Well, I have to admit when I got to the subheading "And does Jon Stewart have those traits?" I had to laugh.
Jon Stewart is intellectually lazy, and far too happy to follow the latest cool thing credulously. I watched the episode "White people talk about racism" where he had a bunch of folks all invited to gang up on Andrew Sullivan, and ended up feeling bad for Sullivan and embarrassed for Stewart.
I'd say his show is all virtue signaling, but that's the only episode I've seen, and it was so awful that I doubt I'll see any more.
I'd definitely support a "no more fucking celebrities running for president" law. I suppose it would have to be a constitutional amendment. "No person shall be elected to the position of President or Vice-President who has not previously served at least three and a half years in the office of Senator, Representative, or Governor of a State."
The primary job of the President is to lead the country through a crisis. IMHO, we’d be better off if ppl voted for President with this in mind, and saved their policy preferences for their congressional representatives.
Honestly - I might have too low standards. But I would be glad if the president candidate is politician with some experience behind (governor/senator/congressman (1)) so you might have some experience with him. Someone who can hold the urine and the thought. Someone who understands that politics is at first the art of compromise so you cannot push everything you want by force and someone who admits that he sometimes need to find common speech even with the people he was running against. It would be nice to have someone like this again.
I think I wrote off Jon Stewart politically when, with America yet to recover from the Great Recession, and Glenn Beck and the Tea Party ascendant, he decided to Both Sides liberals and the already cranky conservative movement with the Rally to Restore Sanity, boosting centrists and moderates. Might as well run Hillary Clinton again if Jon Stewart's a serious contender.
Actually, that's not fair: Stewart hasn't backed any coups or invasions. That I know of.
My wife and I watched the daily show every weeknight in its final few years and I thought John was very funny and often tried to be fair. While he certainly leaned left, there were many moments when he seemed like a more centrist voice of reason. When he retired, and his replacement was comically unfunny, we turned to John Oliver (who we both thought was the obvious choice for his replacement). Oliver’s show (which it sounds like you are familiar with) was quite funny. But we also found it was too preachy and often presented subjects I knew something about in a misleading or biased manner, so we eventually moved on. And then there were a bunch of other attempts (Wyatt, Hasan, etc.) that were all equally cringeworthy in putting progressive/woke messaging/signaling first and comedy second. I’m sad to say that nothing on TV has filled this void, although this newsletter is pretty good!
Also, best line in this essay was “perhaps knowing less than any person who has ever lived.” 😂 I have to imagine that former EPA employee Jeff’s mouth was hanging wide open when he heard those AMAZING air pollution remarks...
I've been rewatching GOT and recently passed the Tywin scene you wrote about; "winter" is about to close in on the quality of the show.
There's always been a current of anti-intellectualism in American politics. The late great historian Richard Hofstadter wrote a book about it. It's one reason teachers in America lack the prestige of teachers in Europe.
Of course that anti-intellectual current waxes and wanes, but I suspect we are still at high tide.
it would be great if one of the presidential debates took the form of an oral exam to test knowledge.
I'm not sure I know enough about MMT...a future column explaining your aversion to it perhaps Jeff??
While I also have reasons to agree that JS is not President material, I don't think questioning Yellen's 'basic economics lesson' is the kind of thing that invalids him, given her life's work and credibility are based on fortifying a system that increasing numbers of anthropologists, sociologists and (yes) economists are raising some pretty thoughtful questions about.
As you point out, 'knowledge' is as closely tied to where you exist in human history, as to the facts you've collected in your skull. It's worth remembering we're presently living through a pretty 'nonsense' financial system from the perspective of the pre-derivatives, gold-standard financial beliefs of our recent forbears.
Well, I have to admit when I got to the subheading "And does Jon Stewart have those traits?" I had to laugh.
Jon Stewart is intellectually lazy, and far too happy to follow the latest cool thing credulously. I watched the episode "White people talk about racism" where he had a bunch of folks all invited to gang up on Andrew Sullivan, and ended up feeling bad for Sullivan and embarrassed for Stewart.
I'd say his show is all virtue signaling, but that's the only episode I've seen, and it was so awful that I doubt I'll see any more.
I'd definitely support a "no more fucking celebrities running for president" law. I suppose it would have to be a constitutional amendment. "No person shall be elected to the position of President or Vice-President who has not previously served at least three and a half years in the office of Senator, Representative, or Governor of a State."
The primary job of the President is to lead the country through a crisis. IMHO, we’d be better off if ppl voted for President with this in mind, and saved their policy preferences for their congressional representatives.
Honestly - I might have too low standards. But I would be glad if the president candidate is politician with some experience behind (governor/senator/congressman (1)) so you might have some experience with him. Someone who can hold the urine and the thought. Someone who understands that politics is at first the art of compromise so you cannot push everything you want by force and someone who admits that he sometimes need to find common speech even with the people he was running against. It would be nice to have someone like this again.
I think I wrote off Jon Stewart politically when, with America yet to recover from the Great Recession, and Glenn Beck and the Tea Party ascendant, he decided to Both Sides liberals and the already cranky conservative movement with the Rally to Restore Sanity, boosting centrists and moderates. Might as well run Hillary Clinton again if Jon Stewart's a serious contender.
Actually, that's not fair: Stewart hasn't backed any coups or invasions. That I know of.
My wife and I watched the daily show every weeknight in its final few years and I thought John was very funny and often tried to be fair. While he certainly leaned left, there were many moments when he seemed like a more centrist voice of reason. When he retired, and his replacement was comically unfunny, we turned to John Oliver (who we both thought was the obvious choice for his replacement). Oliver’s show (which it sounds like you are familiar with) was quite funny. But we also found it was too preachy and often presented subjects I knew something about in a misleading or biased manner, so we eventually moved on. And then there were a bunch of other attempts (Wyatt, Hasan, etc.) that were all equally cringeworthy in putting progressive/woke messaging/signaling first and comedy second. I’m sad to say that nothing on TV has filled this void, although this newsletter is pretty good!
Also, best line in this essay was “perhaps knowing less than any person who has ever lived.” 😂 I have to imagine that former EPA employee Jeff’s mouth was hanging wide open when he heard those AMAZING air pollution remarks...
Stewart has really leaned into being a baggy-eyed scold. Disappointing. What we need is an easygoing genius. Unfortunately, those don't exist.
I've been rewatching GOT and recently passed the Tywin scene you wrote about; "winter" is about to close in on the quality of the show.
There's always been a current of anti-intellectualism in American politics. The late great historian Richard Hofstadter wrote a book about it. It's one reason teachers in America lack the prestige of teachers in Europe.
Of course that anti-intellectual current waxes and wanes, but I suspect we are still at high tide.
it would be great if one of the presidential debates took the form of an oral exam to test knowledge.
Thank you for your pronoun-choosing wisdom!
I'm not sure I know enough about MMT...a future column explaining your aversion to it perhaps Jeff??
While I also have reasons to agree that JS is not President material, I don't think questioning Yellen's 'basic economics lesson' is the kind of thing that invalids him, given her life's work and credibility are based on fortifying a system that increasing numbers of anthropologists, sociologists and (yes) economists are raising some pretty thoughtful questions about.
As you point out, 'knowledge' is as closely tied to where you exist in human history, as to the facts you've collected in your skull. It's worth remembering we're presently living through a pretty 'nonsense' financial system from the perspective of the pre-derivatives, gold-standard financial beliefs of our recent forbears.