So it seems as if the @NYTimes opinion piece by an oh-so-sincere right wing Princeton student was actually a Conservative grievance artist repeating a claim already purveyed in high school.
It would be very interesting to hear from some homeschooled evangelicals who move left in college--but that would break the left-intolerance narrative and we can't have that.
@tomlevenson @NYTimes Perhaps I'm naive about the ivy league but that seems like remarkably shitty writing for a Princeton senior. Do they really reward petitio principii and unsourced claims?
@pieist @NYTimes Also, I'm amused at the historical illiteracy and the utterly misplaced anglophilia in the name of the publication the kid edits--the Princeton Tory. Tories were, of course, those British colonials who fought to retain their colonial status instead of seeking American independence. Given the predominance of neo-secessionists in that camp, that's odd, at best.
@tomlevenson @NYTimes
Hell, I'll be hours unpacking the ideas in that reply.
One that springs to mind immediately: the Antebellum South had a lot in common with British aristocratic rule: it was basically feudalism. So maybe not so surprising. Not what one expects from New Jersey, but hey, what Ivy League uni resembles its host state or city? (I have family in New Haven, mmmkay?)
@tomlevenson @NYTimes [PS that's a follow. Rare and appreciatee to encounter someone whose thoughts move faster than their ability to type]
@pieist @tomlevenson @NYTimes It’s probably just a skin deep & intellectually lightweight allusion to the more modern UK Tory party - anti democratic, anti-labor, etc etc without much historical understanding I suspect
@Theblueone @pieist @NYTimes Oh, most likely. But the pretensions of scions of a declining elite at the northernmost southern school (old joke) surely extend to a grandiose claim of counter-revolutionary stands.
@pieist @tomlevenson @NYTimes a) they know their audience, which is not professors or thoughtful people; and b) their real education has not come from school but from the conservative movement
@pieist @NYTimes Common on the right. Heard an interesting talk that made reference to a mode of meaning making/argument on the right derived from Evangelical Bible studies methods--close reading of a text assumed to be inerrant. If that's how you roll, then absence of evidence, statistical illiteracy and unsourced claims are strengths, not weaknesses.
@pieist @NYTimes Glb and pissed is pretty standard for premature bow-tie fanciers.