1. Manchin's often gets profiled as a moderate or a conservative but his actual political stance is a bit odder than that. Being a Dem Senator from a very red state, he's figured out a way vote with his party on major legislation while keeping a distance.
2. I think a lot of Manchin's behavior is more performative than ideological. He has a lot of voters who aren't Dems & don't like the Dems, so he needs to have very visible public spats with Dems. But he rarely abandons Dems on decisive votes.
3. Look at this recent actions. If scuttling Neera Tanden's nomination was the price to pay for a vote for $1.9 trillion stimulus, I'm not going to shed any tears. The trimming of UI top up by 3 weeks was bad, but pales against one of the biggest stimulus in history.
4. There's also the minimum wage, but he was hardly alone in voting against it. And the minimum wage can be brought up again after filibuster reform. $15 is a lift but Biden might get $12 tied to inflation, which would lift up many working poor.
5. I say let Manchin have a few small victories if that gives him cover to vote for big Democratic bills. thenation.com/article/politi…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. Once an author writes a book it might belong to them in terms of copyright but it also belongs to the world as a creation. But some writers try to self-cancel. Some thoughts on this with reference to Rosemary Tonks, Sidney Hook, Kafka, Virgil, Seuss, James Gould Cozzens, etc.
2. Part of the frustration with the cloddish Dr. Seuss discourse is that what is clearly an attempt by estate to do brand management got recast in cultural war terms. But authors do brand management all the time by selecting what to put out into world & what to keep in print.
3. Seuss himself engaged in brand management by not keeping in print such now embarrassing juvenilia as "Boners: By Those Who Pull Them" and "The Pocket Book of Boners."
1. As Andrew Cuomo is enmeshed in multiple scandals, there's an interesting inter-Democratic debate about double standards. Dem elected officials have been good about hold Cuomo to account but, as @michelleinbklyn notes, there's some base complaint about "Frankening"
2. We've seen in Trump era not just asymmetric polarization but also asymmetric accountability. Trump & other GOP pols & bigwigs get away with outrageous stuff while lesser Dems offenses get punished. "But her emails," in short.
3. There are divergent ways to handle asymmetric polarizations. Dems could say double standards means we should also go partisan & defend our miscreants against all evidence (i.e. no standards > double standards).
1. I have some good news and bad news about Trump's CPAC speech.
2. The good news is that although Trump gestured at running again it was a low energy performance and his heart didn't seem in it. That could change but right now he doesn't seem in campaign mode.
3. The bad news is that Trump even if Trump doesn't run again he's very intent on maintaining his stranglehold on the GOP. Many gestures about punishing his Republican enemies.
1. We've had roughly a year more or less, depending on where you live, of isolation and social distancing. Good time for a reckoning of how it's changing us.
2. In the latest New Left Review, the sociologist Dylan Riley has some suggestive thoughts on how the isolation is a paradoxically collective act: maintained by a social infrastructure and also a shared global experience of a type never seen before.
3. The collective nature of the isolation has also, paradoxically again, energized a new wave of activism, both in terms of the global BLM movement (the biggest protests in American history happened last year) & the anti-masking/QAnon/MAGA agitation.
1. Counter-point: the "elite overproduction" framework is a blaming the victim narrative that obfuscates the larger context of declining social mobility, failure of circulation of elites, rise of the Failsons & failed attempt to diversify historically exclusionary institutions.
2. To my mind, the best conservative apologia for our shitty society has always been the idea of "a circulation of elites" developed by Vilfredo Pareto & expanded on by James Burnham: "sure, we're not a real democracy but talented outsiders & opposition factions can rise"
3. I'd say from late 18th century till about end of Golden Age of capitalism in early 1970s, the "circulation of elites" held true in Anglo-American society, with successful (although always bumpy) absorption of new money, educated professionals, and eventually white ethnics.
For my Buckley/Bozell piece I didn't go enough into how off the rail (sometimes in good ways) Bozell was in 1960s/1970s when he rejected standard Republicanism for open revolt. Started praising Black Power, Irish republicanism & spelling America as Amerika.
Bozell in 1970s as described by his biographer: "As enemies of the American civil order, Catholics should make their hostility plain to see. For example, they -- and especially the bishops -- should boycott patriotic and civic celebrations."
Bozell: "The Constitution has not only failed, it was bound to fail. The architects of our constitutional order built a house in which secular liberalism could live, and given the dominant urges of the age, would live. The time has come to leave that house and head for home."