Skip to main content

Steve Bannon

Image result for Steve Bannon

 Slate recently featured a fine brief take-down of Steve Bannon's reputation as a policy intellectual, written by Jamelle Bouie.

Of course, Bannon no longer darkens the doors of the White House. He is back at Breitbart, but he has made it clear he isn't going away.

And coverage of him by press organs he does not control does often have a certain grudging-respect quality. Sort of like what Newt Gingrich got in the 1990s, back when he was relevant and not yet a caricature of himself.

Here's a link to the Bouie piece:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/09/steve_bannon_s_reputation_as_an_intellectual_and_strategic_genius_is_unearned.html

Early on, Bouie provides a couple of fine examples of this grudging-respect tone, one from Glenn Thrush of The New York Times. Bannon, Thrush says, "is a deep if narrow reader who is trying to create an ideological/intellectual foundation for Trumpism."

The following has little to do with Bouie's argument, but is what the Thrush quote brings to my mind.

1) Either Trump is acting on a real and coherent set of premises, or he is not.
2) The Thrush quote makes it seem as if the work of creating an "foundation for Trumpism" is an ongoing present-text project.
3) That suggests there was no such foundation as of, say, November 2016 or before,
4) Which in turn suggests the proper response to premise (1) above us, "he is not."
5) And if he is NOT, then present moment rationalizations won't change that.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti
7 comments
Read more

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers
Post a Comment
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak
13 comments
Read more