...those who understood the importance of standing on principle—friends or not—on issues such as resisting the grotesque demonization of individuals and whole social groups, or fighting the toxicity of guilt-by-association in political discourse, also became conspicuous. Those who were confused or confounded, duped or bamboozled, faded into the background.I know many Mefites pay lip service, at least, to the idea that there are no monsters, on the left or on the right. It's very powerful to see this in practice. It's disheartening that Breitbart, to the end, saw a dinner party as a battlefield, and as much as I despise his actions I'm sad that he can never take that trip with Ayers.
Now, SEE what happens when you try being civil to your rivals for a change?....Oh yeah, Andrew Breitbart paragon of civility
CARLSON: What's it like to have dinner with you? It must be excruciating. Do you like lecture people like this or do you come over to their house and sit and lecture them; they're not doing the right thing, that they're missing their opportunities, evading their responsibilities?posted by audi alteram partem at 9:57 AM on April 10, 2012 [7 favorites]
STEWART: If I think they are.
(LAUGHTER)
CARLSON: I wouldn't want to eat with you, man. That's horrible.
STEWART: I know. And you won't.
Given that you seem to think Bill Ayers is both rich and liberal (when he is neither), it's not a surprise that you didn't get much out of this piece.What's the actual dollar cutoff for being "Rich" in your mind? If not rich, then obviously upper middle class. I don't really know that much about his ideology, but what makes him "not liberal"?
....I see you completely missed what I quoted, where someone realized that being civil to "those rich people" made them interested in checking out what your life was like rather than just sneering at you.Well, to be honest I don't really spend a lot of time thinking about Bill Ayers in general. (I guess I felt kind of bad that he had his name dragged through the mud just because he happened to have some dirt and knew Obama) But other then that, why should I care if someone who is a huge asshole in general was nice to him, in particular?
Isn't that a good thing? Or would you rather them stay in their ivory towers because it's a better target for you?
For example, he raised as a son the child of imprisoned fellow radicals. He's also spent his entire post-revolutionary life working on public education issues. So yeah, he's a rich, entitled kid and still acts like it as an aging guy, but he's also commmitted his life to dealing with the non-theoretic ways the right (and the mainstream left) destroys peole's lives.Right, but Breitbart and Carlson on the other hand... I'm not saying Ayers is a bad guy for having had dinner with those guys. I'm saying Breitbart and Carlson's having dinner and being polite doesn't really mitigate the other terrible crap they've pulled over the years.
So: in short, Delmoi, you would prefer to keep those unlike you far away from you, and see no point in trying to stop antagonism.First of all, is that really a "civil" way to summaraize my comments? That's not what I was trying to say at all.
Well, we live in warmongering times.
Hey, trying to not to perseverate on this but I bet if you read a bit more about Ayers you might have a somewhat different perspective about this. He is probably most known for being extremeley confrontational - not a guy who believed in sitting down to dinner with the architects of war, but rather an advocate of literally blowing these guys up. Like most healthy people I think he's gotten calmer, more open, less confrontational as he has aged - but I don't think he is the least bit compromising in his beliefs about war mongers. If you haven't seen it, The Weather Underground documentary is a very well-done, thoughtful film about Ayers and his crew.Like I said though, my comments are really more about Breitbart and Carlson then they are about Ayers. The guy raised $2,500 for charity, etc. There is nothing wrong, IMO with talking to the other side, but I don't think people should pretended that people who are assholes aren't. I'm sure there are some non-assholes on the right. There are people like David Frum or Andrew Sullivan who strive for some level of intellectual honesty.
I have despised Mr. Breitbart since forever ... but his final proposal? His willingness to try and SEE another America? It's given me pause...What you're missing here is that people like that do not change their opinion -- or at least, there is substantial pressure not to -- because they are public figures with a great deal of investment in the hateful crap they spew. I would not expect them to be uncivil -- but maybe persistent and politely deferential to the host. Like any party guest.
Now, SEE what happens when you try being civil to your rivals for a change?....
....You seem to be fixated on what I said, Delmoi. What about the concept of being nice to people gets under your craw so much?So, you're choosing to respond to my points by being snarky and dismissive? I didn't say I had a problem with it, I just don't think it accomplished anything (other then getting the $2,500, of course)
I genuinely believe that nothing but good will come of these two sets of assholes breaking bread and having a civil discussion. It's not a whitewash of what they've done, it's a fleeting hope that they'll be, at least a little bit, de-assholified by the experience.Yeah, and I don't. Now, maybe your local neighborhood racist uncle who's never met an actual liberal might have his eyes opened, but these guys have been inside the D.C elite, been on talk shows (and greenrooms) for years, decades in the case of Tucker Carlson. They've met tons and tons of liberals. The idea that they simply haven't ever had the experience of having a pleasant conversation with a nice liberal is just not realistic.
I don't understand how you don't understand that throwing invective at each other in the safety of ideological echo chambers doesn't accomplish a damn thing. It's been going on for half a century, and the national discourse in the US is still nu uh, you're Hitler! nu uh, you're Stalin!It's been going on since the founding of the country. In fact, the middle of the 20th century was actually something on an anomaly in terms of discourse. Do you think abolitionists and secessionists were nice to eachother during the civil war?
Hint: Breitbart was telling a polite lie.Yeah, the "we should totally do X" thing. People make all kinds of proposals for stuff, even if they think it's a good idea at the time that doesn't mean they'd really go through with it. Breitbart maybe have tossed that out in conversation, that doesn't mean they'd ever actually do it.
« Older The Camorra Never Sleeps: "The Camorra is not an o... | Met Before. The new video from... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by shakespeherian at 8:44 AM on April 10, 2012 [9 favorites]