were bullying newsstands into banning The New Yorker.

    I kept reading both, less and less, until I gave up on the MSM in 2014. The descent into propaganda was too obvious.

    In 2016, could anyone in the MSM tell the difference between a chicken or egg?

    • Fat_Man

      The MSM was pumping propaganda long before you were born. Google Walter Duranty.

      • Disappeared4x

        2008 was different. You might want to read Timothy Snyder’s “Bloodlands” which put Duranty’s lies in the NYT about Stalin’s decimation of Ukraine in that overflowing dustbin of history.

        • Fat_Man

          I moved to New York City in 1975*. I started reading the Times and the New Yorker. By 1980, I understood that they published nothing other than party propaganda. 2008, was more of the same, but louder and in glorious technicolor.

          Left for the heartland in 1985.

  • FriendlyGoat

    Those who call themselves liberal in America need to first recognize that the driving force which elected Donald Trump was a congregation of mostly-white, mostly-Protestant church attendees in many denominations who describe themselves as “evangelical” or “born again”—–and that no other group actually did it or could possibly have done it in the collection of states which produced the electoral college result. That the people most raised and marinated in the presumed Sunday School message of kindness gravitated——to the tune of 81%—-to the most verbally unkind and untruthful campaign of our lifetimes is THE political story, THE American religious mystery and THE future challenge.

    The second thing for liberals to realize is that there is no professional media which will be covering this story with enough depth to unravel it because the advertisers in professional media are not comfortable with the subject matter. But there is not going to be any left-side political recovery until this church voting bloc is re-converted back to humble spiritualism from its present infatuation with nationalism and a cult-like attraction to “kick butt” talk. At the moment, the few from this group with any reservations at all are stuck on “Hillary made us do it”. If and when those people realize that actually Hillary DIDN’T cast a spell over their hearts and brains—- but something else did—- and the rest start waking up to a heartfelt sickness of the consequences rolling in, there can be talk of political pendulum swing. Meanwhile, corporatism will be making huge gains over people’s lives and you don’t get to reverse that even a little bit until you help pull the church out of its present mental ditch. As long as America’s church-goers cannot recover Holy Spirit kindness, the political scene is sick.

    • Arkeygeezer

      Oh, now churches are the blame for the Democratic defeat? What happened Goat? Did you run out of other reasons?

      • FriendlyGoat

        No, I’m trying to be realistic about the real demographic which just produced the present election result, the only one which could have and the one now documented by polling to have done so. This also happens to be the one which cannot and will not be spoken of in adequate terms by professional journalists because they cannot endure from a business standpoint the kind of criticism to which I have become accustomed in the comment section. There is a difference between WHAT is to blame (probably dozens of falsehoods) and WHO bought into them. I’m identifying “the BIG WHO”.

        We are permitted to analyze urban vs. rural, rich vs. poor, races, ethnicities, genders, down to levels like “Soccer Moms” in previous elections. The left side HAS TO come to eventually recognize where the big swing came from. It came from people who once celebrated the real theme of the New Testament and lately have been enticed elsewhere in droves.

        • Angel Martin

          Evangelical Protestants are 25 percent of the population.

          Blaming or crediting them alone for electing Trump is bogus.

          http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/

          • FriendlyGoat

            Well, 81% of 25% happens to be a huge influence when a mere 200,000 votes or less distributed in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan would have changed this entire national outcome.

          • Disappeared4x

            Which Protestant churches have adopted the hateful pro-Palestinian BDS language? Those are the churches which have been brainwashed into the false secularism of the far left, now busy trying to do the same to ‘medieval’ Catholics.

        • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

          You and your Progressive fellow-travelers, by your insistence that government be the caregiver of first resort, stand in the way of the real theme of the New Testament with respect to charity. You have us rendering unto Caesar, what we should be rendering in God’s name to the less-fortunate in more direct – and efficient, and effective – ways.

          You sound a lot like those who declare that “Jesus was a socialist”, when His Parable of the Talents – and Proverbs 31 – indicate a healthy respect for an honest profit.

          • FriendlyGoat

            As the single response to all three of your replies this morning, I would invite you to read both of these articles about business today.
            https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/11/activist-investors/506330/
            https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/11/trump-antitrust-barry-lynn/507917/

          • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

            Those articles start off with a fundamental flaw.

            Those other Caesars have no power to coerce behavior, unless they collude with the government Caesar. And the more you ask government to do FOR you, the more opportunities you have for just such collusion … as in Hillary’s need to keep two different messages, for voters and donors.

            But the problem is more fundamental than that, when it comes to charitable activity:

            The Federal government is structurally incapable … regardless of the intent of its operatives at any given time … to deal with anything beyond one-size-fits-all programs involving defense and infrastructure.

            The operatives simply do not have the perceptual ability, no matter how educated or virtuous they are, to accurately determine the best course of action for each individual when it comes to resolving the highly-individualized problems of personal economics, employment/career, and health.

            We are talking about a nation with 300 million living/breathing people that face these challenges over entire lifetimes … compared to this level of problem-solving, building Saturn V’s and going to the moon a half-dozen times in a few years were mere exercises in Lego building, and we remember the effort that endeavor took.

            And to even come close to gaining the insight needed to effectively and efficiently resolve such problems, the operatives would have to act in ways that would seriously threaten the freedom-of-conscience and other civil liberties of the individual, as well as equal protection under the law.

            Because we (rightly, IMO) stop short of that, the government “toolbox” is reduced to two tools … a bag of money … and a set of handcuffs. Neither of which are precise enough to resolve socio-economic problems at the individual level … nor can their application be modified fast enough to prevent serious harm to individuals when the operators make an error. In fact, because the process is subject to the effects of politics and bureaucratic inertia, errors are often perpetuated instead of corrected.

            And all that assumes the presence of operatives of the highest moral and ethical character … and it is quite evident that our government falls quite short in that regard.

            The history of the Great Society welfare state reflects what I describe … not only has it been counterproductive when applied to many people, it has proven that the government cannot even, reliably, tell the difference between the truly needy … and the merely greedy who choose to “get by” on other peoples’ money when they are capable of getting ahead by taking the initiative to do so.

            And top-down government “help”, combined with a FALSE narrative of pervasive racism that has gone on for fifty years after Jim Crow was lynched by the Civil Rights Act, has also done more to keep people of color down than the KKK could ever dream of. BTW, from what I see, Trump sees this and is willing to challenge it.

            All because we rendered unto Caesar, what we should have been rendering “to the least of these” in more direct – and non-coercive – ways.

          • FriendlyGoat

            You have elected what you want and believe in. The consequences of that are very, very large and very, very long. As I have told all my other regular critics—-Stay Tuned, not to me, but to what your new government does and for whose benefit.

            I have my opinions, suspicions and predictions, but the only thing that counts is what you will see taking place when it takes place.

          • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

            I submit that the consequences will be far more benign than you imply.

            At least this government is less likely than its predecessor – or the government its opponent would have instituted – to operate under the assumption that its operatives are omniscient, infallible, and superior to the governed.

          • FriendlyGoat

            You have pointed out that the actions of government sometimes have unintended consequences. History is also replete with examples of inaction by government having unintended consequences. Somebody is always figuring out how to take advantage of any situation and that is usually the ones holding the capital to do so. So, I submit that though a substantial segment of ordinary USA people have been either actually falling behind or perceiving themselves as falling behind for several decades, there is still much more room for downside than most of them think.

            The world population is going straight up, technology is slated to be eliminating more family-supporting jobs than ever, and our people just responded to those concerns here by celebrating and enthroning what will increasingly look like a Royal Family and an aristocracy empowered beyond its dreams.

            Stay Tuned, not to me, to your new government.

          • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

            You have pointed out that the actions of government sometimes have unintended consequences.

            No, what I have pointed out is that the limits of human perception and insight, as well as respect for civil liberties, render government structurally incapable of effectively and efficiently delivering compassionate aid … no matter the good intentions of its operatives. This is reminiscent of doing brain surgery, blindfolded – and not recommended.

            You are advocating the wrong tool for the job.

            Somebody is always figuring out how to take advantage of any situation and that is usually the ones holding the capital to do so.

            Capital itself cannot coerce behavior from us … capital colluding with government can do so. Like I said, the more you ask government to do FOR you – including protecting you – the more opportunities you create for just such collusion.

            Government has a legitimate mission: securing our unalienable rights. It is when it steps beyond that mission, in the name of “social justice” or “compassion” or any other reason, that it becomes dysfunctional. This does not mean that these objectives necessarily lack merit – it means that they need to be pursued by the people, outside of government and its monopoly on coercive force and printing money.

            … and our people just responded to those concerns here by celebrating and enthroning what will increasingly look like a Royal Family and an aristocracy empowered beyond its dreams.

            All they are doing is taking over the apparatus Progressives created over the years, celebrating and enthroning their own aristocracy – whom I refer to as high priests of The Cult of the Credentialed and Connected Omniscient. And while I don’t think the Trump Administration shares the arrogant, condescending hubris of that Cult, perhaps their presence will make Progressives reconsider the value of limited governance.

          • FriendlyGoat

            There is no way you punish “progressives” without punishing two thirds or more of the people who voted for this new Republican alignment. This will become clear over time. Stay Tuned, not to me, to your new government.

          • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

            I’m not interested in punishing anyone. I’m interested in bringing them back to reality.

            I’m interested in seeing people take control of their lives, to protect and grow themselves while helping their neighbors do the same … instead of becoming ever more vulnerable to the errors, greed, mendacity, and delusions of a small intellectual elite of “experts” and “leaders” by letting this elite continue to make so many decisions FOR them (and in the process, limiting their options and work-arounds).

            The latter is what we have already been doing, by living for seven decades in the Blue Social Model, accepting its assumptions as simply The Way Things Are and beyond the need to fundamentally question.

            In fact, I’d recommend that you yourself engage in such fundamental questioning, for you consistently espouse the conventional wisdom of the Blue Model as though it is simply The Way Things Are.

            Our problems are too deep and too fundamental, to think that changing the name cards at the head table of our society will solve them. We have changed leaders time and time again, yet the problems never get solved … in fact, many get bigger, like the national debt.

            It is the societal paradigm itself, that is dysfunctional. Our leaders only reflect it … and us. Even we conservatives bitterly cling to our pet pieces of the Blue Model … our pet tax deduction, that government grant that funds our business, that government service that delivers some benefit to us, some form of “protection” that we have been led to believe we need, even the status quo of Social Security and Medicare … instead of looking at the paradigm as a whole and honestly facing its fundamental flaws.

            In fact, my greatest concern about the incoming Administration is that they will not see this, and continue to treat the symptoms from the top down … instead of leading the people away from such dependence upon our elites, and towards the direct engagement of the proximate insight and individual initiative of the “ordinary” person as the primary problem-solving process.

            Because if we do not forsake the Blue Model and get our 300 million problem-solvers engaged, our decline becomes inevitable and perhaps intractable.

            Love does not delight in evil, but rejoices with the truth … I Corinthians 13:6.

          • FriendlyGoat

            We just elected a government which will please in most every way the top 30 million in the 300 million, but this was not done with 10% of the vote. It was done with about 50% which is going to leave 40% surprised and 90% disappointed with what 50% did. I know you believe that laissez-faire can fix this. I don’t.

          • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

            It will benefit a lot more than the 30 million – if they take the initiative to build upon the opportunities this new governance is likely to create as it moves away from the Progressive excesses of the last eight years … especially if it avoids the temptation to turn protectionist. Just as many did in the 1980’s and 1990’s.

            You assume that the 90% are incapable, of taking that initiative and therefore bear no responsibility to do so. That is your error … and the fundamental flaw of the Blue Social Model.

            We keep believing in that fundamental flaw, and our decline is inevitable – we MUST forsake it.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Why should Donald Trump avoid the temptation to “turn protectionist” when he absolutely RAN ON protectionism and without a doubt would not be president at all in absence of his bullsh*t on that? I’ve already had more than one conversation with people praising his level of lying on many subjects as being smart and cute. If you’re going there too, then we’re going to probably need to drop this conversation.

            When his supporters shift from being mad if he caves on his promises to them——to——-damn, I’m proud of him for being such a persuasive liar on all that stuff that was just for “Chumpsville Voters”, well, it’s another sign of the sickness of both the result and the supporters of it.

          • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

            How about the bullsh*t Hillary spread, about how she would “invest in you” … as though she can tell YOU and YOUR needs apart from a statistical average? Or the bullsh*t of having different messages for voters and donors? Or the bullsh*t of the DNC cheating on Sanders? Or the bullsh*t that systemic racism is THE problem for people of color to this day?

            And we already know about life in “Chumpsville”, with its population of “teabaggers” and “bitter clingers” as spread in the bullsh*t of pop-culture/media/political elites who never missed a moment to look down upon us “chumps” who didn’t place our faith in their Cult of the Credentialed and Connected Omniscient.

            https://reason.com/archives/2016/11/20/america-called-bullshit-on-saint-hillary

            Face it, this race was about who, in the eyes of the people of the various states, had the shorter pile of bullsh*t … and Trump won on that metric. He got my vote for that very reason, plus his willingness to challenge the conventional wisdom on race relations, plus the fact that the media and Congress will hold Jabber the Trump far more accountable than they would the Pantsuit Palpatine.

            And how many past Presidents have promised extreme policies during their campaigns, only to moderate themselves once it becomes their call on policy? Did Nixon promise to go to China in 1968? Did Reagan do more than joke about bombing the Russians? Did Obama not enforce the individual mandate, even flouting the law to do so?

            I hope Trump similarly moderates on “fair trade” … because protectionism is just another flavor of Blue Model policy that I consider corrosive to our future. His promises of that was one of the reasons I was a ReluctanTrumper and not a full-on supporter.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Yeah, Hillary made you do it, ReluctanTrumper that you are. That’s what I hear all over.
            Some families are well enough off to withstand years of onslaught from the Chamber of Commerce gang against their job opportunities, wages, labor standards, health care and elder pensions. Most aren’t. None of them were tipped by any of the Republicans that they will be asked for more and more and more austerity of every kind in the years ahead as the new American Royalty goes upward like a rocket ship. But nothing else is going to happen. Happy Bullsh*t. You and the rest of the apologizers have pulled a trigger you can’t stop.

          • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

            Some families understand the need to take the initiative to turn the opportunities the Chamber of Commerce gang leaves in their wake into better and more secure lives for themselves … better wages (and labor standards, and health care, and retirement financing) by working to become a valuable asset to a company (and other companies who will compete for their services) instead of settling for commodity status.

            I’ve lived that, and thrived. Without that, all those good things can’t be sustained.

            Others have been led to believe, by Progressives like you, that “experts” and “leaders” can be trusted to take care of all that, so all they have to do is punch in, do what they’re told, and punch out. They are the ones who will be left behind.

            When I’ve lived that, I’ve been burned.

            Doesn’t matter what you would like, FG … the Blue Social Model is fundamentally unsustainable. The sooner Progressives like you realize that and adjust, the better it will be for those who have been led to put their trust in that Model instead of the responsible exercise of their own initiative.

            One other thing … when it comes to royalty, Trump can’t compete with the arrogant, condescending Cult of the Credentialed and Connected Omniscient and its Styrofoam columns and faux-glass ceiling, his Administration is replacing.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I don’t have to “adjust”. I’m retired from both employment in the private sector and later self employment. I practiced plenty of self initiative with no government jobs and no union memberships. I know what “get up and go” is. I also happen to know how much harder it is today to start out than when I did decades ago in the Nixon, Ford era There is nothing about the parade of conservatism which helps make life actually work economically for the bulk of young couples trying to do the family thing right.
            If there was, the older conservatives lucky enough to still be in group health plans would not be so energized about wanting to be sure that “keep the kids on as dependents to age 26” doesn’t get repealed.

          • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

            Is it that much harder to start out, than in those days of stagflation? And if so, to what degree it is harder because Blue Model governance diminishes opportunities and options for those young folks?

            Conservative economics expands opportunities and options for those who take the initiative to build upon them. I’ve lived that, too, in a 33-year career in the tech sector that has taken me through multiple employers big and small.

            Conservative allegiance to personal responsibility leads one away from the conventional wisdom of accumulating debt and limiting one’s flexibility to respond to life’s changes in the name of instant gratification. I’ve experienced both sides of that hill, and I wouldn’t wish the consequences of that conventional wisdom on anyone.

            OTOH, the Blue Model works against both paragraphs just above … leaving millions vulnerable to life’s shocks like the collapse of the housing bubble and the recession that followed, and comfortably numb to their vulnerability … all because they think the Smart People™ will take care of them.

            I don’t see those older conservatives energized over the 26-year rule … I see them accommodating (imprudently, IMO) that benefit for others.

          • FriendlyGoat

            If only everyone could work in tech. Most of what I’ve heard from TAI itself about killing the Blue Model has dwelt upon driving for Uber, renting out a bedroom on AirBnB and getting rid of the licensure requirements for hair braiders. Seriously.

            As for repealing Obamacare, it’s true that conservatives are quite concerned about keeping the dependents to 26 rule. It’s one of the only positives they have ever mentioned about PPACA and they have mentioned it consistently as something they want kept. Some of them also want to keep coverage availability for pre-existing conditions, too, but those who say that merely demonstrate a complete cluelessness about how that was achieved in the first place with the rest of PPACA.

            Stay Tuned. On Obamacare you are about to see a “repeal” that is not a repeal. The insurance and medical industries are informing Congress and Trump now that their ship is neither going to be sunk nor turn on a dime—-which should have been the GOP messaging all along instead of the lying that took place for years running on this subject from every Republican on the planet.

          • Anthony

            FG, just speculation (as we all have our blind spots) but given all this rancor, resentment, rationalization, and self-serving bias, here’s two pieces – “Mourning for Whiteness” and “Fractured Country” – that add context (different though insightful – I particularly was struck by phrase “violence against the defenseless as strength”): http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/11/21/aftermath-sixteen-writers-on-trumps-america#morrison Bye the way, I read your Atlantic links on another thread and agree that both informs the willing interpreter.

          • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

            So, I submit that though a substantial segment of ordinary USA people have been either actually falling behind or perceiving themselves as falling behind for several decades, there is still much more room for downside than most of them think.

            I submit that the problem you describe here, is a more fundamental problem than government can resolve … and in fact, its attempts to intervene reinforce and exacerbate the dysfunctional thinking that creates the problem:

            https://www.facebook.com/notes/ritchie-the-riveter/outsourcing-is-the-problem-but-not-the-way-you-might-think/416571378389947

          • Jim__L

            Thank you for taking up the task of providing FG with a calm and well-reasoned response, you are unusually good at it.

          • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

            The hurt you refer to is, in fact, in large part the result of seventy years of encouraging these non-elites to simply punch in, do what they’re told, and punch out every day – under the expectation that the elites will solve their problems FOR them – instead of rising to the challenge of competing in the world economy, acting like more than interchangeable parts, and not waiting for others to solve those problems FOR them.

            Again, only government can coerce.

    • Anthony

      FG, I’m not sure yet (in my own mind) how this ties in with your theme (segment of Protestant Church) but reading your thought brings to mind last defined Populist Movement in U.S. – led by many Protestants. That movement (marinated in strong Protestant resistance to immigrants, Catholics, Jews, foreigners, and the regular whipping boy [blacks]) rested also on a sense of moral superiority (though imbued with an idea of preserving an agrarian and small-time way of life threatened by both modernization, economic hard times and anxieties and frustrations engendered by new societal forces).

      The reflection in your comment brought that U.S. historical period and its prime movement forces to mind – there are manifest similarities. History may not repeat itself but we humans fail to come to terms with its lessons at our peril.

      • FriendlyGoat

        People who seek to rebuild the kind of thinking favorable to Fair Labor Standards, elder programs, mitigation of inequality, global human rights, public education, the mixed-blessing benefits of trade, action on climate change, public infrastructure and so forth have no way forward without recognition of who just dealt all those world views a mountain-sized setback.

        This is not a call to demonize the church people. It is a call to re-evangelize the church people back to kindness. If this cannot be done, the political scene is going to continue to be very sick.

        • Anthony

          Thanks, and I read reply to Arkeygeezer. Equally, I have never considered your Evangelical commentary demonizing but recognized it as a fellow brother calling out his brethren to pause and reflect (a long way from demonizing by my lights). Your view is grounded, as best I can tell, in love of fellow man/woman despite his/her flaws – that’s neither left/right, progressive/conservative, liberal/reactionary, but it is human and God Bless you.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Thank you. Given that we write into small readership here, you may be the only person on earth who understands my expressed frustrations with the unfortunate drift of our “Christian nation” into spiritual Netherlands and the reasons I find the subject such a sad one.

          • Anthony

            I appreciate the acknowledgement but the earth encompasses many and your view (and frustrations) resonates – give it time but don’t cease the message (the struggle continues as I was once told as a mere lad).

          • Anthony

            When you get a moment something related (regarding work to be done – reworking social compact): fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-don’t-trust-their-institutions-anymore/

          • FriendlyGoat

            Thanks. Trump could actually restore some confidence if he were willing to absolutely say a flat “no” to some of the Republican legislation Ryan and McConnell are rushing to prepare. Quoting from the article a phrase about “Trump’s vows to eschew the interests of corporate America”, I do not now have reason to believe any such thing is coming to pass. Seeing as how we have elected this alignment and can’t reverse that error, it would be fun to see Trump absolutely astonish his party by going center-left on anything at all of substance. Can’t hope for that until it is seen.

          • Anthony

            Hope springs eternal as some like to say. But reading article for me drew parallel to your earlier discussion – the exasperating institutional failure and how we are challenged to find social balance if possible. By the way, I been meaning to tell you I like phrase “padded-wall asylum”.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Yes, that’s what we do here. Voluntary inmates, though, it seems. I sometimes wonder if TAI is ever alarmed by what it attracts as “regulars”.

          • Anthony

            It does make you wonder (because when initiated ViaMedia, if not high brow – WRM outlined some guidelines – availed a less intense partisan forum for idea consummation). But, ads (subcripitions) must be sold!

        • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

          FG, the problem with much of what you seek is that you seek to use our government as the delivery system, when that government is the wrong tool for that job. Many of us evangelicals would like to take that responsibility back, but Progressives INSIST that government must be involved, diminishing our ability to do so.

          And part of that insistence, is the desire to impose their moral viewpoint as The One and Only True Way with coercive force. They have become more fundamentalist than the Christian fundamentalists they decry.

    • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

      … most verbally unkind and untruthful campaign of our lifetimes …

      I’ll see that, and raise you seven decades of Progressive intellectual dishonesty, delivered in both sugar-coated and bitter flavors.

      Including the dishonesty that “kindness” must involve rendering unto Caesar as the delivery system.

  • Jacksonian_Libertarian

    “cocooned conservative voters”

    Conservative voters need only turn on the TV to get the leftist opinions of the completely biased Main Stream Media. Given this fact, it’s impossible for conservative voters to be cocooned, as they have to go looking for conservative arguments. On the other hand I have read numerous reports from leftists who say they don’t know any conservatives, and have never been exposed to conservative thinking. Washington DC voted 92.8% for Clinton and 4.1% for Trump, this is the kind of vote you would expect in a Communist Country, or a Dictatorship, and there isn’t any thing comparable on the Right for Trump. Wyoming was his best showing with 70% vs. 22.5% for Clinton for a similar 3 Electoral Votes.
    Here’s some food for thought, since the American People elected Trump despite the full throated roar of the Leftist MSM, how would they have voted if the media was balanced politically like the American People?

    • ljgude

      That DC vote is an eye opener – Drain the Swamp, indeed. They wont be drinking barrels of whisky on the white house lawn and shooting each other out of the sheer joy of it all like they did when Andrew Jackson became president, but there will be some serious consumption of ‘sippin’ whiskey’ here is the ‘conservative cocoon’ come Jan 20.

  • Angel Martin

    RE: “Bregret”.

    Just in case anyone in the UK was having second thoughts, the EU keeps coming up with more and more gems that validate the Exit vote.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3823706/European-human-rights-chiefs-orders-British-press-NOT-reveal-terrorists-Muslims.html

  • Mike Howard

    Hey, Progtards… The only fake news stories that had any impact on the election were the ones that equated Trump with Hitler.

  • CO2isGood

    Hopefully, the Left will continue to believe this poppycock they are feeding themselves. Shsssh! Do not tell them we knew exactly what we were doing when we rejected their neo-racist ideology driven agenda and voted for Trump.

  • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

    What they pushed too hard for, is to put nations and demographics they considered “uppity” in their place … and assure that their mellows would never be harshed with credible criticism from those who do not share the credentials/position/popularity/presentation skills of the allegedly-enlightented.

    Saving liberalism will require intellectual honesty and a respect for liberty that will make them, at the end, look a lot like conservatives.

  • InklingBooks

    Quote: “Cutting off globalization, dismantling the pan-European project, replacing egalitarian democracy with a kind of nationalistic authoritarian tendency.”

    Excuse me, but isn’t the entire point of the EU bureaucracy headquartered in Brussels to replace “egalitarian democracy” with a heck of a lot more than a mere “authoritarian tendency”? Isn’t its purpose to remove any opportunity for the citizens of a community or even a nation to make their own laws? Isn’t it an attack on democracy itself?

    And isn’t it obvious that the closer the governing officials are their citizens, the more likely the government is to be responsivel to their wishes. I’m an example. I live in a small town. If I dislike something it does, the city manager lives across the street from me, and city hall is within walking distance. My ability to democratically work for change here is enormous. That’s not remotely so for actions my federal government takes in faraway DC and even less so with those in the European union. Indeed, the very idea that EU could be democratic or egalitarian in any real sense is absurd. Kings treated peasants with more respect than Brussels treats Europeans.

    Elites like the EU project because they not only control it, they run it to serve their interests. They let Polish plumbers into the UK, so they can pay less when their plumbing goes bad. The same is true for their nannies and gardeners. They’re a labor consuming class that wants to keep the cost of employing those others down. Indeed, it’s easy to suspect that they enjoy the thought of their own countrymen being out of work. Long ago, G. K. Chesterton described them when he wrote of internationalists who “love every country but their own.”

    You admit as much with this remark: “Saving liberalism will require elite introspection and a deeper understanding of our current crisis of governance.” Behind that remark lies the revealing assumption that this liberal elite can choose or not choose to engage in that “introspection” and that what they’re now doing is not wrong. Their only failing is merely to “lack a deeper understanding.” They’re right about beliefs A, B, and C. They merely need to add an additional belief D.

    You aren’t suggesting that this elite could be wrong even intellectually, much less that it has been amoral, greedy and self-serving. You’ve merely raised the possibility that they have not been as clever as they might. Empoverishing Britsh working people with cheap imported labor and burying out their votes in those of poorly assimulated immigrants is fine. That simply needs to be done a bit more slowly and with increased secrecy. And above all else, there must be no more votes like Briexit anywhere else in Europe. There’s where this elite hostility toward democracy is best revealed.

    –Michael W. Perry, editor of Chesterton on War and Peace: Battling the Ideas and Movements that Led to Nazism and World War II

  • Terenc Blakely

    What we desperately need is a new federal agency that vets and fact checks the news before it’s disseminated. We could give it a catchy title ‘Ministry of Truth’, perhaps?

  • Gern Blandersong

    This is funny. The politicians and mainstream media blame the “fake” media. However, they forget or deny the fact that CBS 60 minutes in 2004 was also broadcasting fake news about George Bush’s National Guard experience during the presidential campaign. Or how about the fake news we learn from Wikileaks about news that is santized by the DNC and then printed in the New York Times and Politico. This is why the public distrusts all media.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service