It also shouldn't be understated how major events can shape generations. For Millennials, the numerous catastrophes of the Bush administration, particularly the economic recession in 2007, the disappointment of the Obama administration, and the failure of the Democratic establishment to stop the election of Trump is seared into the collective consciousness of that age group. For Gen Z, the disasters of Trump and his administration and an increasingly inequitable economy will continue to mold their political views.

Not really. Leftist Baby Boomers were a minority. An extremely vocal one at times, but a minority all the same. There may be some evidence to suggest that as people get older they become more conservative, but the transformation is generally slight. Usually people retain the political affiliations and beliefs they develop in their twenties throughout their lives.

But no, you are willing to go with sentence that Scruton is a right-wing racist anti-semite islamophobe, which is so obvious to you that you want to stop the conversation now. — ssu

Interesting how much mental gymnastics @ssu is willing to do to deny that Scruton's comments are problematic, yet he'll repeatedly accuse me of painting Scruton as an outright anti-semite, which, as I've argued, is demonstrably untrue.

According to the latest Emerson Polling, Bernie Sanders is the Democratic front runner, ahead of Biden by 5% (29% and 24% respectively). Harris and O'Rourke are only at 8%. I still think it's odd that Biden, who has not announced his candidacy, is still featured in surveys. It obscures the fact that Sanders is by far the leader of those who have actually announced.

When the interviewer literally celebrates with drinking champagne that the "right-wing racist homophobe" he interviewed is fired from a position thanks to his interview, I think the objectives for the interview are quite evident. — ssu

I don't know who George Eaton is; never heard of him prior to this, but damn he must be an extremely talented interviewer to get Scruton, a public servant in a country with nearly three million Muslims to say things like, "The Hungarians were extremely alarmed by the sudden invasion of huge tribes of Muslims from the Middle East," or that Islamophobia was “invented by the Muslim Brotherhood in order to stop discussion of a major issue” or that many Jewish-Hungarian intellectuals form networks around a "Soros Empire". Crazy!

Well, I assume that the whole response that people give to something should be considered. You don't think so: uttering the J-Word means you are a bigot. As I've already said, the alt-right does indeed talk of a Soros empire. Just how you talk about it is important. But if Scruton mentions Soros, is obviously he is part of the alt-right, not the traditional right. — ssu

Insofar as you're, once again, unwilling to directly confront Scruton's remarks that I've highlighted and the loaded antisemitism that they contain, I consider this conversation over.

No one makes these hilariously straw-man claims

From Slavery to the Cooperative Commonwealth: Labor and Republican Liberty in the Nineteenth Century by Alex Gourevitch

As younger generations of Democrats/leftists are gaining political clout viz., Millennials or are finding their political voice viz., Gen Z, both of which lean far more left on key issues than older generations, the older/more moderate members of Democratic party will have to contend with two generations worth of voters who are increasingly exasperated by the many failings of the party from the last 40 years (the symptom of which has culminated in Trump) and are demanding (and will vote for) seismic changes.

Oh I'm dodging now comments? — ssu

God damn, can you please read what I actually write? I said you dodged the "issue" i.e. the content of the antisemitic comments, not that you dodged the comments themselves. Congrats, ssu, you "quoted" them, but you didn't actually directly explain why his comments weren't actually antisemitic canards, you had merely tried to highlight the quotes around them in order to excuse them. As I pointed out, they don't.

You simply have to give the example, not just say the interpretation of what he had in mind is obvious. — ssu

I literally posted a very good article in the previous page explaining how Soros has come to embody the centuries old archetype of the "manipulative Jew". Here is a salient point:

Matthew Lyons, a researcher and the author of several books on rightwing populism and far-right ideology, said that commonly circulated narratives about George Soros resonate with a long history of antisemitic myths and stereotypes.

“One of the central antisemitic themes for a thousand years, at least, has been the notion that Jews represent this evil, super-powerful group that operates behind the scenes,” Lyons said.

“Often, anti-Jewish conspiracy theories don’t explicitly talk about Jews or ‘the Jews’ as a group. There’s some kind of code word or symbol that’s used in place.”

Here is another good article on how Soros has become a boogeyman for right-wing conspiracies, and which discusses Hungary at length. Here is another salient point:

The Hungarian prime minister, on course for re-election next month, now calls Soros “an American financial speculator attacking Hungary” who has “destroyed the lives of millions of Europeans”, and has based his election campaign on attacking a supposed “Soros plan” to flood Hungary with Muslim migrants.

Further, it is important that this is taken against the backdrop that, as of 2015, 59% of Hungarians think it's "probably true" that Jews have too much power in the business world; 57% that they have too much power in financial markets; and 49% that they have too much control over global affairs.

So when someone says, "Many of the Budapestintelligentsia are Jewish, andform part of the extensive networks around the Soros Empire" do you still sincerely think this has nothing to do with antisemitic tropes?

How about first saying that you aren't explicitly saying that he is an anti-semite and then saying he is making antisemitic comments? — ssu

These are very much two separate things. Soros made an antisemitic trope. Do I think everyone who has made a racially stereotypical comment or trope racist? No, not necessarily. Just as I think it would be absurd to call someone a liar because they've lied once. It would be a whole other matter if he repeated it multiple times, or had made additional antisemitic comments, or stated it more explicit terms, such as "Jews manipulate the world" or something to that effect. But he didn't, and as I explained earlier, I wasn't going to call him an outright antisemite because I'm not aware of any other comments he's made towards Jews.

This was just a typical leftist character assassination campaign — ssu

LOL he said that "tribes" of Muslim refugees were "invading" Hungary for fuck's sake! It's not "character assassination", he merely quoted him! I do love when right-wingers do this, they accuse others of "character assassination" when their own fucking words are thrown right back at them.

Oh yes, you just said that his comments are an undeniable antisemitic canard and you can't imagine he has a rosy view of Jews. Again, that he in his talk referred to Jews being prosecuted in Hungary and antisemitism being a problem there doesn't naturally matter to you. — ssu

Yes, he mentioned the historical fact that Jews were prosecuted under Eastern European Communists, and that indigenous antisemitism continues to be an obstacle for the emergence of a nationally shared Hungarian identity between Jews and non-Jews, which of course seems odd to me given his friendship with Orban who has leveraged antisemitism for political purposes, while Scruton has said such accusations were "nonsense". So when the only "problem" of antisemitism is because it's a barrier to shared nationalism, rather than a problem in itself, I'm somewhat skeptical for his sincerity here.

Regardless, you continue to dodge the issue I brought up, which is that Scruton made antisemitic comments, which of course hasn't been disputed.

And it's not about his dishonor here, it's about the ease how loosely defined accusations are enthusiastically hurled and accepted without critical thinking — ssu

I'm frankly less interested in what epithets we apply to people, as oppose to what they actually say, and in this particular case, if it's acceptable for someone in a government position to say them. Personally, I don't think it's acceptable for someone in a public position to say that Islamophobia isn't a valid term, or to refer to immigrants and refugees as "Muslim tribes" who are "invading".

Btw folks, don't think Roger Scruton gives a fuck about any of you. You aren't required to defend his honor.

And of course as you have made your opinion about him, you don't see any reason to dwelve further, but to go along the sentence of him being anti-semite — ssu

Hey ssu, I would strongly recommend actually reading what I wrote prior to posting. As I explained here, I didn't explicitly say that Scruton is an antisemite (I'm hesitant to do so), but that his commentary was loaded with antisemitic canards, etc., which you conveniently haven't acknowledged, much less disputed.

Of course, those parts of the talk highlighted are not quoted, which clearly show the tendentious bashing and mudslinging the whole thing is about. You see, at least I think that usually anti-semites DO NOT talk about the persecution of the Jews and anti-semitism being 'an obstacle to the emergence of a shared national loyalty'. — ssu

Yes, I'm familiar with Scruton's quotes here, having actually read his full commentary before posting, but as I pointed out, this doesn't excuse what he said (which you are disinclined to acknowledge, much less defend). But sure, pay no attention to one of the few people of actual Jewish decent here, and please, let's have all the non-Jews who clearly know jackshit about antisemitism explain to me what it entails...

The connotations of those things aren't particularly good — fdrake

I think one could reasonably go so far as to say they are very bad actually!

Having an antisemitic friend doesn't make you an antisemite — fdrake

Sure, but I didn't say that, I said that he described accusations of antisemitism against Orbán as "nonsense". I would also add that suggesting Islamophobia isn't real is more than having "little sympathy" for Muslims, especially when you add other comments of his, such as, "sudden invasion of huge tribes of Muslims from the Middle East," when describing refugees and immigrants.

The topic and Scruton's remarks could be used for the purpose you're suggesting, since skilful dog whistling does usually look like that. Though in this case I do doubt that their original intent is like that though. — fdrake

I don't know what else Scruton has said or, of course, thought about Jews, but his comments above are an undeniable antisemitic canard, as I've pointed out. I would assume a public intellectual would be familiar with such tropes. Scruton is, it should be noted, friendly with Viktor Orbán, who is an antisemite, despite having said accusations against Orbán as an antisemite were "nonsense", so I can't imagine he has a rosy view of Jews. Wouldn't surprise me coming from a man who said Islamophobia isn't real.

Use your brain, I know you have one, I've seen you use it.

If you are a Congressperson who questions American Imperialism the GOP will place their crosshairs on you, while the Dems shrug their shoulders. All the more true if you are a black Muslim woman.

Trump and and the rest of the conservatives are trying to get Ilhan Omar killed.

I should also say that a long-term coworker at my company was recently fired for making a mildly racist comment towards a black coworker. I didn't see his termination at all unjustified. Roger Scruton, who was in a government position, doesn't get exemption simply because he's a celebrated philosopher or because he sanitizes his comments as profound, philosophical, or relevant ideas worthy of public debate or discussion. They are not.

Scruton never said 'Jewish intelligentsia networks', which would have nasty connotations, implying the age-old belief in a Jewish conspiracy. He spoke of 'Budapest intelligentsia' and 'networks around the Soros empire'. To me at least, that has very different connotations. — andrewk

What the heck would "antisemitic" refer to if either of those are sufficient to be antisemitic? (Not that he even used the phrase "Jewish intelligentsia networks," but we can pretend that he did.) — Terrapin Station

His exact quote was, "many of the Budapest intelligentsia are Jewish, and form part of the extensive networks around the Soros Empire," and which is a hairsplitting distinction from outright saying, "Jewish intelligentsia networks", and committed or even casual antisemites wouldn't see any significant difference. Further, the concept of a "Soros Empire" is at least a two decade long antisemitic trope, and particularly pervasive in Hungary. It's the idea of manipulative elitists Jews who act as puppet masters behind global and state affairs, and policies.

I should also note the audacity behind saying that the term Islamophobia is mere propaganda, less than a month after 50 Muslims were brutally murdered in their Mosque.

There are innumerably more concerning things occurring in the world that demonstrate the absolute abysmal state of affairs in regards to public discourse, government, culture, and journalism, than Roger Scruton losing one of his jobs in a public position because he said Islamophobia is made up. No one should really care.

Knowing that you've seen the full quotation, I have to say that this is beneath contempt. — jamalrob

How does the second half of the full quotation justify the first half regarding a "Soros Empire", and "Jewish intelligentsia networks", which are in and of themselves, antiSemitic remarks? Not to mention his defense of Orban, saying that accusations of antisemitism were "nonsense".

You attempt to push his position outside the realm of reasonable opinion, but really you just disagree with him. I happen to agree with him — jamalrob

And just because you agree with him, doesn't mean his views are inside the "realm of reasonable opinion". They are demonstrably Islamophobic and outright absurd.

because of what it shows about the state of public debate, of government, of cultural mores, and of journalism. — jamalrob

Yes so sad for the state of the world in which a prominent old white guy was let go from a public position because a journalist printed his exact words. So sad that his name will undoubtedly be forever tarnished, that he will live in destitute poverty for the rest of his years. I will play the world's smallest violin for both Scruton and the death of public discourse. Surely this is what Kafka and Orwell were alluding too in their novels.

Yeah I mean saying that there is a "Soros Empire" formed by and around an "extensive network" of "Jewish intelligentsia" who are pulling the strings, is an age old antiSemitic stereotype through and through. The idea that the term 'Islamophobia", or, more saliently, the meaning behind it is agitprop is detestably ludicrous. In fact, I think the term "Islamophobia" doesn't fully express the connotations it ought to have, as compared to antisemitism. But that's fairly demonstrative of what can and can't be discussed, as shown by the rancor expressed towards Ilhan Omar.

But why should I or anyone really care that Roger Scruton is losing a Government position because of this?

But this is wrong. Can one criticize the West as such? Can one criticize Islam as such? — jamalrob

If one wants to criticize either, they should point out moral flaws and historical failings, but that would inevitably entail acknowledging a multiplicity of moral values and historicity, if one wanted to be intellectually honest, and given the context of the thread there is no intellectual honesty that can emerge from this conversation.

Anyone who thinks "The West" or "Islam" can be conceptualized as a monolith, unquestionably has a child's understanding of history and modernity. That's all there is to it.

My own 2 cents is that this dumb as fuck thread should be closed. Go to 4chan or some shit to spew this Islamophobic stupidity, not here.

Yeah those brazen militaristic fascist European countries from WW2, such as Sweden and France.

Anyway, the OP is what you get when you view the world and history in mindbogglingly simplistic dyad

Thank you for your patience Maw — ArguingWAristotleTiff

To be frank I've heard this apologetic spiel from you before

Honestly no one should care about this story

It's times like these that I miss 180 the most. As a fellow resident of AZ he might be able to verify or dismiss what I am saying. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Yeah I definitely don't think 180 Proof would approve of the xenophobic propaganda expressed on Fox News, or by Trump or other right-wing groups and organizations.

Anyway, no one is asking you to change your views overnight, but we've had this conversation for about a year now.

Hey here's an idea, instead of defunding public services, let's tax the rich to better fund these services instead and help the people who are fleeing the countries the US fucked over decades ago, instead of demonizing them, and rounding them up in concentration camps. wow so crazy.

Tiff's whole rant here is no different from Fox/Trump propaganda.

Nice kicks

The Society of the Spectacle by Guy Debord
Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War by Michael Isikoff and David Corn

I'm voting for either Warren or Bernie in the primary.

If you look at Biden's voting record as a senator you'll find he is very bad.

You'll have to ask Barr for now lol

That's a summary of the report from AG Barr, not from Mueller. The summary also said that Trump has not been exonerated. We need the full report.

The first part of this may be true. But not only white baby boomers. A lot of people benefited, most people’s lives improved, maybe by different degrees. — Brett

I didn't say "only white baby boomers". I said they "greatly benefited".

But the second part sounds like someone lashing out at someone to blame. How did they fuck it up for younger generations? And do you mean all generations coming after? — Brett

I think this interview neatly answers that. Also check out Malcom Harris' book, Kids These Days.

You go on to list social accomplishments mostly made by Black Americans and women.

But also it goes without saying that my original comment was a generalization, like come the fuck on