Althouse: "The obvious thing to say about Jonathan Chait’s battle against the left is that we’re rooting for casualties."

January 29, 2015

"The obvious thing to say about Jonathan Chait’s battle against the left is that we’re rooting for casualties."

"Which we suppose calls for an explanation of why we’re not simply on Chait’s side."

James Taranto takes on Jonathan Chait's "political correctness" rant.

(And I'm not just linking because it links to me. ("Blogress Ann Althouse, a law professor whose politics are heterodox and centrist, elaborates pointedly...."))

29 comments:

themightypuck said...: I'm good for around half and I thought I was a bleeding heart liberal.; 1/29/15, 6:25 PM
Troubled Voter said...: Adoringly pro-Walker and anti-left does not equal heterodox and centrist.

You aren't cruelly neutral just because you claim to be and others buy into it.

You actually have to be, well, neutral.; 1/29/15, 6:26 PM
themightypuck said...: http://www.newcriterion.com/posts.cfm/who-are-liberals-4114

For those who didn't read the whole Taranto bit.; 1/29/15, 6:26 PM
themightypuck said...: I'd say Althouse is fairly heterodox and centrist and not particularly cruelly neutral. No one who claims to or cares to be cruelly neutral actually is. I'm pretty sure she knows that. It is more a note to her readers, who tend to be more conservative than her, to pay attention. She isn't always saying what you think she is saying.; 1/29/15, 6:33 PM
Ann Althouse said...: I've never claimed to be entirely neutral! The "cruel neutrality" thing was a position within one election season, where I was not interested in making up my mind until the end. I didn't have enough of a preference between the 2 parties -- neither of which I like -- to align, so for blogging purposes, I was neutral. The cruel part is: I'm not going to be bland because I'm neutral, but actually more incisive and spicy.

Anyway, I never claimed to be set in a neutral position!; 1/29/15, 6:37 PM
tim in vermont said...: First things first: there’s no such thing as “political correctness.” The term’s in wide use, certainly, but has no actual fixed or specific meaning. What defines it is not what it describes but how it’s used: as a way to dismiss a concern or demand as a frivolous grievance rather than a real issue. . . .

First rule of the fight club is: You do not talk about the fight club.

I wonder how she defines a grievance as "trivial"? My guess is she examines the gender first and politics second of the complainer.; 1/29/15, 6:42 PM
Curious George said...: Spicy?; 1/29/15, 6:43 PM
rhhardin said...: Derbyshire has a better observation, that PC is about not noticing things and not remembering things.; 1/29/15, 6:44 PM
Sebastian said...: As Taranto implies, Chait protests too much.

On speech, most "liberals" have been "left" for quite some time. In media, academia, politics, etc., the identity/diversity regime rules.; 1/29/15, 7:05 PM
Beldar said...: That link doesn't work for me, Prof. Althouse, but this seems to be it.; 1/29/15, 7:14 PM
Beldar said...: Or perhaps you were just using a search engine to get around the WSJ's paywall, in which case, never mind.; 1/29/15, 7:16 PM
Ann Althouse said...: @beldar

Yes. That's the way to get in.; 1/29/15, 7:49 PM
YoungHegelian said...: Is "heterodox" a lot like being "cis-dox"?; 1/29/15, 8:04 PM
traditionalguy said...: Why complain that Chait has gotten mugged by reality since the last time he was arguing and using progressive tactics.

There should be great joy over what he says about those tactics today.; 1/29/15, 8:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Sometimes the order of things in English is the difference between a stand-pipe and a pipe-stand, but how does cruel neutrality differ from neutral cruelty?; 1/29/15, 9:13 PM
Laslo Spatula said...: "...but how does cruel neutrality differ from neutral cruelty?"

It depends who is bent over the Spanking Chair.

I am Laslo.; 1/29/15, 9:32 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: ... that PC is about not noticing things and not remembering things.

A perpetual selfie state.; 1/29/15, 9:47 PM
HoodlumDoodlum said...: You should ask Taranto to do a guest Blogginheads one of these days, Prof. I'd watch that.; 1/29/15, 9:54 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: Remember when the "religious right" took over the GOP, sometime after Reagan took office?

This PC takeover is bigger than that.; 1/29/15, 9:56 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: Harvey Levin asked his sidekick the other day... Could Blazing Saddles be made today... after some hesitation he agreed. Not in todays climate.; 1/29/15, 10:12 PM
Original Mike said...: "James Burnham listed 39 sentences, about which he observed: “A full-blown liberal will mark every one, or very nearly every one, of these thirty-nine sentences, Agree. A convinced conservative will mark many or most of them, a reactionary all or nearly all of them, Disagree.”"

21 AGREE
18 DISAGREE

Guess that means I'm a moderate. Not sure I'm comfortable with that.; 1/29/15, 11:04 PM
lonetown said...: Blogress?

really?; 1/30/15, 5:10 AM
tim maguire said...: It's not so much that we don't take Chait's side--we do. It's that Chait doesn't take Chait's side. He's fine with everything he complains about, he just doesn't like it directed against him.; 1/30/15, 5:17 AM
MayBee said...: Lem- and more evangelical.; 1/30/15, 7:29 AM
dreams said...: "Why complain that Chait has gotten mugged by reality since the last time he was arguing and using progressive tactics.

There should be great joy over what he says about those tactics today."

Here is the reason why. "He doesn’t live by the creed he now defends."; 1/30/15, 9:56 AM
dreams said...: "heterodox and centrist" In other words not always politically correct.; 1/30/15, 10:14 AM
mikee said...: Looks like Mr. Chait realized that after the fundamental transformation of the United States becomes a sure thing, he is among those to be first up against the wall.; 1/30/15, 10:14 AM
Ficta said...: Speaking of 70s comedies. The commentary track on Kentucky Fried Movie is a steady stream of "Nope, couldn't do that one today".; 1/30/15, 11:37 AM
ザイツェヴ said...: There is no blogging style rule not to link to articles that link to you. In fact, it was the proper thing to do before the commenting systems took over. Just link, jeez.; 1/30/15, 5:52 PM