Try reading the article again. The author's critique extends to both houses, asserting that there are problems deeper than political division. It is your own version of political correctness that makes you hypersensitive to any criticism of the Swine President and your favorite of the two corrupt parties. My favorite part of the article is when the author challenges the self-congratulatory myth of the inherent goodness of the American people. The doctrine of Original Sin opposes this. The inherent goodness myth is the distorted mirror that makes our distorted selves look normal when we look into it, covering our faults, robbing us of our ability to repent.
You judge without reason and create what is not there. I am very critical of Trump on lots of things. My comment lists several of a personal nature.
- Emerson's "Self-Reliance" - A Close Reading Lesson Plan!
- Building 66 (Red Hat Book 1);
- 2. Some Complexities: A Humungous Fungus and Coral Reefs;
- BLANDINA, A Name Forgotten?
- Folk and Children songs No. 1- 10 - Score;
- Additional information!
- Life and Letters of Stonewall Jackson by his Wife: Comprehensively Annotated and Illustrated..
However, individualism is not a valid criticism. I did not list any policy issues since this was not brought up. That you do not like Trump is obvious from your comments. It makes anything you say about him irrelevant but it is always interesting to read the new adjectives and nouns you apply.
There is very little in this OP that is insightful or relevant. He misses completely the basic problem of the United States today. Maybe it people like the author who are part of the problem.
I read it twice. It was even more painful the second time. It is basically a screed and incoherent.
People also read
The second time I made notes and the word "crock" was used a lot. I think you just don't like what he says. He is quite coherent in describing the American Zeitgeist and how the Trump phenomenon fits in. Perhaps what you don't like is someone saying, not only does the emperor have no clothes, but the subjects are running around in their birthday suits as well.
No it is incoherent. Maybe you are confusing consistency with coherency. I understand why you like it. It is really anti-Trump but that does not make it coherent. Even the title is a meaningless criticism.
Individualism and the Land Question: A Discussion by Sir Roland Knyvet Wilson - dienatene.tk
Expressive individualism can be applied to just about any politician or successful person. Maybe the author is jealous. Valuable info. Lucky me I found your website by accident. I bookmarked it.
This article is genuinely good and I have learned a lot of things from it concerning blogging. We need our moral compass - the Word of God - to get back on track in this country. Prior to Trump's stepping up to the plate, the ancient and reliable moral teachings of the Bible were suffocating, about to expire.
Donald Trump defends freedom of religion, preborn life, and natural marriage. His policies are providing jobs and a livelihood for many who had been locked into the welfare system. Donald Trump is a rock enduring a deluge of criticism from the mainstream media, but following through with what he believes, which happens to correspond to the teachings of Sacred Scripture.
Jesus says, "Whoever is not against us is for us. Spurred by love of family, love of country, and the weight of his awesome responsibility as POTUS, a new man is leading us. Even though he is at the crude beginning of this walk, we should not define him by his past that has been washed away.
He never cares about any cause — all he has been doing is about himself, to make him looks good. He fails miserably to a majority of Americans. I started with quoting something the author said above because I found that this description can be applied to many people, in particular many leaders in the Democratic party, such as Bill and Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama, as well as many far-left democrats and their supporters including the destroy-Trump media. While I found this article interesting, it was full of assertion after assertion about how Trump is the personification of evil while quoting, almost incoherently, some authors most of whom the average person never heard of.
Most importantly, there was nothing new here that most people who follow society and religion already know. In other words, our society has been losing its religious beliefs, norms and moral virtues because of consumerism, individualism, relativism and liberalism, The question the author did not address was "What is the solution and what are we going to do about changing things for the better? Note that I do agree that our religious beliefs, norms and virtues are being lost to the ills of our secular society.
However, let's get real here. Part of the blame also rests with the Christian, Catholic and Jewish religious organizations, and not merely with secular society and the people who are its leaders. We see a breakdown in moral norms and virtues across institutions, both secular and religious.
Donald Trump: the president of expressive individualism
In the sexual abuse scandal, we see such a breakdown in the behavior of Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and even popes. The largest segment or cohort of the Catholic Church are those that call themselves spiritual but not religious.
Getting back to this article. The etiology of this problem is not Trumpism. If the author was honest and responsible, he should have written a more balanced article because the leaders of the democratic party are no better examples of encouraging and practicing moral norms and virtues than Trump. We all agree that our politics have been over-run by hate and vitriolic remarks, misleading half-truths, lies and deception. Nevertheless, if you read this article, you are lead to believe that Trump has exacerbated the problem and not anyone else, full stop.
The truth is that both parties and many of their leaders are to blame including many in the media. Make no mistake about what I am saying. I don't like Trump's rhetoric and condemn many of his ill-conceived and irresponsible remarks. However, his policies have done more for our country compared to Obama or what Hilary would have done. I agree that Trump is not the ideal President and I wish he would tone down his rhetoric. I also agree that his remarks fuel the negativity and over-the-top remarks from many of his critics. However, Trump had the courage to put a stop to countries like Iran and Syria who are the largest sponsors of terrorism in the world and are pure evil.
He is standing up to China and stopping them and other countries from stealing our intellectual property, and renegotiating one-sided trade deals. When we negatively exaggerate the description of Trump as evil or use words such as swine in articles and comments then the ones who are persuaded are "not" his supports or even most of the few that are considered moderate and centrist.
- Aldo Leopold: Reconciling Ecology and Economics?
- Creating the national domain?
- Main navigation;
- Individualism and the Land Question: A Discussion ePUB.
- Sociation Today.
- About This Item.
While the author did not explicitly say this, it is as though Trump is so evil and the perfect example of individualism et al, that we would be have been better off if Hilary would have won the election. In other words, under Hilary we would not be witnessing the demise of our norms, beliefs and virtues.
Under Hilary we would have a better America, a booming economy and a fairer and kinder nation because college would be free, Government paid healthcare would become a reality for everyone, our borders would be open, the rich would pay more in taxes, the middle class and poor would get a deeper tax cut and perhaps a minimum guaranteed income, and businesses taxes would not be cut but remain the highest in the industrialize world. Forget about how we would pay for all of this, or if we would be better off as a nation, in particularly the poor and middle class.