This makes a lot of sense. Modern liberalism and leftism isn't a coherent political ideology in the way that Libertarianism or Marxism or Amatchism. All three of the previous philosophies have a lot of variation but have a common foundation or end point be it the minimal state or the dictatorship of the proletariat. Modern liberalism has numerous foundations and no clear end point. To a certain extent it's a strength because it allows for flexibility. It's also a weakness for the reason you mentioned.
An example of a cartoon liberal/leftist would be like the people who see the United States as the source of all evil in the world and any American foreign policy as imperialist. Sometimes they extend this to an entire Western discourse. The liberals and leftists that keep talking about privilege also strike me as cartoonish.
I think thinks this sums up the division on the liberal/leftist side but it doesn't quite show what a cartoon liberal would be. To me a cartoon liberal or leftist like a cartoon libertarian or conservative has to be one that sees the liberal solution as so obviously correct that they can't understand why somebody would reach a different conclusion. These are the types that see libertarians and conservatives as strange creatures, not quite human, that can't be understood.
If I'm remembering correctly, I don't think this is right. One aspect of the Progressive Era was the High School movement, a push to have 14 to 18 year olds in school rather than going out to work. The High School movement was particularly big in the Mid-West and North East. I think that by the late 1910s or early 1920s, most Americans aged 14 to 18 were in school. At least in the more industrialized and urban parts of the country. In the South, you might be right.
When I went to watch the Hobbit, I had to deal with the constant narration from a group of teenagers.* Why can't people watch movies with no commentary while giving the appropriate audible reaction at the appropriate time?
*Although I understand that the idea that you should be silent during movies, plays, and musical performances is relatively recent.
No, it was accordance with Jewish law. Burial in this case means disposing of the body rather than letting it decompose in the open. However, you do not need to treat the body of the criminal with the same respect as the body of an ordinary person let alone a good person. By cremating and putting his ashes in the sea, the body was disposed of but not in a respectful way. This is perfectly fine.
No, it was accordance with Jewish law. Burial in this case means disposing of the body rather than letting it decompose in the open. However, you do not need to treat the body of the criminal with the same respect as the body of an ordinary person let alone a good person. By cremating and putting his ashes in the sea, the body was disposed of but not in a respectful way. This is perfectly fine.
In case your wondering, Jewish law requires that everybody be given a burial. No crime is considered so serious that it renders the perpetrator undeserving of a burial and requires their remains to rot forever. However, that doesn't mean that people deserve equal burials. You can treat the remains of criminal differently than those of a more ethical person.
Well, we know its not what others might do but what they will do. Spain has moer than a few people that revere Franco and Chile has its Pinochet fans. They treat the graves of their "heroes" as revered monuments.
I believe the French have a saying about the more things change, the more they stay the same. We might dress differently and our toys might be different but many of the dilemmas faced by us were faced by our ancestors in the distant past.
Personally, I don't see the benefit in denying Tamerlane Tsarnaev a burial somewhere. What he did was horrible but plenty of other people have done worse and received glorious funerals and burals because of the horrors that they inflicted on the world. Tamerlane Tsarnaev was a son, brother, husband, and father in addition to being a murderer. Not for his sake but for his families sake, he should be given a burial and his family should be allowed to mourn.
I believe the French have a saying about the more things change, the more they stay the same. We might dress differently and our toys might be different but many of the dilemmas faced by us were faced by our ancestors in the distant past.
Personally, I don't see the benefit in denying Tamerlane Tsarnaev a burial somewhere. What he did was horrible but plenty of other people have done worse and received glorious funerals and burals because of the horrors that they inflicted on the world. Tamerlane Tsarnaev was a son, brother, husband, and father in addition to being a murderer. Not for his sake but for his families sake, he should be given a burial and his family should be allowed to mourn.
Diana Rigg has that effect on many of us. According to TV Tropes, Emma Peel has her origins when the writers were told to create a character with Male Appeal. This was written down as M. Appeal and eventually Emma Peel. The writers certainly did a good job.
I think that the best animal mascot for the League of Ordinary Gentleman University would be the fox. In folklore, foxes are known for their cleverness and wit. The League is known on the internet for their cleverness and wit. Foxes are often associated with upper-classness and would naturally look good in bowler because of that. Another advantage to foxes is that they are under-represented in the world of mascots.
For the non-animal mascot, I'd go with the a bowler since we already selected it as a mascot.
Quotas were placed on Jewish students at elite colleges because too many were getting in on the prior system and we were reviewed as de classe and ruining the scene. The elite colleges were basically elaborate finishing schools for young people. Jews were perceived as taking academics too seriously and not treating college as a country club.
Actually, I think that Spaniards count as Hispanic under the census. You just need to be at least 1/4th Spanish or Latin American in origins to be Hispanic.
No, quite the opposite. The modern method of college admission in the United State and our standarized test regume has its origins in an attempt to keep the colleges from having too many Jewish students. Many accusations were levied against us but stupidity wasn't one of them.
I agree with this. The advantage that newspapers had over the internet is that the readers couldn't them punish them instantly for not giving them what they wanted. This allowed newspapers and magazines to give a bit more medicine with the sugar when it came to cultural reporting.
The internet allows more instant punishment, so cultural reporting has to reflect the readership's tastes more. If the readership does not want to be exposed to high culture than so be it.
I think another thing that changed is that in the past, cultural expectations made exposure to high culture cooler than now. At leaset thats what I gather from talking to my baby bommer parents. You saw the latest French or Sweedish films because they were good and thats what cool people did.
I'm going to quibble with point 1. The American Right has had a strong Free Market/anti-government intervention in the economy segment since the Gilded Age. They were opposed to the reform of the Progressive Era, they complained bitterly about the New Deal, and they hate the Great Society. Every sort of welfare state legistlation/government intervention in the economy was seen as taking American on the wrong path to degenerate European socialism rather than vigorous American capitalism. To the extent that Right and Conservative are somewhat synonymous in politics than the GOP can be Conservative and still want to dismantle the New Deal and Great Society since they are returning to an older conservative standard.
I don't think this is exactly what New Dealer is saying. Besides reviewing the main stream Hollywood movies, many film critics also thought that it was their duty to educate the audience about the lesser known, more artisitic independent and foreign films. It was considered necessary to educate your readership on things they won't normally see. These days, even though the audience is bigger, the desire to educate is less.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Self Criticism!”
This makes a lot of sense. Modern liberalism and leftism isn't a coherent political ideology in the way that Libertarianism or Marxism or Amatchism. All three of the previous philosophies have a lot of variation but have a common foundation or end point be it the minimal state or the dictatorship of the proletariat. Modern liberalism has numerous foundations and no clear end point. To a certain extent it's a strength because it allows for flexibility. It's also a weakness for the reason you mentioned.
"
An example of a cartoon liberal/leftist would be like the people who see the United States as the source of all evil in the world and any American foreign policy as imperialist. Sometimes they extend this to an entire Western discourse. The liberals and leftists that keep talking about privilege also strike me as cartoonish.
"
I think thinks this sums up the division on the liberal/leftist side but it doesn't quite show what a cartoon liberal would be. To me a cartoon liberal or leftist like a cartoon libertarian or conservative has to be one that sees the liberal solution as so obviously correct that they can't understand why somebody would reach a different conclusion. These are the types that see libertarians and conservatives as strange creatures, not quite human, that can't be understood.
On “What the Hell am I supposed to make of the new Pew report?”
If I'm remembering correctly, I don't think this is right. One aspect of the Progressive Era was the High School movement, a push to have 14 to 18 year olds in school rather than going out to work. The High School movement was particularly big in the Mid-West and North East. I think that by the late 1910s or early 1920s, most Americans aged 14 to 18 were in school. At least in the more industrialized and urban parts of the country. In the South, you might be right.
On “Driving Blind: Foucault, Nietzsche, and Dotcom”
When I went to watch the Hobbit, I had to deal with the constant narration from a group of teenagers.* Why can't people watch movies with no commentary while giving the appropriate audible reaction at the appropriate time?
*Although I understand that the idea that you should be silent during movies, plays, and musical performances is relatively recent.
On “The Only Comment Possible on the Tsarnaev Burial Dilemma”
No, it was accordance with Jewish law. Burial in this case means disposing of the body rather than letting it decompose in the open. However, you do not need to treat the body of the criminal with the same respect as the body of an ordinary person let alone a good person. By cremating and putting his ashes in the sea, the body was disposed of but not in a respectful way. This is perfectly fine.
"
No, it was accordance with Jewish law. Burial in this case means disposing of the body rather than letting it decompose in the open. However, you do not need to treat the body of the criminal with the same respect as the body of an ordinary person let alone a good person. By cremating and putting his ashes in the sea, the body was disposed of but not in a respectful way. This is perfectly fine.
"
In case your wondering, Jewish law requires that everybody be given a burial. No crime is considered so serious that it renders the perpetrator undeserving of a burial and requires their remains to rot forever. However, that doesn't mean that people deserve equal burials. You can treat the remains of criminal differently than those of a more ethical person.
"
Well, we know its not what others might do but what they will do. Spain has moer than a few people that revere Franco and Chile has its Pinochet fans. They treat the graves of their "heroes" as revered monuments.
"
I believe the French have a saying about the more things change, the more they stay the same. We might dress differently and our toys might be different but many of the dilemmas faced by us were faced by our ancestors in the distant past.
Personally, I don't see the benefit in denying Tamerlane Tsarnaev a burial somewhere. What he did was horrible but plenty of other people have done worse and received glorious funerals and burals because of the horrors that they inflicted on the world. Tamerlane Tsarnaev was a son, brother, husband, and father in addition to being a murderer. Not for his sake but for his families sake, he should be given a burial and his family should be allowed to mourn.
"
I believe the French have a saying about the more things change, the more they stay the same. We might dress differently and our toys might be different but many of the dilemmas faced by us were faced by our ancestors in the distant past.
Personally, I don't see the benefit in denying Tamerlane Tsarnaev a burial somewhere. What he did was horrible but plenty of other people have done worse and received glorious funerals and burals because of the horrors that they inflicted on the world. Tamerlane Tsarnaev was a son, brother, husband, and father in addition to being a murderer. Not for his sake but for his families sake, he should be given a burial and his family should be allowed to mourn.
On “Thursday Night Bar Fight #9: Furries Unite!”
Have you ever been in a Turkish prison?
"
Diana Rigg has that effect on many of us. According to TV Tropes, Emma Peel has her origins when the writers were told to create a character with Male Appeal. This was written down as M. Appeal and eventually Emma Peel. The writers certainly did a good job.
"
Down-vote. Platypus' do not have the image of elegance and sophistication that we on the League wish to cultivate and project. We are gentleman.
"
Plus one for the non-animal mascot.
"
I think that the best animal mascot for the League of Ordinary Gentleman University would be the fox. In folklore, foxes are known for their cleverness and wit. The League is known on the internet for their cleverness and wit. Foxes are often associated with upper-classness and would naturally look good in bowler because of that. Another advantage to foxes is that they are under-represented in the world of mascots.
For the non-animal mascot, I'd go with the a bowler since we already selected it as a mascot.
On “Why Conservatives Can’t Win Non-White Votes, Heritage Foundation Edition”
This is outlined in Jerome Karabel's history on college admissions in the United States.
"
Quotas were placed on Jewish students at elite colleges because too many were getting in on the prior system and we were reviewed as de classe and ruining the scene. The elite colleges were basically elaborate finishing schools for young people. Jews were perceived as taking academics too seriously and not treating college as a country club.
"
Actually, I think that Spaniards count as Hispanic under the census. You just need to be at least 1/4th Spanish or Latin American in origins to be Hispanic.
"
So does the population that arrived latter.
"
No, quite the opposite. The modern method of college admission in the United State and our standarized test regume has its origins in an attempt to keep the colleges from having too many Jewish students. Many accusations were levied against us but stupidity wasn't one of them.
On “What Alyssa Rosenberg Gets Wrong About Iron Man 3 (Spoilers)”
I agree with this. The advantage that newspapers had over the internet is that the readers couldn't them punish them instantly for not giving them what they wanted. This allowed newspapers and magazines to give a bit more medicine with the sugar when it came to cultural reporting.
The internet allows more instant punishment, so cultural reporting has to reflect the readership's tastes more. If the readership does not want to be exposed to high culture than so be it.
I think another thing that changed is that in the past, cultural expectations made exposure to high culture cooler than now. At leaset thats what I gather from talking to my baby bommer parents. You saw the latest French or Sweedish films because they were good and thats what cool people did.
On “Ideology is the Enemy: Prelude”
I'd like to thank Damon for illustrating my point above.
"
I'm going to quibble with point 1. The American Right has had a strong Free Market/anti-government intervention in the economy segment since the Gilded Age. They were opposed to the reform of the Progressive Era, they complained bitterly about the New Deal, and they hate the Great Society. Every sort of welfare state legistlation/government intervention in the economy was seen as taking American on the wrong path to degenerate European socialism rather than vigorous American capitalism. To the extent that Right and Conservative are somewhat synonymous in politics than the GOP can be Conservative and still want to dismantle the New Deal and Great Society since they are returning to an older conservative standard.
On “What Alyssa Rosenberg Gets Wrong About Iron Man 3 (Spoilers)”
I don't think this is exactly what New Dealer is saying. Besides reviewing the main stream Hollywood movies, many film critics also thought that it was their duty to educate the audience about the lesser known, more artisitic independent and foreign films. It was considered necessary to educate your readership on things they won't normally see. These days, even though the audience is bigger, the desire to educate is less.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.