From where I sit, liberal publications invested more heavily in the activist model of organization and identity politics are now reaping what they’ve sown during Obama’s two terms; many not likely soon emerging from a more advanced righteous state of mind against perceived enemies (Trump, Trump, Trump!).
Righteousness is not uncommon in human affairs, especially in defeat, where the emotions often travel in search of reasons; loyalists uniting against enemies in order to reinforce shared commitments, beliefs, and policy goals to combat the sting of loss.
In my humble experience, many voices promoting change always had radical sympathies (not all change is bad, not all tradition is good…as I see things, but which changes, and how?). Now that there’s less apparent shared national identity, less social and political consensus, I’m not too surprised at the vagaries of the Trump carnival.
This is why I tend favor a smaller government, respect for process, and to keep many people who want power from getting it, and to watch the ones who do. Find me decent people.
Or let’s at least maintain decent incentives.
One simple request: Spare me the bullshit of impartiality, will ya, while in the throes of righteousness?
-(addition) Via a reader: Eugene Volokh argues freedom of the press ain’t about saving the buggy whip industry:
‘I’ve often argued that the freedom of the press was seen near the time of the Framing (and near the time of the ratification of the 14th Amendment, as well as in between and largely since) as protecting the right to use the press as technology — everyone’s right to use the printing press and its modern technological heirs. It was not seen as protecting a right of the press as industry, which would have been a right limited to people who printed or wrote for newspapers, magazines and the like .‘
At least with the Weekly World News, you got up-front, outlandish bullshit: