Maybe the New Republic should change its name

The New Leftist maybe, or The New Statist? frankly they ought to do something because their Liberal mask has slipped off and the ugly face of unbridled Leftism is showing. But don’t take that from me, listen to the former publisher

The New Republic has abandoned its liberal but heterodox tradition and embraced a leftist outlook as predictable as that ofMother Jones or the Nation.”

– Marty Peretz, former publisher of The New Republic

After Facebook zillionaire Chris Hughes purchased The New Republic, he proclaimed that the magazine, which has long since lost the prestige it enjoyed in the 1980s and ’90s, would “strive to be free of party ideology or partisan bias.” This proclamation was instantly falsified by the magazine’s first print cover story under the new publisher, a smear of the Republican Party by Sam Tanenhaus.

Yes, they are non-partisan like MSNBS is. Stacy McCain has some fun at the expense of TNR

That inspired a memorable Twitter beatdown of Chris Hughes by Ace of Spades — if you haven’t seen it, you simply must — who pointed out that, despite its partisan heckling of Republicans as “The Party of White People,” The New Republic‘s editorial staff is a monochromatic swath of vanilla honkydom. What is true of The New Republic is, of course, true of liberalism in general. The folks who were most eager to brand the Tea Party movement “racist” were white liberals, and this tells you something about what Shelby Steele called the White Guilt mentality of liberals: “Vote Democrat, cracker, in order to signify your moral righteousness on race issues.”

Never mind, of course, whether the policies of the Democrat Party actually result in any genuine improvement in the quality of life for African-Americans: When all that matters is your bien pensant good intentions toward black people, the efficacy of policy can be ignored as a trivial concern. Skepticism toward liberal policies becomes evidence ofmala fides — for example, you’re a racist if you take seriously the “mismatch” critique of affirmative action – and intelligent examination of alternatives is thereby rendered impossible.

Essential to this way of thinking is the demonization of Republicans as representative of negative values: Racist, sexist, homophobic, greedy, redneck, theocratic, clueless, rich people. 

Rhetoric about ideological liberalism thus ignores the unthinking partisanship — the enthusiastic cheerleading mentality that views the success of the Democratic Party as necessary to the good of the American people — which is the genuine nature of “bias” in 21st-century political journalism. The press corps is nowadays overcrowded by propagandists who think of every story in terms of startling simplicity: How will this help Democrats or hurt Republicans?

That is about as honest a depiction as I can recall reading. Basically, the Left’s moral compass points one of two ways. What is good for Democrats, is moral, period. Just look at the Left’s soft-pedaling of Chris Dorner. Sue he killed innocent people in cold blood, but he decried racism, and supports gun control, AND he likes Michelle Obama’s new bangs so he can’t be all bad can he? The Left’s moral compass does the opposite for Republicans. The Tea Party? Why they are all RAAAAACIST, sexist, xenophobic, Islamaphobic, rednecks, bible thumpers, and they wear fur coats when they flush kittens down toilets!  Certainly the treatment they get on MSNBS, or any other Lefty blog or station will be far worse than the treatment given Dorner. But, again, that is the morality of the Left.


One thought on “Maybe the New Republic should change its name”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s