Title : "Calls for 'civility' in politics are as likely to elicit ridicule as they are plaudits these days..."
link : "Calls for 'civility' in politics are as likely to elicit ridicule as they are plaudits these days..."
"Calls for 'civility' in politics are as likely to elicit ridicule as they are plaudits these days..."
Oh, yes, I've been ridiculing what I call "civility bullshit" for years.... due in large part to their repeated deployment in the face of escalating state violence.What?! I'm trying to read "Why ‘Civility’ Protects Dan Crenshaw But Not Ilhan Omar" by Zak Cheney-Rice (NY Magazine), which looked like it was right up my alley but up my alley and off somewhere I wouldn't go.
What "state violence" is Cheney-Rice talking about? His next paragraph is about whether harassing former Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen is acceptable because the government has been "locking children in cages." He weasels a semi-generalization:
Where one falls on this spectrum in any given instance is often, but not always, a partisan calculation.My point is that it's always bullshit. "Civility" is not your value. It's a fake value, presented as real when it serves your partisan interests and subordinated whenever it doesn't.
Cheney-Rice has something to say about the Ilhan Omar business, and it's too complicated to attempt to excerpt here. Somehow "civility" is supposed to be in play when people are simply harshly criticizing Omar for sounding insufficiently somber about 9/11. There's a very strained effort to equate vigorous criticism with the incitement of violence, so that saying Omar sound almost as though she was laughing at 9/11 is the same as saying that she ought to be physically attacked. We're told that she gets death threats, and that seems to be offered as a reason why she should be spared verbal attacks on the public statements that she makes. Her antagonists would be fools to stand down either because of the phony "civility" argument or because her proponents show their willingness to connect public verbal opposition to her to unsourced death threats.
Congressman Dan Crenshaw criticized Omar, and then Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez criticized Crenshaw. Somebody else pushed Ocasio-Cortez back for incivility to Crenshaw, and Cheney-Rice says, "Bad-faith outcries about civility aimed at deflecting from Republican misdeeds are the order of the day." Yes, and what else is new? Bad-faith outcries about civility are the only kind of outcry we ever get in American polities — this day or any other day, from Republicans or Democrats or anybody.
Cheney-Rice has not explained "Why ‘Civility’ Protects Dan Crenshaw But Not Ilhan Omar." Civility doesn't "protect" anyone. Civility is just a transitory condition that might make some people feel better when it's blowing in their direction, but it's nothing you can rely on, and you ought to assume it's there only because those who are blowing it think it's good for them. The prevailing winds of civility may favor Crenshaw over Omar at the moment, but civility bullshit is subject to constant change. I see that Cheney-Rice would like to force the change, and of course, he's free to bullshit about bullshit.
Thus articles "Calls for 'civility' in politics are as likely to elicit ridicule as they are plaudits these days..."
that is all articles "Calls for 'civility' in politics are as likely to elicit ridicule as they are plaudits these days..." This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.
You now read the article "Calls for 'civility' in politics are as likely to elicit ridicule as they are plaudits these days..." with the link address https://usainnew.blogspot.com/2019/04/calls-for-civility-in-politics-are-as.html
0 Response to ""Calls for 'civility' in politics are as likely to elicit ridicule as they are plaudits these days...""
Post a Comment