What do you call it when the Democratic party recharacterizes Mamdani as a middle-of-the-road Jew lover, supported by AOC--the voice of the party's future, mere days before the NYC mayoral election?
By “liberal,” I have in mind someone committed to a set of philosophical and institutional commitments that are central to a political liberal society. In thinking about the philosophy, I’d point to the work of John Locke, John Stuart Mill, John Rawls, and Richard Rorty. Here’s what Stephen Holmes wrote, which I think is a very helpful distillation:
“The core practices of a liberal political order are religious toleration, freedom of discussion, restrictions on police behavior, free elections, constitutional government based on a separation of powers, publicly inspectable state budgets to inhibit corruption, and economic policy committed to sustained growth on the basis of private ownership and freedom of contract.”
The attacks on Virginia's Abigail Spamburger this week, from the left,showcased this specific flavor mental laziness. While if in the same position, I might not have vetoed the same way,I can say the lady had a reason for every veto.
"Absolute disaster" talk, and oddly explicitly anti CIA rhetoric ,and the famous "both sides are just as bad" sentiments that your article here is focused on.
Sidenote, I love THC. I have been an advocate of it and Marijuana, medical, recreational, and otherwise. I'd personally love it to be legal everywhere.
That being said, if I was Governor of Nebraska, I would want the regulations to be safe. The Virginia Governor said that's what she wanted, and planned on working towards getting the marketplace set up there.
So, is it bad faith on my part to see the huge difference in how Medical Marijuana has been treated here, thst the voters wanted? I honestly don't think so. The Governor in Nebraska has been in opposition to Medical Marijuana and has made the entire regulations process a partisan joke. That's simply not what I'm seeing from the Governor in Virginia. They are not the same. Frankly Ari ,I think making the distinction is important.
Both pictures are not the same. One is charcoal, the other is acrylic.
The very first comment I can see on that Bluesky post is "It’s almost like litmus tests may be a good idea." They're definitely not! I'll probably write something about purity politics in an upcoming post.
Again, so right & It's what I believe too. Thank for your insight
What do you call it when the Democratic party recharacterizes Mamdani as a middle-of-the-road Jew lover, supported by AOC--the voice of the party's future, mere days before the NYC mayoral election?
I think a root of this problem is the ingrained belief that partisanship is the problem. I'm in the process of finishing an essay on that
I'll be interested to read that!
You can’t blame customers for avoiding a restaurant that serves only two poorly made dishes, both cooked with unsafe and unpalatable ingredients.
Define what you mean by liberal for my education
Great question!
By “liberal,” I have in mind someone committed to a set of philosophical and institutional commitments that are central to a political liberal society. In thinking about the philosophy, I’d point to the work of John Locke, John Stuart Mill, John Rawls, and Richard Rorty. Here’s what Stephen Holmes wrote, which I think is a very helpful distillation:
“The core practices of a liberal political order are religious toleration, freedom of discussion, restrictions on police behavior, free elections, constitutional government based on a separation of powers, publicly inspectable state budgets to inhibit corruption, and economic policy committed to sustained growth on the basis of private ownership and freedom of contract.”
I wrote quite a lot about these ideas when I launched this Substack, about a year ago. One of the foundational posts is here: https://arikohen.substack.com/p/liberalism-what-even-is-it
Another is here:
https://arikohen.substack.com/p/what-we-like-about-liberalism
The attacks on Virginia's Abigail Spamburger this week, from the left,showcased this specific flavor mental laziness. While if in the same position, I might not have vetoed the same way,I can say the lady had a reason for every veto.
In a Discord group I am in,this was posted.
https://bsky.app/profile/joshuaerlich.bsky.social/post/3mmapepf5ys2k
"Absolute disaster" talk, and oddly explicitly anti CIA rhetoric ,and the famous "both sides are just as bad" sentiments that your article here is focused on.
Sidenote, I love THC. I have been an advocate of it and Marijuana, medical, recreational, and otherwise. I'd personally love it to be legal everywhere.
That being said, if I was Governor of Nebraska, I would want the regulations to be safe. The Virginia Governor said that's what she wanted, and planned on working towards getting the marketplace set up there.
So, is it bad faith on my part to see the huge difference in how Medical Marijuana has been treated here, thst the voters wanted? I honestly don't think so. The Governor in Nebraska has been in opposition to Medical Marijuana and has made the entire regulations process a partisan joke. That's simply not what I'm seeing from the Governor in Virginia. They are not the same. Frankly Ari ,I think making the distinction is important.
Both pictures are not the same. One is charcoal, the other is acrylic.
The very first comment I can see on that Bluesky post is "It’s almost like litmus tests may be a good idea." They're definitely not! I'll probably write something about purity politics in an upcoming post.