I thought I was the only person who read this sort of stuff.
Yascha Mounk's prior book-- The People vs. Democracy: Why Our Freedom Is in Danger and How to Save It -- in 2018 is a good one to read to understand the view of the author.
This is the kind of high level view that is, unfortunately, completely disconnected to the reality of the electorate and the streets.
Let me take a small example: critical race theory. Using the term CRT inflames some and is the passionate belief of others, but at its core -- the notion that white men made laws that reflected their culture and heritage to the detriment of others, particularly black persons -- it is no great stretch of one's imagination.
In fact, Joe Biden's 1994/5 crime bills are Exhibit No 1 in support of the reality of CRT -- sentencing guidelines for powder cocaine v crack rocks.
Take that fact as true and then mix in the reality that black persons make up 13.4% of the population and a small segment of that population -- black men 16 - 30 -- account for more than 60% of the violent crime, 62% of murders, and are, therefore, incarcerated at a rate of 85% of our jails. FBI numbers.
Traditional patriarchal black families are virtually non-existent and black women are the prime market for abortion. These two facts are, of course, related.
Take those facts together and prioritize them and decide wherein CRT fits in the pantheon of ills.
You use the term "Trumpian alt-right" which is a divisive pejorative, by intention, and, yet, there are many who would fit under that umbrella who are simply opposed to policies of this President that have destroyed the southern border, put us on a path to WWIII, and who believe there is a wholesale low tide in law enforcement.
These are core policies, hardly "alt-right." Some of these folks are driving around in EVs holding these thoughts.
We are not really a democracy by specific intent of the Founding Fathers. We are a constitutional representative republic wherein we conduct state elections to anoint our representatives at both the local and Federal level. We elect Representatives, Senators, and Electoral College reps by virtue of voting for a President.
I close by saying that much of the lofty theory on such matters disappears when the streets are filled with BLM and Hamas riots -- or the real world as some think. Is this just an exercise in liberalism -- classic or otherwise?
How many credit hours do we get for reading your excellent post?
Jeff, thanks for reading and for sharing your thoughts.
Regarding my reference to the "Trumpian alt-right," I don't label all Trump supporters as belonging to this group. Political support is diverse, and many individuals may align with certain policies or aspects of a candidate without subscribing to extreme ideologies. There are illiberal supporters of Trump, but, as you say, there are others who support Trump as an alternative to a Democratic candidate without necessarily subscribing to Trump's extremism.
I don't understand your point about Critical Race Theory (CRT). Originating in the 1970s, CRT was developed primarily within the legal field by scholars such as Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and Richard Delgado. It excessively broadens the definition of racism to make racism not just a matter of individual bias but inventing the concept of "systemic racism" that is somehow embedded within laws, institutional practices, and culture. CRT is one of the philosophies Mounk describes as expanding illiberalism. There is no record of CRT being part of the discussions or motivations behind the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.
Extra credit for reading the whole post.
Thanks again for your comments and Merry Christmas!
The term "Trumpian alt-right" is one of those groundless, knee jerk pejoratives that people throw around to justify ungrounded views they themselves hold. It is cartoonish and low brow.
There is no better group of leftist haters than the Southern Poverty Law Center which has continually defined the alt-right -- not the "Trumpian alt-right" -- as "a set of far-right ideologies, groups and individuals whose core belief is that 'white identity' is under attack by multicultural forces using 'political correctness' and 'social justice' to undermine white people and 'their' civilization." Pretty coherent sentence, no?
This is not a wildly contentious statement -- again by the SPLC, not some bomb throwers. How would one react to the Mayor of Boston holding a city funded Christmas celebration that purposely did not include white persons? There was no alternative celebration that did include white persons.
Does that sound like an attack on white identity by a multicultural force using political correctness and social justice?
The Anti-Defamation League states that "alt-right" is a "vague term actually encompass[ing] a range of people on the extreme right who reject mainstream conservatism in favor of forms of conservatism that embrace implicit or explicit racism or white supremacy".
The alt-right's initial opponents were not the left, but "mainstream conservatism" which I would translate to be the Reagan/Bush GOP.
Groups that I would consider far right -- as far right as Antifa or BLM are left -- supported Trump in 2016. He famously disavowed that support after the election and has refused to meet with any of the groups that were identified at that time.
I served for decades on the Travis Cty Republican confab and never met a single person I would consider to be "Trumpian alt-right" or had anyone identify themselves as "alt-right."
As to why intelligent persons would support Trump, the foundation logic is simple -- better polities.
I think a fair minded person comparing and contrasting the current regime's actual performance on immigration, energy, foreign affairs, military readiness, war/peace, spending, and the economy would find mountains of factual data upon which to base their support.
CRT did not start in the 1970s. Kimberle Crenshaw and others first spoke the term in 1989 as part of the title of a workshop they held. She graduated law school in 1984 and got her LLM in 1985, so she would have been a little kid in the 1970s.
As of 2002, there were only 20 +/- law schools that taught CRT out of a total of approximately 200 law schools in the US.
In the example I offered, it was my intention to suggest that Sen Biden's (and Sen Clinton's) actions were a perfect example of the systemic nature of racism in the country's laws. Nobody brought up CRT as it was a fringe discussion point at that time -- note the paucity of law schools then offering courses in CRT.
In those days, Joe Biden was a first rate systemic racist.
While I do not subscribe to the radical solutions proposed by the race baiting industry, I am comfortable acknowledging that such system racism did and does exist and is a valid point in an intellectually honest conversation.
The 13.4% of America that is black is entitled to a fair hearing on the subject. The 68% of America that is white does not have to surrender their majority or give up their rights in order to make that an effective conversation.
I thought I was the only person who read this sort of stuff.
Yascha Mounk's prior book-- The People vs. Democracy: Why Our Freedom Is in Danger and How to Save It -- in 2018 is a good one to read to understand the view of the author.
This is the kind of high level view that is, unfortunately, completely disconnected to the reality of the electorate and the streets.
Let me take a small example: critical race theory. Using the term CRT inflames some and is the passionate belief of others, but at its core -- the notion that white men made laws that reflected their culture and heritage to the detriment of others, particularly black persons -- it is no great stretch of one's imagination.
In fact, Joe Biden's 1994/5 crime bills are Exhibit No 1 in support of the reality of CRT -- sentencing guidelines for powder cocaine v crack rocks.
Take that fact as true and then mix in the reality that black persons make up 13.4% of the population and a small segment of that population -- black men 16 - 30 -- account for more than 60% of the violent crime, 62% of murders, and are, therefore, incarcerated at a rate of 85% of our jails. FBI numbers.
Traditional patriarchal black families are virtually non-existent and black women are the prime market for abortion. These two facts are, of course, related.
Take those facts together and prioritize them and decide wherein CRT fits in the pantheon of ills.
You use the term "Trumpian alt-right" which is a divisive pejorative, by intention, and, yet, there are many who would fit under that umbrella who are simply opposed to policies of this President that have destroyed the southern border, put us on a path to WWIII, and who believe there is a wholesale low tide in law enforcement.
These are core policies, hardly "alt-right." Some of these folks are driving around in EVs holding these thoughts.
We are not really a democracy by specific intent of the Founding Fathers. We are a constitutional representative republic wherein we conduct state elections to anoint our representatives at both the local and Federal level. We elect Representatives, Senators, and Electoral College reps by virtue of voting for a President.
I close by saying that much of the lofty theory on such matters disappears when the streets are filled with BLM and Hamas riots -- or the real world as some think. Is this just an exercise in liberalism -- classic or otherwise?
How many credit hours do we get for reading your excellent post?
Merry Christmas, Ben.
JLM
www.themusingsofthebigredcar.com
Jeff, thanks for reading and for sharing your thoughts.
Regarding my reference to the "Trumpian alt-right," I don't label all Trump supporters as belonging to this group. Political support is diverse, and many individuals may align with certain policies or aspects of a candidate without subscribing to extreme ideologies. There are illiberal supporters of Trump, but, as you say, there are others who support Trump as an alternative to a Democratic candidate without necessarily subscribing to Trump's extremism.
I don't understand your point about Critical Race Theory (CRT). Originating in the 1970s, CRT was developed primarily within the legal field by scholars such as Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and Richard Delgado. It excessively broadens the definition of racism to make racism not just a matter of individual bias but inventing the concept of "systemic racism" that is somehow embedded within laws, institutional practices, and culture. CRT is one of the philosophies Mounk describes as expanding illiberalism. There is no record of CRT being part of the discussions or motivations behind the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.
Extra credit for reading the whole post.
Thanks again for your comments and Merry Christmas!
The term "Trumpian alt-right" is one of those groundless, knee jerk pejoratives that people throw around to justify ungrounded views they themselves hold. It is cartoonish and low brow.
There is no better group of leftist haters than the Southern Poverty Law Center which has continually defined the alt-right -- not the "Trumpian alt-right" -- as "a set of far-right ideologies, groups and individuals whose core belief is that 'white identity' is under attack by multicultural forces using 'political correctness' and 'social justice' to undermine white people and 'their' civilization." Pretty coherent sentence, no?
This is not a wildly contentious statement -- again by the SPLC, not some bomb throwers. How would one react to the Mayor of Boston holding a city funded Christmas celebration that purposely did not include white persons? There was no alternative celebration that did include white persons.
Does that sound like an attack on white identity by a multicultural force using political correctness and social justice?
The Anti-Defamation League states that "alt-right" is a "vague term actually encompass[ing] a range of people on the extreme right who reject mainstream conservatism in favor of forms of conservatism that embrace implicit or explicit racism or white supremacy".
The alt-right's initial opponents were not the left, but "mainstream conservatism" which I would translate to be the Reagan/Bush GOP.
Groups that I would consider far right -- as far right as Antifa or BLM are left -- supported Trump in 2016. He famously disavowed that support after the election and has refused to meet with any of the groups that were identified at that time.
I served for decades on the Travis Cty Republican confab and never met a single person I would consider to be "Trumpian alt-right" or had anyone identify themselves as "alt-right."
As to why intelligent persons would support Trump, the foundation logic is simple -- better polities.
I think a fair minded person comparing and contrasting the current regime's actual performance on immigration, energy, foreign affairs, military readiness, war/peace, spending, and the economy would find mountains of factual data upon which to base their support.
CRT did not start in the 1970s. Kimberle Crenshaw and others first spoke the term in 1989 as part of the title of a workshop they held. She graduated law school in 1984 and got her LLM in 1985, so she would have been a little kid in the 1970s.
As of 2002, there were only 20 +/- law schools that taught CRT out of a total of approximately 200 law schools in the US.
In the example I offered, it was my intention to suggest that Sen Biden's (and Sen Clinton's) actions were a perfect example of the systemic nature of racism in the country's laws. Nobody brought up CRT as it was a fringe discussion point at that time -- note the paucity of law schools then offering courses in CRT.
In those days, Joe Biden was a first rate systemic racist.
While I do not subscribe to the radical solutions proposed by the race baiting industry, I am comfortable acknowledging that such system racism did and does exist and is a valid point in an intellectually honest conversation.
The 13.4% of America that is black is entitled to a fair hearing on the subject. The 68% of America that is white does not have to surrender their majority or give up their rights in order to make that an effective conversation.
Merry Christmas, Ben.
JLM
www.themusingsofthebigredcar.com