,
8 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
The white Christian nationalist senator from Missouri who used “cosmopolitan” (opposed to of a place, akin to how it was used of Jews in 20th century) now claims as defense use of word by Obama. But just as he misquoted Nussbaum, here he can’t tell the difference in use.
First Here is transcript of that speech from 2019 that targeted Trump without using his name theguardian.com/us-news/2018/j…
Second @HawleyMO used cosmopolitan as negative, Obama used it as positive. The group is “diversity of nationalities and ethnicities... A decent percentage consider themselves liberal in their politics, modern and cosmopolitan in their outlook.”
Hawley is right - Obama criticizes this group. But *not* for their cosmopolitan outlook. He criticizes them for not being in touch with their workers and local effects of decisions.
Obama: “And from their board rooms or retreats, global decision-makers don’t get a chance to see sometimes the pain in the faces of laid-off workers.”
These people don’t work from “common humanity” shared by those who come from their county of origin, Obama notes, echoing Nussbaum.
Hawley’s history of liberal policies oppose Obama’s history of nationalism and fear. Hawley also can’t read/comprehend for a second time. Stanford and Yale degrees, you say?
Finally “liberal language police” isn’t saying one can’t use “cosmopolitan.” Obama used it well. One can’t use it as negative, tie it to rootless, moneyed elite, and also promote white Christianity without at least raising eyebrows. Any undergrad at Stanford or Yale knows that.
