Good habits formed at youth make all the difference.
Youth is easily deceived because it is quick to hope.
The young are permanently in a state resembling intoxication.
All who have meditated on the art of governing mankind have been convinced that the fate of empires depends on the education of youth.
To put it more succinctly: The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.
Okay, I may or may not have plagiarized those thoughts from a couple of folks who lived over 2000 years ago. But I might as well have written them today. Or in this piece.
Still, I look with caution at those who presume correlation and causation are the same thing. Who serve platitudes as wisdom. Comfort food goes well with Thanksgiving dinner. But is it what we want in our public discourse as well?
Just to play devil's advocate here - has the need for contextualized versus objective journalism risen, or has the vanity of the writer's increased their desire to insert themselves into the story? Prove it if it's going to be included as a given in your piece.
Yet still, I don't like to read. I love to read. I'm addicted to it. Have been for as long as I can remember.
WaPo, NYT, Chartbook for economics, Quanta and Scientific American. Tuchman, Sandford, Stephenson. Icelandic detective novels by Indridason, history from Eckert, to the 1619 Project. Python for Dummies, Technical Math, Arduino boards, Fundamentals of Modern Manufacturing (quiz on Tuesday, Gleick and Martin Cruz Smith. That's my (partial) list from the last year.
Does that mean we should devalue of those who derive their knowledge from other means? The same people not reading a trade journal may be getting better information from a Youtube video. When I needed to repair my dryer, that's what I reverted to, with much better results.
I learned more about local birds by downloading the Merlin app from Cornell University and then using it to identify the sounds I was hearing rather than a dry tome from the Audubon society.
And I suspect the unread welder or machinist has long been aware of the properties of strain hardening or annealing before I read of them in a book this fall.
Which of us is more learned about the subject? We should not lightly value life experience versus our own strategies. Not and still consider ourselves truly inclusive. Should we?
And then there's the greatest weakness in the whole article. That lack of literacy is the cause of all evils in the world. Is it?
Citation, please?
So many suppositions built into that.
Is incivility in and of itself, a bad thing? I'd say that proposition needs context. If someone is attempting to overthrow your government by violence - you may attempt civility, but sometimes - there comes a point where force needs to be met with force. Ask any cop who's made an arrest.
And is it wrong to experience anger, when something you value is being destroyed? Is it better to not talk about the things which anger you, to demand justice, address of grievances, adjudication - rather than being so worried of giving offense that you do not say anything? Lot of presumption in that strategy. Lot of rights being ignored for comity's sake.
Typically, when you suppress an honest emotion, it comes out in unplanned ways. Better to be honest, open, and direct about it, if you ask me. The only thing worse that state censorship is self censorship. And that's saying something.
I'd rather see the uncomfortable questions debated. I don't know the answers, but that should be no reason to fear debate. Here's a couple that relate to the topic that come to mind.
Has our general public discourse degraded because we've become TOO democratic? Mightn't the quality of our discourse and voting patterns be because we have people voting who have little idea of who or what they are voting for?
How many US voters could pass a citizenship test? Is it possible the disconnect and discontent of today's American youth has as much to do with their having so few expectations of them for citizenship? Mightn't it be improved more by having them do some type of public service after high school (trade school, military, college, Peace Corp) so that they have some skin in the game - rather than thinking as long as they read about the Great Gatsby, everything's okay?
Fareed Zakaria wrote an interesting book years ago about Illiberal Democracy that talked about how some of the most important institutions for propping up our democratic republic are the least democratic. And posited that we weaken our democracy when we make those institutions more egalitarian. Might not that have as much effect as reading, as you propose?
I don't know. But those and similar ideas seem at least as interesting.
Finally, I note your admiration for Mr Yancey, though I do not share it. My most memorable thoughts of him was of how he would always equivocate on the actions of Trump while editor of the Roanoke Times. An example was in 2018. He came out with a strong editorial condemning the hype which Republicans had been using to promote the immigrant "caravan" invasion which they were using to gin up fear and votes for that election cycle. It was a clear and concise condemnation that showed how preposterous the whole thing was. It was admirable.
So my complaint?
He didn't publish it until 2 days AFTER the election. What good exactly did it do then?
What's that old saying about being forewarned is forearmed?
I make it a point to bust Mr Kenney's chops on a regular basis for being a Republican who, though knowing of immorality of Trump and the current Republican kowtowing the demagogues of the far right of their party. Justifiably, I feel.
But I posit it is even worse than that to be someone who is not either a member of the kult, nor of the party who benefits from their extremes - yet does not stand up to them, merely so as to not hurt their feelings.
Why are their feelings more important than the real damages they are causing by their actions?
That I can never understand. You figure it out, let me know, would ya?
Aaah the kids of today. Pfft.
Here's what I think of 'em:
Good habits formed at youth make all the difference.
Youth is easily deceived because it is quick to hope.
The young are permanently in a state resembling intoxication.
All who have meditated on the art of governing mankind have been convinced that the fate of empires depends on the education of youth.
To put it more succinctly: The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.
Okay, I may or may not have plagiarized those thoughts from a couple of folks who lived over 2000 years ago. But I might as well have written them today. Or in this piece.
Still, I look with caution at those who presume correlation and causation are the same thing. Who serve platitudes as wisdom. Comfort food goes well with Thanksgiving dinner. But is it what we want in our public discourse as well?
Just to play devil's advocate here - has the need for contextualized versus objective journalism risen, or has the vanity of the writer's increased their desire to insert themselves into the story? Prove it if it's going to be included as a given in your piece.
Yet still, I don't like to read. I love to read. I'm addicted to it. Have been for as long as I can remember.
WaPo, NYT, Chartbook for economics, Quanta and Scientific American. Tuchman, Sandford, Stephenson. Icelandic detective novels by Indridason, history from Eckert, to the 1619 Project. Python for Dummies, Technical Math, Arduino boards, Fundamentals of Modern Manufacturing (quiz on Tuesday, Gleick and Martin Cruz Smith. That's my (partial) list from the last year.
Does that mean we should devalue of those who derive their knowledge from other means? The same people not reading a trade journal may be getting better information from a Youtube video. When I needed to repair my dryer, that's what I reverted to, with much better results.
I learned more about local birds by downloading the Merlin app from Cornell University and then using it to identify the sounds I was hearing rather than a dry tome from the Audubon society.
And I suspect the unread welder or machinist has long been aware of the properties of strain hardening or annealing before I read of them in a book this fall.
Which of us is more learned about the subject? We should not lightly value life experience versus our own strategies. Not and still consider ourselves truly inclusive. Should we?
And then there's the greatest weakness in the whole article. That lack of literacy is the cause of all evils in the world. Is it?
Citation, please?
So many suppositions built into that.
Is incivility in and of itself, a bad thing? I'd say that proposition needs context. If someone is attempting to overthrow your government by violence - you may attempt civility, but sometimes - there comes a point where force needs to be met with force. Ask any cop who's made an arrest.
And is it wrong to experience anger, when something you value is being destroyed? Is it better to not talk about the things which anger you, to demand justice, address of grievances, adjudication - rather than being so worried of giving offense that you do not say anything? Lot of presumption in that strategy. Lot of rights being ignored for comity's sake.
Typically, when you suppress an honest emotion, it comes out in unplanned ways. Better to be honest, open, and direct about it, if you ask me. The only thing worse that state censorship is self censorship. And that's saying something.
I'd rather see the uncomfortable questions debated. I don't know the answers, but that should be no reason to fear debate. Here's a couple that relate to the topic that come to mind.
Has our general public discourse degraded because we've become TOO democratic? Mightn't the quality of our discourse and voting patterns be because we have people voting who have little idea of who or what they are voting for?
How many US voters could pass a citizenship test? Is it possible the disconnect and discontent of today's American youth has as much to do with their having so few expectations of them for citizenship? Mightn't it be improved more by having them do some type of public service after high school (trade school, military, college, Peace Corp) so that they have some skin in the game - rather than thinking as long as they read about the Great Gatsby, everything's okay?
Fareed Zakaria wrote an interesting book years ago about Illiberal Democracy that talked about how some of the most important institutions for propping up our democratic republic are the least democratic. And posited that we weaken our democracy when we make those institutions more egalitarian. Might not that have as much effect as reading, as you propose?
I don't know. But those and similar ideas seem at least as interesting.
Finally, I note your admiration for Mr Yancey, though I do not share it. My most memorable thoughts of him was of how he would always equivocate on the actions of Trump while editor of the Roanoke Times. An example was in 2018. He came out with a strong editorial condemning the hype which Republicans had been using to promote the immigrant "caravan" invasion which they were using to gin up fear and votes for that election cycle. It was a clear and concise condemnation that showed how preposterous the whole thing was. It was admirable.
So my complaint?
He didn't publish it until 2 days AFTER the election. What good exactly did it do then?
What's that old saying about being forewarned is forearmed?
I make it a point to bust Mr Kenney's chops on a regular basis for being a Republican who, though knowing of immorality of Trump and the current Republican kowtowing the demagogues of the far right of their party. Justifiably, I feel.
But I posit it is even worse than that to be someone who is not either a member of the kult, nor of the party who benefits from their extremes - yet does not stand up to them, merely so as to not hurt their feelings.
Why are their feelings more important than the real damages they are causing by their actions?
That I can never understand. You figure it out, let me know, would ya?