1. I'm in sympathy with much of what Ross Douthat writes here (particularly on the corporate uses of diversity) but I think his discussion of the Cotton op-ed suffers from a fatal abstraction from context.https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/nyt-tom-cotton-oped-liberalism.html …
-
Show this thread
-
2. Here's the crucial context
@DouthatNYT misses: the idea of sending in the military to quell the uprising didn't just scare the liberal & post-liberal reporters at the New York Times, it also freaked out the non-liberals in the Pentagon.3 replies 42 retweets 187 likesShow this thread -
3. The crucial context is that the president is Trump (a race-baiting know-nothing) rather than, say, Eisenhower or George H.W. Bush or Obama. That's why the Pentagon resisted having troops sent in and that's why many civilians reacted with revulsion.
5 replies 13 retweets 88 likesShow this thread -
4. You could, if you wanted to, make an argument that in the abstract "sending in the troops" might in some circumstances make sense. But guess what? Life is not a debating club. Our choices take place in a specific moment: sending in the troops would mean Trump with in charge.
3 replies 11 retweets 127 likesShow this thread -
5. It's not an accident the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff got enormous pushback for participating in Trump's St. John's photo op: the next day he issued a statement reaffirming military's commitment to constitution & later apologized for photo op. https://twitter.com/AYATOMM_COM/status/1271522360600887296/photo/1pic.twitter.com/sJM4Jf686C
1 reply 6 retweets 62 likesShow this thread -
6.
@DouthatNYT says Cotton distinguishes between looters & protestors. But, again, this isn't an abstract debate. Cotton isn't the commander-in-chief, Trump is. And Trump, as he did today, uses looters and protesters interchangeably. He'd be in charge if troops sent in.pic.twitter.com/08X1v5vBB8
4 replies 12 retweets 101 likesShow this thread -
7. The problem with James Bennet's op-ed page (a problem that Douthat's current column replicates) is that it treated ideas as entertainments: playful exercises for the mind. Thought experiments. Now I think ideas can be playful but not always, not during a mass uprising!
5 replies 32 retweets 201 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @HeerJeet
This. This is what I have been saying for a while now. For far too many people in punditry and journalism, ideas are treated as if they essentially have no actual real world consequences. It's abstracted and intellectualized to the extreme.
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @dreamingnoctis @HeerJeet
One of the most unrecognized divides in intellectual public discourse is this one between people for whom ideas have no consequences and those who believe they do.
1 reply 5 retweets 7 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.