Ta-Nehisi Coates Rules, The Thread

def think it's time to retire the term "neoliberal."

I don't get the commenters on websites claiming Coates is endlessly blaming the past, constantly cynical and negative, and that we'll never progress with that viewpoint. To me, he's optimistic -- acknowledging the past and the present as they are, but it's not in the context of blame per se, just acknowledgment. This is where we were, we are here in part due to the past and in part due to present policy, but we can address that and make things better.

I understand the impulse to start at this very moment and only move forward from there, but without the context of how things got the way they are, you'll never address a way to make things right, imo. The people who start at the present day, claiming they want to make a difference, always seem to jump straight to the "pull up your pants, stop shooting each other (black people), use these resources (that have purposefully been built to exclude you) to get ahead"

Yeah he addressed that quite thoroughly here and throughout the course of his back and forth with Chait
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/03/other-peoples-pathologies/359841/ (still think this is among the best things he's written)

Chait thinks this view is "fatalistic." I think God is fatalistic. In the end, we all die. As do most societies. As do most states. As do most planets. If America is fatally flawed, if white supremacy does truly dog us until we are no more, all that means is that we were unexceptional, that we were not favored by God, that we were flawed—as are all things conceived by mortal man.

I find great peace in that. And I find great meaning in this struggle that was gifted to me by my people, that was gifted to me by culture.

namaste

I'm not about to join in some unsupported anti- Cornel West thing, he is owed at least a systematic takedown of specific points in his argument, not just some typical ILE "oh how obvious, I don't even have to make an argument here" snark. Just going to lump him with de Boer, that will prove it.

West has earned more than that, get busy.

Not saying you can't make the case! But internet discourse is so lazy now, like "oh I'm just going to sneer, I don't have to actually make coherent arguments because sneeeeeeeeeeer" At least there is something to talk about then, not just another tedious pile-on and you're-either-with-us-or-against-us thread.

west's comments are too stupid to deserve a detailed response, but the idea that TNC has avoided criticizing obama is especially dumb

is west making any well-considered arguments to be refuted? or is he just lazily repeating a shtick?

How is saying he's wrong or limited in his scope of analysis of Coates being anti-Dr. West? His criticism might have some legs when limited in scope to Coates' recent book, and some of the way Coates frames his viewpoint don't necessarily ring true with me, but I still appreciate his approach and can differ with West on some of those criticisms.

The sneering, as you see it, is taking aspects of West's argument in this particular case and saying that he's off base on some legs of his criticism. There are plenty of other criticisms, some of which he brings up, that are valid.

this is a p good takedown of West's recent schtick from awhile back (altho personal motivations of the author don't do it any favors)

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121550/cornel-wests-rise-fall-our-most-exciting-black-scholar-ghost?utm_content=bufferd4fd7&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

I get that there is always a segment looking for a single "correct" voice but there are so many points where Coates has said he doesn't say that, but even framing it as "taking down" West is exactly the sort of binary thinking you're claiming you dislike, VP!

http://www.poemhunter.com/i/p/21/11621_b_498.jpg

That New Republic article was utter shit! I read it when it came out.

The West/Dyson spat is a whole nother thing but West invariably comes off as embittered and irrational when it comes to Obama.

i like c west but he gives little impression of having read anything by coates. but i recall coates endorsing that (i thought pretty unfair) new republic article on west, so hey tit for tat

TNR article has a point about West eschewing any kind of deep critical discourse for cheap celebrity imo

good on Dr. Cornel West for being the uncompromising person he is, but you have to question what rock he's standing on

and then there's Vic Perry resolutely blasting an entire article as "utter shit" in total

the writer of that article has earned more than "utter shit" as a rebuttal, get busy!

(is "get busy" the 2015 "do your research?"

the stuff west has said about obama is so deplorable that i have a hard time taking anything he says seriously anymore.

I'm all for critiques of Obama but West gets p hystrionic

Just checked and I stand by my assessment of that New Republic article, from the preposterous illustration of "cuh-RAY-zee" Cornel West on down to such sentences reducing all crit of Our Beloved President as

It is a sad truth that most politicians are serial rhetorical lovers and promiscuous ideological mates, leaving behind scores of briefly valued surrogates and supporters. West should have understood that Obama had had similar trysts with many others. But West felt spurned and was embittered.

Surely ILE is PC enough to notice the sexist bizarreness of this opening line:
"Nor hell a fury like a woman scorned” is the best-known line from William Congreve’s The Mourning Bride."

Man, that Cornel West is like some kind of CHICK or something....

the next sentence begins with "But"

lemme know when you get there

did you even make it to the second sentence

xpp

Oh gee let's not notice the bizarre sexism of the New Republic article or anything, we have an agenda here.

*farts*

the bit you quoted is a non-gendered critique fyi

xp

ha ha ha okay carry on toadies

haven't you read anything, Obama is a secret homosexual muslim, obviously West is literally a spurned lover

who the f are we toadies for?!?

just to make it absolutely crystal fucking clear here, here's the full passage:

Nor hell a fury like a woman scorned” is the best-known line from William Congreve’s The Mourning Bride. But I’m concerned with the phrase preceding it, which captures wrath in more universal terms: “Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned.” Even an angry Almighty can’t compete with mortals whose love turns to hate.

and this:
It is a sad truth that most politicians are serial rhetorical lovers and promiscuous ideological mates, leaving behind scores of briefly valued surrogates and supporters. West should have understood that Obama had had similar trysts with many others. But West felt spurned and was embittered.

is not gender-specific

Is your point that West is 100% correct about Coates? What are you even debating here?

I think he's trying to say "oh I'm just going to sneer, I don't have to actually make coherent arguments because sneeeeeeeeeeer"

guys vic perry is not owed a systematic takedown

we can't understand vic's point because we're neoliberals who are paralyzed by our obama worship, duh

otm, he could find actual problematic phrases that aren't actually related to critical discussion all day, and we could take them down all day, avoiding the actual discussion

why haven't you all hit "Flag Post" on this fool and moved on

toadiebs

we can't understand vic's point because we're neoliberals who are paralyzed by our obama worship, duh

― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, July 16, 2015 3:56 PM (14 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

speak for yourself

just because vp is totally incoherent doesn't mean you're made entirely of kneejerks

you're not made entirely

Oh hey, over here (I'm picturing a pile of posters with nothing specific underneath, ooph).

Earlier I asked if anybody would make a specific argument as to why West is wrong about Coates. (I like Coates by the way). Not only couldn't you manage the most basic argument, you righteously explained why it was beneath you to do

Unsurprisingly, "I Refuse To Make A Coherent Argument Because You Suck" is a thing at ILX. Otherwise coherent arguments would need to be made and how do you manage a good pile on that way.

The tragic Outic bits on why the New Republic arguments aren't sexist are just sad. Dude, nobody in the 21st C quoting the "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned" deserves the slightest consideration. Do YOU go around quoting that shit? I haven't heard such convincing arguments since that guy in my high school locker room called another guy a "woman". Yeah, man. Men should be men, you know?

Again, I'm absolutely amazed that such an utterly Peee Ceee discussion space as ILX would actually decide at this moment in time to say, hey, in this case it is okay, just cuz they talking about men, to repeat dumbass sexist ideas about women (as somehow particularly prone to irrational behavior around jealousy --- never mind the track record of homicidal jealous males throughout history, hell hath no fury etc.)

tl; waste of time; dr

feel like you are arguing in bad faith what with the chronic (apparently intentional?) misquoting, inability to read etc. so I'm a let yr completely baseless sexist accusation against the Dyson piece go, since (as others have pointed out) you are simply using it as a shitty misdirection tactic.

as far as why West is wrong about quotes, he makes several assertions which are just flat-out wrong and inaccurate. Coates has criticized Obama, and he has written about the "new militancy" (as West calls it) in Ferguson, Baltimore etc. Do you want me to post links

xp

wrong about COATES gah

That I could believe. Would it be too much to ask that somebody explain WHY EXACTLY West is wrong about Coates? Pretty please?

speak for yourself

― e-bouquet (mattresslessness), Thursday, July 16, 2015 10:10 PM (21 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

just because vp is totally incoherent doesn't mean you're made entirely of kneejerks

― e-bouquet (mattresslessness), Thursday, July 16, 2015 10:13 PM (18 minutes ago)

ok, what?

WHY EXACTLY West is wrong about Coates? Pretty please?

Because he criticizes Coates for being silent about things Coates has not actually been silent about

I am biting my tongue here fwiw

here I googled something for you

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/05/how-the-obama-administration-talks-to-black-america/276015/