Tales From George Bush’s America…(continued)
Peter Wood wonders about why it is that liberals are so angry…
The Liberalitarian Dust-Up
The Angry Left rebukes a would-be friend.
By Peter WoodWhen I discuss the Left’s embrace of New Anger with people across the political spectrum, two not very satisfactory explanations keep coming up. One is that the party that is out of power has more to gripe about. Yes, but that doesn’t explain why the Left gravitated to a form of anger that exacerbated its unpopularity. Nor, why the Right, in similar circumstances kept its New Anger aficionados on the margins.
The New Anger. The left gravitiates to it. Even though it makes them unpopular. The right would never do such things…
The Democratic Party: A Vast Sleeper Cell
By Ann CoulterFortunately for liberals, the Iraqis executed Saddam Hussein the exact same week that former President Ford died, so it didn’t seem strange that Nancy Pelosi’s flag was at half-staff.
Civility. Why are you liberals so angry? Why can’t you be more civil?
January 5th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
I just read the entire essay.
First, the author describes himself as an anthropologist, but uses the terms “liberals” and “left” interchangeably. He strongly implies that “Yippies” of 1968 have direct ideological heirs in either “liberals” or “left.” This is the professional equivalent of Bill Frist “diagnosing” Terry Schiavo from a videotape.
Second, having immediately made a grudging acknowledgement of the putative anomaly of Ann Coulter, he then focuses exclusively on Jonathan Chait as a representative of a huge, arbitrarily-defined, range of political opinions.
This is supposed to capture the spirit of an allegedly unified movement? Straw man, anecdotal evidence, sweeping generalizations, and compounded subjective judgments–this is BS in its purest form.
January 5th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
First, the author describes himself as an anthropologist, but uses the terms “liberals” and “left” interchangeably.
Good Catch.
Sometimes you wonder how much of this is just pure cluelessness. I mean…it isn’t like nobody’s ever heard of Rush Limbaugh, let alone noticed how angry, and how almost completely republican talk radio in this country is. I have satellite radio in my car so I can have something besides a choice of junk music or one raving hate channel after another to listen to while I’m on the road. Yet they’ve been talking lately like vitriolic angry rhetoric is something only liberals and democrats have built a platform on. Is it really as Digby says, just an indication of how un-self aware they are? I think it’s more likely that this is just another line of manipulative tactical rhetoric on their part.
The meme they’re trying to get out there is that democrats are angry and out of control they are so angry, and thereby untrustworthy. It’s bullshit all right, but in my opinion it’s like all of their bullshit; deliberate, precise. And the mainstream news media laps it up like they have every republican talking point since Clinton became president. It’s really interesting to watch it making its way from one talking head to another.
As a gay man, I am well familiar with the kind of double standards in civility the right loves. If someone says homosexuals are pedophiles and an AIDS spreading danger to the health of Americans, that’s merely their honest opinion, regardless of how many demonstrable lies they base it on. But if I say they’re hatemongers for spreading bald-faced lies about gay people that arouse violent passions against us then I’m being uncivil. If they call me a biological error that’s just their considered opinion. If I call them a knuckle dragging bigot I’m being angry and hateful. If they tell me I’m going to hell they’re merely expressing their deeply held religious beliefs. If I tell them to go thump their goddamned bible somewhere else then I’m not engaging in civil discourse. I know exactly what’s going on here, because I’ve watched it going on for decades. Digby may be right, it may just be utter cluelessness. But I am skeptical of that. I think its just the usual reflex to deceive.
Now that the democrats are back in power, it’s important that we all keep our tongues civil. Of course…that only applies to democrats.
January 5th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
I use “liberal” and “left” interchangeably. Please tell me the difference so I can stop. Thanks.