2. The thing with the New Republic is that there are a set of competing arguments which get tangled up -- just like a bad family dinner.
-
-
Replying to @HeerJeet
3. One argument is about New Republic's checkered history (Bell Curve, Glass, Israel, white-maleness of staff)
1 reply 4 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
4. A separate argument is about what Hughes is doing to the New Republic and what that bodes for magazine publishing as a whole.
2 replies 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
5. For sake of clarity, it's important to keep those two arguments separate. You could hate what TNR was & still be wary of Hughes' plans
1 reply 5 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
6. So: the first argument is about TNR's often contentious political history, with lots of focus on badness of Andrew Sullivan's tenure
1 reply 2 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
7. The political anger at New Republic itself has several different dimensions: substantive disagreements but also demographics behind them
1 reply 2 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
8. Substantially: TNR at worst published scientific racism (and racism in general) was contemptuous of Arabs, and cold towards feminism.
4 replies 5 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @1northofcenter
@1northofcenter I said "TNR at worst" not Wieseltier or Foer1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
@HeerJeet ok just wanted to clarify why we still mourn Leon and@FranklinFoer (and others') departure, and how that specifically hurts@tnr.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@1northofcenter @FranklinFoer @tnr Like I said, I think people are right to have foreboding about about resignations mean for magazine.
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.