884
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

David Brooks wrote a good article in the New York Times today that tries to help shift perspectives a bit to understand this. I'd highly recommend reading it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/02/opinion/trump-meritocracy-educated.html

[-] cannacatman@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

That is the farthest thing from a good article that I've read in some time. I suppose that it does give some insights to why trumpers act the way they do, however trying to align their actions with some sort of 'we the elitists need to do a better job at not being elitist' mentality is rather dumb at first glance, and a bit insidious upon closer examination.

To me it was helpful in trying to understand the perspective from which a group derive their actions. Much like you said. Usually a good first step in dealing with interpersonal conflict is to make an attempt to understand the other perspective. The end does seem to wander a bit, but I think there's some truth in the general premise that a large group of people feel left behind (in various ways for various reasons).

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The ideal that “we’re all in this together” was replaced with the reality that the educated class lives in a world up here, and everybody else is forced into a world down there. Members of our class are always publicly speaking out for the marginalized, but somehow we always end up building systems that serve ourselves.

I love how Brooks can talk about class without bringing labor into it. Just a great example of liberals missing the damn point.

Then he goes on to talk about "open immigration" like that's even close to what we have.

[-] banneryear1868@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah Brooks is one of those special kind of conservatives who seems to always miss the point in the most aspirational moralized way. Like he taught a class on "humility" that included readings of... himself. I also love his ever-Freudian book title "The Second Mountain" which is about how commitment to marriage is part of a fulfilling life... after he divorced his wife and married his younger assistant.

[-] new_acct_who_dis@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago
[-] 4z01235@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Seems 12ft.io doesn't work for NYT, but archive.is does:

https://archive.is/r8L9I

this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
884 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19237 readers
1868 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS