Wednesday, April 20, 2005
Culture: New York Leftists are Elitists who Merit Scorn
I recently found this wonderful writer named Kurt Andersen who writes for the magazine "New York." You can find his archive here. I like his writing for several reasons.
1. His vocubulary is very impressive
2. His writing style is informative, entertaining, and honest
3. His attitudes betray exactly why New York Leftists are scum and worthy of mockery
Here's a choice quote from one of Andersen's articles:
1. His vocubulary is very impressive
2. His writing style is informative, entertaining, and honest
3. His attitudes betray exactly why New York Leftists are scum and worthy of mockery
Here's a choice quote from one of Andersen's articles:
"For New Yorkers, this massive dark cloud does have aHere's another one:
silver lining. We can now feel special again, and revert to
full-bore smugness: We choose to live in New York because
we are superior, and we are superior because we live in New
York."
Hence, Leftists suck in general, and New York Leftists suck in particular. I would just love to see that caustic bitch Ann Coulter tear this guy a new asshole (without getting snot on her hands). Maybe I can get an artist to draw me a picture of Ann Coulter tearing Manhattan a new asshole.
"New Yorkers think we are smarter than other Americans,
that the richness and difficulty of life here give our
intelligence a kind of hard-won depth and nuance and
sensitivity to contradictions and ambiguity. We feel we are
practically French. Most New Yorkers are also liberals. And
most liberals, wherever they live, believe that they are
smarter than most conservatives (particularly George W.
Bush)."
Comments:
<< Home
I listen to Kurt Anderson quite a bit. And while I agree that he can be a bit smug, perhaps effete, definitely culturally elite, you missed his whole frikkin point.
His point was that this is how New Yorkers think about themselves. Not that this thinking is right, or that they really are better than anyone else.
The truth is, people in large cities tend to be liberal. People who are well educated tend to be liberal. People who are culturally literate tend to be liberals.
This isn't a judgement on conservatives or liberals; it's just statistics.
Liberals don't suck because of how they seem themselves any more than conservatives suck because of how they see themselves. These quotes represent a criticism of the superior liberal attitude, not an adulation of it. He's pointing out that just as liberals perceive conservatives (particularly those on the religious right) as thinking that they're "better" than them, so too the liberals hold the same superior attitude.
I'll take the risk of labelling myself as someone on the left, although I don't think that I hold myself in the same position that what I call "cultural elitists" do. Basically, I like my political views and disagree with the political views of those more conservative than me.
If the last election (and recent polls) have shown anything, it's that the country right now is more-or-less ideologically divided in half. Although there are currently majorities in the executive and legislative branches, it's not such a great majority that we can say that any one political position has a mandate.
The only way that any political progress will be made is if we work to remove the ideological mudslinging which serves no real purpose, and move our energies towards figuring out what problems we can commonly agree on and work on those problems. While there are some on the religious right who believe that the presence of gays and abortion in this country is such a crucial problem that this must be resolved before anything else can be addressed, I think that most Americans can agree that the big issues really are security (national and world), poverty and hunger, healthcare (costs and quality), education (the US is number one in so many areas; we should be number one in education and learning), and economic opportunity and growth (I want to have a nice, stable career as I get older; I want any children I have to have access to a good job market).
His point was that this is how New Yorkers think about themselves. Not that this thinking is right, or that they really are better than anyone else.
The truth is, people in large cities tend to be liberal. People who are well educated tend to be liberal. People who are culturally literate tend to be liberals.
This isn't a judgement on conservatives or liberals; it's just statistics.
Liberals don't suck because of how they seem themselves any more than conservatives suck because of how they see themselves. These quotes represent a criticism of the superior liberal attitude, not an adulation of it. He's pointing out that just as liberals perceive conservatives (particularly those on the religious right) as thinking that they're "better" than them, so too the liberals hold the same superior attitude.
I'll take the risk of labelling myself as someone on the left, although I don't think that I hold myself in the same position that what I call "cultural elitists" do. Basically, I like my political views and disagree with the political views of those more conservative than me.
If the last election (and recent polls) have shown anything, it's that the country right now is more-or-less ideologically divided in half. Although there are currently majorities in the executive and legislative branches, it's not such a great majority that we can say that any one political position has a mandate.
The only way that any political progress will be made is if we work to remove the ideological mudslinging which serves no real purpose, and move our energies towards figuring out what problems we can commonly agree on and work on those problems. While there are some on the religious right who believe that the presence of gays and abortion in this country is such a crucial problem that this must be resolved before anything else can be addressed, I think that most Americans can agree that the big issues really are security (national and world), poverty and hunger, healthcare (costs and quality), education (the US is number one in so many areas; we should be number one in education and learning), and economic opportunity and growth (I want to have a nice, stable career as I get older; I want any children I have to have access to a good job market).
I've run into elitists on the liberal and conservative side. I think the liberal elitists are much nicer. The conservative elitists are far more snobbish, threatening, and at times downright scary.
The truth is, people in large cities tend to be liberal. People who are well educated tend to be liberal. People who are culturally literate tend to be liberals.
Each of these three points merits discussion. Why are people in large cities liberal? Is it because they're used to seeing large groups of poor people and start thinking, "We have to do *something*!" and that, somehow translates into government seizure programs? People who are "well-educated" often are liberal because rich liberals would rather spend time with a cushy, risk-free live in the Ivory Tower than they would facing the vagaries of the marketplace. The marketplace rewards people who can do it, not necessarily the "well-educated." How will reading _Ulysses_ help you run a business? It won't, but it will help you hob-nob with snotty liberals in the English department. And as far as "culturally literate" goes, what exactly does that mean? Does it mean that they are more tolerant of other cultures? I dispute that. My New York coworker freely shared his open disdain and near-hatred of the New York Puerto Rican population. And he freely shared that the Puertorriquenyos there would freely hate anyone who was not "Boricua" when it was one of "their days."
My stereotypical view of a Leftist is:
1. rich through inheritance
2. snotty
3. lazy
4. elitist
5. horrible debater
6. no sense of humor
I admit I'm being hard. I think my opinion of Leftists took a nose dive recently due to some discussions that I've had with Leftists. I disagreed with one of their vote-buying seizure schemes, and they return with, "Well, you're obviously a Bush supporter." As a gay man and a gay parent who is quite aware of how much the Religious Right wants to see me suffer, I took serious offense to this and wanted revenge.
Each of these three points merits discussion. Why are people in large cities liberal? Is it because they're used to seeing large groups of poor people and start thinking, "We have to do *something*!" and that, somehow translates into government seizure programs? People who are "well-educated" often are liberal because rich liberals would rather spend time with a cushy, risk-free live in the Ivory Tower than they would facing the vagaries of the marketplace. The marketplace rewards people who can do it, not necessarily the "well-educated." How will reading _Ulysses_ help you run a business? It won't, but it will help you hob-nob with snotty liberals in the English department. And as far as "culturally literate" goes, what exactly does that mean? Does it mean that they are more tolerant of other cultures? I dispute that. My New York coworker freely shared his open disdain and near-hatred of the New York Puerto Rican population. And he freely shared that the Puertorriquenyos there would freely hate anyone who was not "Boricua" when it was one of "their days."
My stereotypical view of a Leftist is:
1. rich through inheritance
2. snotty
3. lazy
4. elitist
5. horrible debater
6. no sense of humor
I admit I'm being hard. I think my opinion of Leftists took a nose dive recently due to some discussions that I've had with Leftists. I disagreed with one of their vote-buying seizure schemes, and they return with, "Well, you're obviously a Bush supporter." As a gay man and a gay parent who is quite aware of how much the Religious Right wants to see me suffer, I took serious offense to this and wanted revenge.
I think the liberal elitists are much nicer. The conservative elitists are far more snobbish, threatening, and at times downright scary.
I agree, the conservative elitists are more frightening. But they don't get a pass like the Leftist elitists do. Believe me, I have called many more than one Christian "smug, elitist, and condescending" and it was entirely accurate. It's definately due for many folks on the Left because they've gotten a pass and also because they try to portray themselves as "for the common man" when they are actually filthy rich.
Post a Comment
I agree, the conservative elitists are more frightening. But they don't get a pass like the Leftist elitists do. Believe me, I have called many more than one Christian "smug, elitist, and condescending" and it was entirely accurate. It's definately due for many folks on the Left because they've gotten a pass and also because they try to portray themselves as "for the common man" when they are actually filthy rich.
<< Home
