Love the activist versus thinker debate. Maybe it’s all less complicated than this though. Rufo wants to dismantle the woke left, but replace it with post-liberalism. He’s not a man of integrity. If an activist has worthy goals and integrity than I don’t see anything wrong with activism.
Activist for me has a negative sense attached to it,public intellectual on the other hand gives more positive and prestigious emotions,even if a lot of times these two identities overlap. I just hope people who engage in political discourse are less motivated by negative emotions and things or people they oppose
The work of John Ganz the author of When the Clock Broke Conspiracies and How America Cracked Up in the 1990's . His website is http://www.unpopularfront.news
Interesting post. I think Sarah Haider gets it right; you need both. But there are a few public intellectuals who manage to thread the needle. Jonathan Haidt comes to mind. He strikes me as a man of principles who also realizes that we live in the real world. This is why he can champion free speech while also supporting age-related restrictions on social media, unlike Greg Lukianoff (his co-author on Coddling of the American Mind and head of FIRE).
And I don’t see that there is a real comparison between Christopher Rufo and Cathy Young. Rufo has done what journalists used to do – he uncovered a pernicious ideology finding its way into nearly all our public institutions, and many private ones, and then followed the money to see who was profiting from it. They used to be called muckrakers. I don’t know who Cathy Young is, but my general sense is that The Bulwark is a platform for establishment Republicans who detest populism but still pine for power. She may be an exception, but they don’t seem particularly principled or, at this point, relevant.
Love the activist versus thinker debate. Maybe it’s all less complicated than this though. Rufo wants to dismantle the woke left, but replace it with post-liberalism. He’s not a man of integrity. If an activist has worthy goals and integrity than I don’t see anything wrong with activism.
Activist for me has a negative sense attached to it,public intellectual on the other hand gives more positive and prestigious emotions,even if a lot of times these two identities overlap. I just hope people who engage in political discourse are less motivated by negative emotions and things or people they oppose
It seems to me that you should check out these references.
On the Wetiko Psychosis of which the Orange Oaf is the leading edge vector . And Rufo too!
http://www.awakeninthedream.com/undreaming-wetiko-introduction
On the TV Zombie Machine of which has created the Orange Oaf
http://www.awakeninthedream.com/articles/invasion-of-the-body-snatchers-comes-to-life
Two new books
1. Stench by David Brock
2. Opus by Gareth Gore.
The work of John Ganz the author of When the Clock Broke Conspiracies and How America Cracked Up in the 1990's . His website is http://www.unpopularfront.news
The work of Jared Sexton via his website http://jysexton.com
To go for an even later take, is this not Dialectic (thinking) vs Rhetoric (activism)?
So an activist for the thinker game would be an American Aristotle :)
To go for an even later take, is this not Dialectic (Thinking) vs Rhetoric (Activism)?
So you are exhorting us to be modern Aristotles :)
Interesting post. I think Sarah Haider gets it right; you need both. But there are a few public intellectuals who manage to thread the needle. Jonathan Haidt comes to mind. He strikes me as a man of principles who also realizes that we live in the real world. This is why he can champion free speech while also supporting age-related restrictions on social media, unlike Greg Lukianoff (his co-author on Coddling of the American Mind and head of FIRE).
And I don’t see that there is a real comparison between Christopher Rufo and Cathy Young. Rufo has done what journalists used to do – he uncovered a pernicious ideology finding its way into nearly all our public institutions, and many private ones, and then followed the money to see who was profiting from it. They used to be called muckrakers. I don’t know who Cathy Young is, but my general sense is that The Bulwark is a platform for establishment Republicans who detest populism but still pine for power. She may be an exception, but they don’t seem particularly principled or, at this point, relevant.
I don't think Young wants power, but writes in favor of classical liberalism.
bad post unsubscribed