I concur with most of your assessments. Ramaswamy is alarming. He is oily and he lacks empathy. His denial of climate change when he was a Biology major in college is mind boggling. But most frightening of all is his stance on international relations. Like Trump, he is an autocrat lover. Does he really not know what the results of his policies would be? Unbelievable..
Want to add: completely agree on the Pence points. "Sanctimonious" is the perfect description. The cognitive dissonance between advocating 2004 Republican policy positions while saying he's proud of what he and Trump accomplished is something to behold. Aside from tax cuts, what exactly did Trump do that's in the same universe as what Pence claims to believe?
I agree with your take on Nikki, she looked very presidential, but then I googled her annual pay from the Boeing board seat, and my key issue smacked me in the face, again, the money in politics is a huge problem because your never sure if we are making decisions for the country’s best interests or to enrich the large corporations. One thing I have to hand to these companies, Pharma, Oil, and defense, they spend their money wisely, but I agree with Vivek, “let’s spend that money in Kensington” not to line the pockets of defense contractors To people that say you can do both, first off, well that’s obviously not happening in our cities
Thanks for the wrap up. I didn't watch the circus because I don't like inflicting pain on myself and because, barring a fortuitous cheeseburger incident, Trump's going to be the 2024 GOP nominee. As executor of my father's estate I've had the unfortunate opportunity to receive a fund-raising letter from Ramaswamy. It wasn't that much more repulsive than any of the other rightwing propaganda I've received in the several months since my father died but, even in a party of extremists, he struck me as particularly batsh*t crazy.
I appreciate your bringing a bit of levity to what must have been a depressing event. Your description of Pence had me laughing out loud. That he'd support Trump even if he's convicted of felonies--Trump, the guy who set him up to be lynched--says everything about Mr. Sanctimonious. All posture; no integrity. Jesus would be so proud.
Meanwhile "The first question to ask is why oikophobia should now be so prevalent. To this, I should tentatively reply that it is because of the mass intellectualization of society consequent upon the spread of tertiary education." You know, like Stanford University?
Mark, Rod is an old friend with whom I’ve fallen out over politics, and this is a post for paying subscribers. (At least for me when I click.) I’m not paying to read him. I’ve read many tens of thousands of Rod’s words over the past two decades. I don’t need to read any more. I know exactly where he’s coming from. I also saw him tweet about this subject earlier today. So he found another example of stupidity of certain liberal elites, which this is, and that’s supposed to prove that it makes sense to vote for Trump. If it does for you, Mark, great. Enjoy that satisfaction of pulling that lever. But I will never in a million years cast a vote for Trump. Would I case a vote for some of the people on stage last night? Maybe I would in the right circumstance. But never Trump. And yes, never DeSantis.
I think you misunderstood my piece about the mysterious Trump voter. I get it. I just think it’s catastrophically wrong. I called it a mystery for rhetorical and pedagogical purposes.
Sorry about the paywall, I misread a substack symbol.
I originally had high hopes that you would be someone who understands the totalitarian threat from the left as well as from the right, but you continually dismiss the threat from the left as just a few elites here and there, of no real consequence, even as the Democrats pass law after law and issue executive order after executive order stripping away our rights and imposing an identitarian anti-liberal totalitarian oligarchy that cannot be voted out (short of Schedule F firings). This is, in my view (as a Democrat voter for a half a century), a catastrophic mistake.
And the reason that you (and other left-of-center intellectuals) should tackle this is is that I (and many others like me) can be won back. I really really don't want to vote for a sociopathic criminal like Trump, but I need an intellectual movement that pushes back against the left's excesses instead of endlessly excusing them.
Yes, I am well aware that you think all of that. If you're looking for "an intellectual movement that pushes back against the left's excesses" as you understand them, you have countless options, beginning with Rod. I'm not the guy for you, since I think describing the annoyances and, yes, sometimes stupidity of the "woke" left as a "totalitarian threat" is, well, wildly disproportionate and nonsensical. (Why do I think so? Because I have criticized these things many times in my career and I'm not toiling away in a gulag. I've never even been brought in for questioning. Not once!) And please don't respond by trying to convince me otherwise. You will be wasting both our time.
When Penn asks you for your DEI commitment statement, why don't you try telling them that you judge people by the content of their character and not the color of their skin? See how long you keep that job.
Meanwhile, who exactly do the Republicans have "toiling away in a gulag"? I'm pretty sure that number is zero, and was zero throughout the Trump admin.
It sounds like you actually believe I will be fired from my teaching position at Penn if I quote Martin Luther King, Jr. The reality is this: I have taught at Penn on several occasions since 2007. I also worked for the University of Pennsylvania Press from 2013-2019. And now the teaching position for which I was recently hired. At no point in any of this have I been asked, let alone forced, to read and sign, or to write, a "diversity statement."
It may be different for applicants for tenure-track positions. I really don't know. But I will tell you this: If it is required, it is a bureaucratic formality that no one discusses or thinks about (on hiring committees) for more than two seconds, if at all. Instead, such committees are reading applicant cover letters about research and teaching, letters of recommendation, CVs/resumes summarizing publications, writing samples, etc. That is what matters. (The Career Services link that you dug up provides advice for how to write a diversity statement in case applicants from Penn to other universities are required to submit one. Is that bad?)
It is clearly extremely important for you to think that you're engaged in a righteous crusade against incredibly powerful forces of evil that have seized control of the Democratic Party, universities, and other institutions of American life. I say the truth is far less dramatic and clear-cut than that. There are trends in certain elite-liberal institutions that can be annoying. I often find them annoying. Occasionally they go further and end up doing flagrantly stupid things and/or punishing people unfairly. Those examples should be singled out and criticized so that reforms can be made to make such things happen less often. That's it. That's what you consider a justification for ending your identity as a life-long Democrat, etc. Fine. I know you're not the only one who feels this way. But you repeating yourself ad nauseam in my comments in order to generate more converts to your cause shouldn't be necessary. The need for us to follow you should be obvious. But it isn't. I'm sorry about that.
As for your final line, I'm not the one who invoked a totalitarian threat. I don't think I've ever used that adjective to describe the threat posed by the right. I like to think my analysis in my Substack is more nuanced and sophisticated than that.
Frankly, I have no idea why you wasted so much time with someone who rants against "identitarian anti-liberal totalitarian oligarchy " while clearly stating he would vote for the guy who says "A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution."
2) Totalitarianism in the sense of Havel's greengrocer, not in the sense of the gulag.
3) I dare you to ask for a show of hands in your class at Penn for agreement with "I judge people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin" without first identifying it as an MLK paraphrase. Please report the result.
4) You don't say Republicans are totalitarian (and they are not, in the greengrocer sense), but you do often say that they are "illiberal" or "anti-liberal", without ever giving a clear definition of what you mean by "liberal". It is very hard for me to see how Democrat identitarian polcies that you support (such as "affirmative action", which in practice means brutal anti-Asian discrimination, as revealed by the Harvard/UNC case) can be defined as "liberal".
At least most left DeSantis alone so we wouldn't have to pay attention to that fake smile. He is simply incapable of making himself likable.
I concur with most of your assessments. Ramaswamy is alarming. He is oily and he lacks empathy. His denial of climate change when he was a Biology major in college is mind boggling. But most frightening of all is his stance on international relations. Like Trump, he is an autocrat lover. Does he really not know what the results of his policies would be? Unbelievable..
He thinks the shirtless thing worked for Putin, so why wouldn’t it work for him?
The only thing more mind-warping than last night's circus was the "conversation" I had with coworkers this morning about it.
Want to add: completely agree on the Pence points. "Sanctimonious" is the perfect description. The cognitive dissonance between advocating 2004 Republican policy positions while saying he's proud of what he and Trump accomplished is something to behold. Aside from tax cuts, what exactly did Trump do that's in the same universe as what Pence claims to believe?
I agree with your take on Nikki, she looked very presidential, but then I googled her annual pay from the Boeing board seat, and my key issue smacked me in the face, again, the money in politics is a huge problem because your never sure if we are making decisions for the country’s best interests or to enrich the large corporations. One thing I have to hand to these companies, Pharma, Oil, and defense, they spend their money wisely, but I agree with Vivek, “let’s spend that money in Kensington” not to line the pockets of defense contractors To people that say you can do both, first off, well that’s obviously not happening in our cities
Will there be a transcript available, and if so when? thank you.
Thanks for the wrap up. I didn't watch the circus because I don't like inflicting pain on myself and because, barring a fortuitous cheeseburger incident, Trump's going to be the 2024 GOP nominee. As executor of my father's estate I've had the unfortunate opportunity to receive a fund-raising letter from Ramaswamy. It wasn't that much more repulsive than any of the other rightwing propaganda I've received in the several months since my father died but, even in a party of extremists, he struck me as particularly batsh*t crazy.
I appreciate your bringing a bit of levity to what must have been a depressing event. Your description of Pence had me laughing out loud. That he'd support Trump even if he's convicted of felonies--Trump, the guy who set him up to be lynched--says everything about Mr. Sanctimonious. All posture; no integrity. Jesus would be so proud.
Very insightful and much appreciated summary of the debate.
Burgum is governor of North Dakota, goddamnit!! North Dakota is the Rodney Dangerfield of states, I swear to Jah!
Damon, please read this new post by Rod Dreher (not paywalled):
https://roddreher.substack.com/p/oikophobia-and-the-department-of
I hope this clears up "The Enduring Mystery of the Trump Voter" for you.
If not, there is no hope for you at all.
Maybe not for Damon, but it is paywalled.
Meanwhile "The first question to ask is why oikophobia should now be so prevalent. To this, I should tentatively reply that it is because of the mass intellectualization of society consequent upon the spread of tertiary education." You know, like Stanford University?
https://lawliberty.org/the-oikophobic-will-to-power/
Oops, sorry about the paywall, I misread it.
Mark, Rod is an old friend with whom I’ve fallen out over politics, and this is a post for paying subscribers. (At least for me when I click.) I’m not paying to read him. I’ve read many tens of thousands of Rod’s words over the past two decades. I don’t need to read any more. I know exactly where he’s coming from. I also saw him tweet about this subject earlier today. So he found another example of stupidity of certain liberal elites, which this is, and that’s supposed to prove that it makes sense to vote for Trump. If it does for you, Mark, great. Enjoy that satisfaction of pulling that lever. But I will never in a million years cast a vote for Trump. Would I case a vote for some of the people on stage last night? Maybe I would in the right circumstance. But never Trump. And yes, never DeSantis.
I think you misunderstood my piece about the mysterious Trump voter. I get it. I just think it’s catastrophically wrong. I called it a mystery for rhetorical and pedagogical purposes.
Sorry about the paywall, I misread a substack symbol.
I originally had high hopes that you would be someone who understands the totalitarian threat from the left as well as from the right, but you continually dismiss the threat from the left as just a few elites here and there, of no real consequence, even as the Democrats pass law after law and issue executive order after executive order stripping away our rights and imposing an identitarian anti-liberal totalitarian oligarchy that cannot be voted out (short of Schedule F firings). This is, in my view (as a Democrat voter for a half a century), a catastrophic mistake.
And the reason that you (and other left-of-center intellectuals) should tackle this is is that I (and many others like me) can be won back. I really really don't want to vote for a sociopathic criminal like Trump, but I need an intellectual movement that pushes back against the left's excesses instead of endlessly excusing them.
Yes, I am well aware that you think all of that. If you're looking for "an intellectual movement that pushes back against the left's excesses" as you understand them, you have countless options, beginning with Rod. I'm not the guy for you, since I think describing the annoyances and, yes, sometimes stupidity of the "woke" left as a "totalitarian threat" is, well, wildly disproportionate and nonsensical. (Why do I think so? Because I have criticized these things many times in my career and I'm not toiling away in a gulag. I've never even been brought in for questioning. Not once!) And please don't respond by trying to convince me otherwise. You will be wasting both our time.
When Penn asks you for your DEI commitment statement, why don't you try telling them that you judge people by the content of their character and not the color of their skin? See how long you keep that job.
Penn's Career Services Dept will helpfully tell you how to write a good DEI statement that will please the overlords that you don't even know (yet) that you have: https://careerservices.upenn.edu/application-materials-for-the-faculty-job-search/diversity-statements-for-faculty-job-applications/
Meanwhile, who exactly do the Republicans have "toiling away in a gulag"? I'm pretty sure that number is zero, and was zero throughout the Trump admin.
It sounds like you actually believe I will be fired from my teaching position at Penn if I quote Martin Luther King, Jr. The reality is this: I have taught at Penn on several occasions since 2007. I also worked for the University of Pennsylvania Press from 2013-2019. And now the teaching position for which I was recently hired. At no point in any of this have I been asked, let alone forced, to read and sign, or to write, a "diversity statement."
It may be different for applicants for tenure-track positions. I really don't know. But I will tell you this: If it is required, it is a bureaucratic formality that no one discusses or thinks about (on hiring committees) for more than two seconds, if at all. Instead, such committees are reading applicant cover letters about research and teaching, letters of recommendation, CVs/resumes summarizing publications, writing samples, etc. That is what matters. (The Career Services link that you dug up provides advice for how to write a diversity statement in case applicants from Penn to other universities are required to submit one. Is that bad?)
It is clearly extremely important for you to think that you're engaged in a righteous crusade against incredibly powerful forces of evil that have seized control of the Democratic Party, universities, and other institutions of American life. I say the truth is far less dramatic and clear-cut than that. There are trends in certain elite-liberal institutions that can be annoying. I often find them annoying. Occasionally they go further and end up doing flagrantly stupid things and/or punishing people unfairly. Those examples should be singled out and criticized so that reforms can be made to make such things happen less often. That's it. That's what you consider a justification for ending your identity as a life-long Democrat, etc. Fine. I know you're not the only one who feels this way. But you repeating yourself ad nauseam in my comments in order to generate more converts to your cause shouldn't be necessary. The need for us to follow you should be obvious. But it isn't. I'm sorry about that.
As for your final line, I'm not the one who invoked a totalitarian threat. I don't think I've ever used that adjective to describe the threat posed by the right. I like to think my analysis in my Substack is more nuanced and sophisticated than that.
Frankly, I have no idea why you wasted so much time with someone who rants against "identitarian anti-liberal totalitarian oligarchy " while clearly stating he would vote for the guy who says "A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution."
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/109449803240069864
Self awareness is not his strong suit.
1) Yes, required DEI statements are both common and very bad: https://www.thefire.org/news/fire-releases-statement-use-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-criteria-faculty-hiring-and
2) Totalitarianism in the sense of Havel's greengrocer, not in the sense of the gulag.
3) I dare you to ask for a show of hands in your class at Penn for agreement with "I judge people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin" without first identifying it as an MLK paraphrase. Please report the result.
4) You don't say Republicans are totalitarian (and they are not, in the greengrocer sense), but you do often say that they are "illiberal" or "anti-liberal", without ever giving a clear definition of what you mean by "liberal". It is very hard for me to see how Democrat identitarian polcies that you support (such as "affirmative action", which in practice means brutal anti-Asian discrimination, as revealed by the Harvard/UNC case) can be defined as "liberal".
5) The true "middleground", backed by polling, has been delineated (over and over again) by Ruy Teixeira: https://www.liberalpatriot.com/p/normie-voters-want-common-sense-politics
6) You'lll be pleased to learn that my paid subscription expries on Sept.7, and that I won't be renewing it.