Debate Now Is Liberalism Exhausted?

[Dogmaphobe]

]

Of course you are right, but for the purposes of this thread, let's go with the definition of 'liberalism' and, as necessary 'conservatism' as it is most usually understood and defined in modern day America.

Well, in that case, I would be tempted to respond to this sentence in the article "You judge political movements not by their manifestos but by where they put their passion" by noting that what is even more central to the issue is that ideas are not judged by the actual merit of the idea, but only by who is presenting it.

Which also explains the death of actual liberalism.

 

[Syriusly]

Provide me with your definition of 'LIberalism" and I will be glad to debate.

But i am not going to debate a moving target.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There can't be "debate" when the thread premise fails as a loaded question fallacy.

 

[koshergrl]

The axis of indoctrination (academia, media, Hollywood) has achieved its goal. We are going to see liberalism on steroids in the future.

I think this will become a harder sell, especially if the victimization psychology starts to break down.

It doesn't matter if it's sold at this point or not. The progressives are holding the reins, they won't give them up.

But if they can't gain new recruits, can we at least hope they will lose by attrition?

They create recruits in our schools...but they don't need them at this point. You really think Hillary is going to pick up her toys and go home?

 

[Foxfyre]

Of course liberalism isn't exhausted. The runaway victory of liberal ideas in nearly every field demonstrates that.

Goldberg's rant was hilariously pathetic. It was a mess of disjointed crying, reminiscent of the Unibomber's manifesto. That's one of the intellectual champions of the right, the guy whining about Obama the Marxist dictator and Al Sharpton the eeeeeevil feminists? Way to pack together the nutty strawmen. Kook bloggers usually put together more sensible rants than that.

Clearly, someone is intellectually exhausted. It's just not the liberals.

By the way, if you ever want to know what Goldberg believes himself, simply look at what he accuses liberals of. Goldberg has long been a champion of victimhood politics and identity politics and political correctness, so of course he accuses everyone else of such things. He thinks that way, so he simply can't imagine that anyone else doesn't think that way.

I am not interested in Goldberg himself in this thread. I am interested in the concepts he offered in the linked piece. Please refer to the guidelines for this thread.

So what did he get wrong in this article?

Is left leaning media thriving?
Are the ranks of liberalism swelling?
What are the topics we most see pushed by the left these days?

Can you be specific re something in the article he said that merits criticism?

 

[Foxfyre]

There can't be "debate" when the thread premise fails as a loaded question fallacy.

How can something that can be answered with a simple yes or no be a loaded question fallacy?

 

[Foxfyre]

The word I would use is "supplanted".

Liberalism has been supplanted by identity politics/multiculturalism as the governing ideology of the left.

No argument from me on that point either. But is that identity politics/multriculturalsim as a governing ideology gaining traction in America? Or is it losing favor?

 

[percysunshine]

Okay I'll wade in and offer the first post in the new Structured Debate zone.

In his column today Jonah Goldberg proposes a thesis that liberalism as it is defined and practiced in modern day America has worn itself out. It's proponents in the media have lost their luster and are no longer able to gain much if any traction in popular appeal. The 2014 election suggested people are looking for something different. President Obama has been able to move his party far to the left, but has been unable to attract recruits to join them.

The article: Is Liberalism Exhausted RealClearPolitics

Rules for this debate:
:
1. No ad hominem. Address the member's post and make no comment on the character or motive or intent of the member himself or herself.

2. No mention of Republicans or Democrats or any other political party. Keep the focus on liberalism and whether it has or has not run its course in America.

3. Please keep criticism of specific media, political, or other personalities to a minimum.

THE QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED:

Is liberalism exhausted, i.e. has it run its course in America and will fade into the background in coming years?

".. liberalism as it is defined and practiced in modern day America has worn itself out."

If true, it would make modern liberalism conservative in nature. As far as I understand the definitions of the words. Thus, the modern liberalism ideal is an old, grumpy, worn out, and curmudgeonly stubborn reflection of ancient ideologies. In contrast, the modern conservatism is new, fresh, untried, and hesitant about making progress. What a strange world we live in.

In my opinion anyway.

.

.

 

[amrchaos]

"It's proponents in the media have lost their luster and are no longer able to gain much if any traction in popular appeal."

Hold it--when did liberals have luster?

I think the true problem with the right is being hijacked by a small group of ideologues in the first decade and a lack of direction afterwards.

Liberals are not winning on star power, they are winning due to ineffective opposition.

 

[koshergrl]

Left leaning media is thriving.

Of course liberalism isn't exhausted. The runaway victory of liberal ideas in nearly every field demonstrates that.

Goldberg's rant was hilariously pathetic. It was a mess of disjointed crying, reminiscent of the Unibomber's manifesto. That's one of the intellectual champions of the right, the guy whining about Obama the Marxist dictator and Al Sharpton the eeeeeevil feminists? Way to pack together the nutty strawmen. Kook bloggers usually put together more sensible rants than that.

Clearly, someone is intellectually exhausted. It's just not the liberals.

By the way, if you ever want to know what Goldberg believes himself, simply look at what he accuses liberals of. Goldberg has long been a champion of victimhood politics and identity politics and political correctness, so of course he accuses everyone else of such things. He thinks that way, so he simply can't imagine that anyone else doesn't think that way.

I am not interested in Goldberg himself in this thread. I am interested in the concepts he offered in the linked piece. Please refer to the guidelines for this thread.

So what did he get wrong in this article?

Is left leaning media thriving?
Are the ranks of liberalism swelling?
What are the topics we most see pushed by the left these days?

Can you be specific re something in the article he said that merits criticism?

Left leaning media is thriving...and the ranks are swelling via the artificial injection of illegals that we are being drowned under.

 

[Foxfyre]

The axis of indoctrination (academia, media, Hollywood) has achieved its goal. We are going to see liberalism on steroids in the future.

I think this will become a harder sell, especially if the victimization psychology starts to break down.

It doesn't matter if it's sold at this point or not. The progressives are holding the reins, they won't give them up.

But if they can't gain new recruits, can we at least hope they will lose by attrition?

They create recruits in our schools...but they don't need them at this point. You really think Hillary is going to pick up her toys and go home?

For sure they have been infiltrating education at all levels for a half century now. And yet Goldberg suggests the bloom is off that rose and the ranks of liberalism are not being increased either with numbers of influence. Is he wrong?

 

[Mac1958]

The axis of indoctrination (academia, media, Hollywood) has achieved its goal. We are going to see liberalism on steroids in the future.

.

No, not at all.

I think we've passed the tipping point, and we're on our way towards what the Left wants, some version of a Euro-social democracy.

What I don't (can't) know is whether it will end up looking more like Germany, France or Greece.

The de facto collapse of our southern border will ultimately be the last straw, as the Left will able to flood the electorate with those who are much more inclined to support such a system, a far more powerful, centralized federal government presiding over a populace heavily divided into the various identity groups.

That's been the goal all along.

It is what it is.

.

LOL. You guys aren't giving me a great deal of hope here. I read an article like Goldberg's today and think maybe there is hope. Maybe the American people are less sheeplike than I've given them credit for. Maybe they are able to figure out some things for themselves and the worm really is turning.

He is right that leftwing (aka liberal) media has a really dismal track record. Despite massive funding, Air America couldn't make it. MSNBC has a tiny fraction of the audience of Fox News who continues to out pull all the other cable news networks combined in ratings. NPR and PBS are less partisan than most others, but they are accused of being at least somewhat left of center. I have been reading where they are struggling financially, though I'm not sure that is due to loss of audience. Both are completely funded of course and don't have to make it on popularity. But why is their funding falling behind?

And it seems that fewer people are willing to identify themselves as 'liberal'.

So in all due respect, while I fear you might be right, I hope you are wrong.

I think it's a terribly wasted opportunity, and I don't think it's the spirit of our Constitution, but it's certainly an easier sell than personal responsibility and self discipline.

.

 

[Foxfyre]

"It's proponents in the media have lost their luster and are no longer able to gain much if any traction in popular appeal."

Hold it--when did liberals have luster?

I think the true problem with the right is being hijacked by a small group of ideologues in the first decade and a lack of direction afterwards.

Liberals are not winning on star power, they are winning due to ineffective opposition.

Interesting concept. So how do you support that argument with audience for leftwing media? In the results of the last election? In those willing to identify themselves as 'liberal'?

 

[Carla_Danger]

Okay I'll wade in and offer the first post in the new Structured Debate zone.

In his column today Jonah Goldberg proposes a thesis that liberalism as it is defined and practiced in modern day America has worn itself out. It's proponents in the media have lost their luster and are no longer able to gain much if any traction in popular appeal. The 2014 election suggested people are looking for something different. President Obama has been able to move his party far to the left, but has been unable to attract recruits to join them.

The article: Is Liberalism Exhausted RealClearPolitics

Rules for this debate:
:
1. No ad hominem. Address the member's post and make no comment on the character or motive or intent of the member himself or herself.

2. No mention of Republicans or Democrats or any other political party. Keep the focus on liberalism and whether it has or has not run its course in America.

3. Please keep criticism of specific media, political, or other personalities to a minimum.

THE QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED:

Is liberalism exhausted, i.e. has it run its course in America and will fade into the background in coming years?

Your link from RealClearPolitics is full of ad hominem and criticism of specific media outlets.

 

[Foxfyre]

The axis of indoctrination (academia, media, Hollywood) has achieved its goal. We are going to see liberalism on steroids in the future.

.

No, not at all.

I think we've passed the tipping point, and we're on our way towards what the Left wants, some version of a Euro-social democracy.

What I don't (can't) know is whether it will end up looking more like Germany, France or Greece.

The de facto collapse of our southern border will ultimately be the last straw, as the Left will able to flood the electorate with those who are much more inclined to support such a system, a far more powerful, centralized federal government presiding over a populace heavily divided into the various identity groups.

That's been the goal all along.

It is what it is.

.

LOL. You guys aren't giving me a great deal of hope here. I read an article like Goldberg's today and think maybe there is hope. Maybe the American people are less sheeplike than I've given them credit for. Maybe they are able to figure out some things for themselves and the worm really is turning.

He is right that leftwing (aka liberal) media has a really dismal track record. Despite massive funding, Air America couldn't make it. MSNBC has a tiny fraction of the audience of Fox News who continues to out pull all the other cable news networks combined in ratings. NPR and PBS are less partisan than most others, but they are accused of being at least somewhat left of center. I have been reading where they are struggling financially, though I'm not sure that is due to loss of audience. Both are completely funded of course and don't have to make it on popularity. But why is their funding falling behind?

And it seems that fewer people are willing to identify themselves as 'liberal'.

So in all due respect, while I fear you might be right, I hope you are wrong.

I think it's a terribly wasted opportunity, and I don't think it's the spirit of our Constitution, but it's certainly an easier sell than personal responsibility and self discipline.

.

I'm not following that too well Mac. Can you elaborate or explain what you mean here?

 

[80zephyr]

Liberals have been winning...forever. And since they have been, each "hot button" issue has become more and more obscure.

They remind me of unions. Unions fought for workers rights, safety on the job, etc. What do the unions fight for today? Superfluous items that for the most part make no difference to most of the membership.

I think the liberals may have reached that point.

Mark

Hi Mark. That was pretty much Goldberg's point I think. From the article:

". . .Meanwhile, the cultural left has disengaged from mainstream political arguments, preferring instead the comforts of identity-politics argy-bargy. You judge political movements not by their manifestos but by where they put their passion. And on the left these days, the only things that arouse passion are arguments about race and gender. . . ."​

And 'gender' of course includes the whole gay scene.

It is really all they have left. It is why they push racism, sexism, etc. Without that, they are irrelevant.

Mark

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay I'll wade in and offer the first post in the new Structured Debate zone.

In his column today Jonah Goldberg proposes a thesis that liberalism as it is defined and practiced in modern day America has worn itself out. It's proponents in the media have lost their luster and are no longer able to gain much if any traction in popular appeal. The 2014 election suggested people are looking for something different. President Obama has been able to move his party far to the left, but has been unable to attract recruits to join them.

The article: Is Liberalism Exhausted RealClearPolitics

Rules for this debate:
:
1. No ad hominem. Address the member's post and make no comment on the character or motive or intent of the member himself or herself.

2. No mention of Republicans or Democrats or any other political party. Keep the focus on liberalism and whether it has or has not run its course in America.

3. Please keep criticism of specific media, political, or other personalities to a minimum.

THE QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED:

Is liberalism exhausted, i.e. has it run its course in America and will fade into the background in coming years?

Your link from RealClearPolitics is full of ad hominem and criticism of specific media outlets.

Please be specific. The link does use MSNBC as an illustration to support the point made, but I didn't see any specific criticism of it. Could you give me an example of ad hominem from the article because I definitely did miss that.

 

[Syriusly]

The axis of indoctrination (academia, media, Hollywood) has achieved its goal. We are going to see liberalism on steroids in the future.

.

No, not at all.

I think we've passed the tipping point, and we're on our way towards what the Left wants, some version of a Euro-social democracy.

What I don't (can't) know is whether it will end up looking more like Germany, France or Greece.

The de facto collapse of our southern border will ultimately be the last straw, as the Left will able to flood the electorate with those who are much more inclined to support such a system, a far more powerful, centralized federal government presiding over a populace heavily divided into the various identity groups.

That's been the goal all along.

It is what it is.

.

LOL. You guys aren't giving me a great deal of hope here. I read an article like Goldberg's today and think maybe there is hope. Maybe the American people are less sheeplike than I've given them credit for. Maybe they are able to figure out some things for themselves and the worm really is turning.

He is right that leftwing (aka liberal) media has a really dismal track record. Despite massive funding, Air America couldn't make it. MSNBC has a tiny fraction of the audience of Fox News who continues to out pull all the other cable news networks combined in ratings. NPR and PBS are less partisan than most others, but they are accused of being at least somewhat left of center. I have been reading where they are struggling financially, though I'm not sure that is due to loss of audience. Both are completely funded of course and don't have to make it on popularity. But why is their funding falling behind?

And it seems that fewer people are willing to identify themselves as 'liberal'.

So in all due respect, while I fear you might be right, I hope you are wrong.

I think it's a terribly wasted opportunity, and I don't think it's the spirit of our Constitution, but it's certainly an easier sell than personal responsibility and self discipline.

.

I'm not following that too well Mac. Can you elaborate or explain what you mean here?

What is 'liberalism'- other than anything other than what you agree with?

You can't debate something without agreeing what that something is.

 

[Foxfyre]

Liberals have been winning...forever. And since they have been, each "hot button" issue has become more and more obscure.

They remind me of unions. Unions fought for workers rights, safety on the job, etc. What do the unions fight for today? Superfluous items that for the most part make no difference to most of the membership.

I think the liberals may have reached that point.

Mark

Hi Mark. That was pretty much Goldberg's point I think. From the article:

". . .Meanwhile, the cultural left has disengaged from mainstream political arguments, preferring instead the comforts of identity-politics argy-bargy. You judge political movements not by their manifestos but by where they put their passion. And on the left these days, the only things that arouse passion are arguments about race and gender. . . ."​

And 'gender' of course includes the whole gay scene.

It is really all they have left. It is why they push racism, sexism, etc. Without that, they are irrelevant.

Mark

But is that effective? Or ineffective? I think those using any ideology to sell themselves are likely to use what is effective in gaining the interest, respect, and/or approval of the people. So would you say current trends suggest that focus on racism, sexism, etc. is sufficiently effective that their focus on that is paying off?

 

[Carla_Danger]

Okay I'll wade in and offer the first post in the new Structured Debate zone.

In his column today Jonah Goldberg proposes a thesis that liberalism as it is defined and practiced in modern day America has worn itself out. It's proponents in the media have lost their luster and are no longer able to gain much if any traction in popular appeal. The 2014 election suggested people are looking for something different. President Obama has been able to move his party far to the left, but has been unable to attract recruits to join them.

The article: Is Liberalism Exhausted RealClearPolitics

Rules for this debate:
:
1. No ad hominem. Address the member's post and make no comment on the character or motive or intent of the member himself or herself.

2. No mention of Republicans or Democrats or any other political party. Keep the focus on liberalism and whether it has or has not run its course in America.

3. Please keep criticism of specific media, political, or other personalities to a minimum.

THE QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED:

Is liberalism exhausted, i.e. has it run its course in America and will fade into the background in coming years?

Your link from RealClearPolitics is full of ad hominem and criticism of specific media outlets.

Please be specific. The link does use MSNBC as an illustration to support the point made, but I didn't see any specific criticism of it. Could you give me an example of ad hominem from the article because I definitely did miss that.

Really, you don't?