Headline: Can this American version of the French Revolution bring change?
Where is the Marat, the Robespierre? Your historical inflation looks a bit grand for this list of villains: The Boogaloo Bois, ANTIFA, maybe BlackBlock. Should we add to this list American Policeman? The only persons, ‘voices of reason’ , on television/social media are Al Sharpton and Cornell West? Not quite to your exacting standard? Where is Obama’s former political house-pet, and windbag Michael Eric Dyson?
The collapse of the Neo-Liberal State brings forth Monsters! Look to the culpability of your own ‘profession’ ,The Law! The rise and triumph of the Neo-Confederate/Originalist coterie of racists, under the respectable bourgeois rubric of The Federalist Society. Rehnquist, Scalia etc. and their sometime ally Centrist Kennedy. Shelby County v. Holder the monument to the Neo-Confederate/Originalists, and their jurisprudential catamite! And now the complete colonization of the Supreme Court by these Political Romantics!
You brief but rambling saga continues:
One of the Monsters, the fascist Tom Cotton! The New York Times, James Bennet and publisher A.G. Sulzberger ,who defended their publishing of his incendiary polemic,in your telling, this places them in the hero category. But then ‘The Mob’ triumphed. Your natural ally Bari Weiss named this triumph ‘Safetyism’, riffing on the trailblazing lead of the ‘Coddling’ duo of Haidt & Lukianoff.
(Added June 6, 2020 2:30 PDT)
Here a critical review of ‘Coddling’, that includes this revelation about the choice of the title for their book:
If it seems odd that a book primarily concerned with the well-being of students would boast a title implying that those students are “coddled,” I agree, as does Greg Lukianoff, who has told both Jaschik and the Chronicle of Higher Education that he essentially disagrees with his own title – preferring “Disempowered” – but ultimately going with the publisher’s preferred “The Coddling of the American Mind” because it is “less boring.”
The title is a discordant note coming from two authors who center the benefits of rational debate as a necessary part of our public discourse. It’s as though we should be truthful and accurate, except when it comes to having an attention-grabbing title which will help sell a lot of books.
How unfortunate that you end your polemic with Abbe Sieyes. This screen shot from pages 81 and 82 of the print copy of Liberalism: A Counter History by Domenico Losurdo adds a certain dimension to the radical, or is that revolutionary fellow traveler Sieyes?