Comments on: Lunch with my friend, the Trump supporter Ethan Zuckerman’s online home, since 2003 Sat, 30 Sep 2017 15:09:57 +0000 hourly 1 By: TCC Thu, 09 Mar 2017 14:27:50 +0000 I am also willing to believe, theoretically, that both the “right” and the “right” of the US can benefit from a closer dialogue that fully affects the extent of American law known as “alt-right.”

By: Homepage Fri, 03 Mar 2017 07:04:50 +0000 … [Trackback]

[…] Read More: […]

By: Entertaining Reader Requests : EphBlog Mon, 06 Feb 2017 11:27:41 +0000 […] 100 page report (pdf) from the Curricular Planning Committee. 15. Ethan Zuckerman’s ’93 lunch with an (anonymous!?) Eph Trump supporter. 16. An update on athletic admission, starting with this […]

By: Robert Nasir Thu, 15 Dec 2016 20:20:58 +0000 Outstanding.

Next, I would love to know the result of a lunch spent on the question, “why are you a Citizenist, while I am a Globalist?” What are the premises underlying THOSE stances?

What is/are the root difference(s) in your worldviews?

Address that, and you know either how to bridge the gap, or why it’s unbridgeable.

(And then determine the best strategies for dealing with one another from there. And dealing with trivial issues, like the fact that there are Trump supporters in the world.)

By: Em Wed, 14 Dec 2016 20:11:14 +0000 Although I’m willing to agree in theory that both the US “right” and “left” can probably benefit from deeper dialogue, I think there’s an issue that predominantly impacts that extension of the US right known as the “alt-right”.
Basically, the issue is this: The alt-right has linked very real stresses (financial and otherwise) impacting working people to a pre-cooked set of notions and what they declare to be solutions to those problems. Those are two very distinct layers and they have successfully merged them in the minds of Trump supporters. This makes real dialogue almost impossible. A good example is climate change: They seem to need to reject the existence of human-induced climate change in order to also deflect (what they perceive to be) its only possible solution: Stronger state control and mandates. Thus, to date we’ve seen exceedingly few “conservative” approaches or discussions to solving or at least economically mitigating the very serious problems that will arise.

The left, meanwhile, hasn’t been too great in terms of clearly acknowledging and then proposing solutions impacting the lives traditional working class America. And of course, part of this is because many of us live in the big US urban centers so there’s usually new opportunities out there for us. But my personal feeling is that we “lefties” allowed too much deregulation to occur and lost industries that in (eg) Germany and other highly unionized countries still provide significant wages for a real middle class. So we played a role in getting us to where we are.

But like during George W Bush’s second term in office, we have a significant portion of the US population willing to vote against their own interests and (unknowingly) for increasing the odds of the dissolution of the US as a single entity. And I don’t think this can be fixed until the heart of the problem (lack of education, insufficient capital, lack of intercultural awareness, critical thinking tools and background) is solved. The “right” is unable to realistically participate in any true solution to both their plight and the plight of the US in the 21st century.

By: Kaleberg Tue, 13 Dec 2016 17:13:20 +0000 re: “I don’t see a strong reason to privilege the economic success of someone who happened to be born here over that of someone who wants to come here.”

This seems to deny the very idea of human social organization. It denies real human needs for resource management, and it denies every human social structure in which bonds of trust and support are established and developed over time. While it seems benign anarchism, it is also the creed of any conqueror or colonialist.

I’m not sure you have thought this through.