Keep America Weird
There are very few things I miss about Washington DC: a craft cocktail bar called The Gibson, thunder storms in the summer, and a handful of people — those are the notable items.
I’ll spare you a list of all the people, except to say that The American Scene’s own Reihan Salam is high on it. In my Best Journalism of 2009, I linked to a wonderful post he wrote titled A New Way to Think About Life — and that is what being around Reihan affords those lucky enough to spend an occasional hour in his energetic company. His ability to combine playfulness and seriousness is singular, and every time I go awhile without reading his work or seeing him on Bloggingheads or in person, I forget that I should be reading more, that I could be more generous to those with whom I disagree, and that the normal ways things are done constrain us less than we imagine.
I’m reminded of all this by a Bloggingheads where Reihan is paired with Chris Hayes, another great guy, and one of the few young writers I wish I’d have met in Washington DC but didn’t. Here’s a short excerpt from their conversation:
(Image of Reihan above by Mariam ElNaggar.)
One of the things I love about This American Life, the wonderful radio program, and about The Marriage Ref, the mediocre Seinfeld-produced reality television meets talk show meets game show, is that they both highlight real people who speak in regional dialect, aren’t stock characters from central casting, and say unexpected things — put another way, these shows help reverse the flattening foisted upon us by mass market television shows and movies, and every time I see either I remember how much I like quirky America.
Of course, I haven’t needed a reminder lately, having just spent 6 weeks touring The South. A project I dreamt up on that trip is hopefully going to contribute to the unflattening project (more on that soon). Meanwhile, I’d like to embark on another project, one that is technically unrelated, but that taps into the same spirit: I’d like to praise things.
To write about stuff I like, and especially writers I like. Reihan is certainly one of them, and I thank him for this latest inspiration (and no, I haven’t forgotten about all the other posts I owe here).
Stay tuned.
Oh man Conor, you’re going the full McSweeney’s!
— haighterade · Mar 26, 02:03 PM · #
To elaborate a little bit: The valorization of diversity and of the obscure, the desire to think more about things that you like rather than things that you reject, the odd mix of sincerity and irony—this is the sensibility of hipster-inflected 20-30-something-dominated institutions like McSweeney’s, Pitchfork, and This American Life. I’m going to guess you live in a gentrifying neighborhood and frequent your local farmer’s market.
I’m not making fun—this is basically my sensibility too. It’s just odd to see it from someone ostensibly on the political right, given how tribal politics seem to be anymore. It’s part of why I like reading your posts, despite basically always disagreeing with you. Good luck with your project. I’ll definitely check it out.
— haighterade · Mar 26, 02:28 PM · #
The Friedersdorfianist.
— Freddie · Mar 26, 04:51 PM · #
-est, that is.
— Freddie · Mar 26, 05:02 PM · #
What I never got about Reihan is, if he was so interested in experementation and getting away from centralization and weirdness, why lable himself conservative? Or anything really? And why in god’s name go write for the National Review? I mean “The RIght” is a very, very structured, non-experimental, non-flexible organization which very much dislikes the weird.
The other thing that I find strange is, when he is forced to clearly articulate his views, how conventionally “right” they are. He sometimes seems to me to be a regular conservative, but tolerant, rather than a “new” conservative. Tolerance is great, but I would like more new. He doesn’t like the lefts conventional responses, but he seems to support the rights conventional responses.
I say this as someone who likes him personally. And I don’t have any problem with him being a conventional (though tolerant) conserviative. But I would really like to see more wierdness from him, in the policy department.
— cw · Mar 26, 08:01 PM · #
OK, I think I have to retract some of what I said before. I hadn’t read what he’s written lately at the National REview (becasue the National review is for dishonest nutjob political operatives what virginia is for lovers). But then I felt like I should and read his policy blog and he’s responses are not strictly “conventional” right responses. They are much more varied, thoughtful, and honest.
But I still stick by my larger point. If he is intersted in change why align himself with the conservative machine? WHat could be a more partisan, less intellectually honest organization that the National Review? It’s like someone saying they want to reform our current drug economy and then going to work for the narcos in colombia.
If he actualy wants to change conservatism I think he is going to have to break with the conservative party.
Of course he might think that he will be able to bring change from within. To that idea I recommend the example of Michael Corelone.
— cw · Mar 26, 11:13 PM · #
CW,
Reihan does writing inside the movement and outside it too. So long as he can try to influence both conversations without compromising his integrity — and I think he can and does everyday — I am quite glad that he’s taken the approach that he has, and I hope his venues continue to grow.
Haighterade,
Do I live in a gentrifying neighborhood? Well I am in Orange County right now. Soon I’ll live in either Los Angeles — Venice Beach if I have my druthers — or San Francisco. Previously I’ve lived on U Street and before that in Adams Morgan (Washington DC), Park Slope (Brooklyn), Claremont (East Los Angeles County, CA), The Isle San Louis (Paris), El Centro (Seville, Spain) and some neighborhood in Munich. I grew up in Orange County, California. I am not sure if this confirms or disproves your thesis. I do like farmer’s markets — shopping indoors is kind of awful. I also like living near the beach and bars I both like and can walk home from. None of this strikes me as political. But I suppose it is these days.
— Conor Friedersdorf · Mar 27, 12:03 AM · #
But I suppose it is these days.
Oh, of course it is, and because of whom? You don’t even really have to ask the question. There’s a real America, and a fake America, or so I’m told.
— Freddie · Mar 27, 02:19 AM · #
Thanks for the kind words, Conor. The feeling is mutual.
cw:
(1) In very broad outline, I think that I am a fairly conventional Rawlsekian conservative. But
(2) the conservative label is useful insofar as it marks one as non-left, and my real issue is with what I see as a certain kind of left-materialist thinking, i.e.,
(3) the view that the relevant inequalities are material inequalities rather than hierarchies centered on respect and recognition, or the presence or absence of a thick cultural context. (One of these days I want to write about class and stratification at greater length.) I’m interested in the idea of a “contextual” space: not political or economic, and something more than what we’ve come to understand as “social.” The “contextual” space is how we relate to each other laterally, for lack of a better word. There is, in my view, a real danger posed by a state strong enough to colonize the terrain of solidarity. Danny Kruger has written about this very thoughtfully.
(4) Though I think that material well-being is really important, I worry that the left-materialist view is founded on an excessively mechanistic reading of the sources of material well-being — and it loses sight of why material well-being is important and valuable in the first place.
(5) I’m also concerned by the lack of a limiting principle in the left-materialist view. Some kind of rough prioritarian view makes sense to me. But in the absence of a limiting principle, I’m not sure self-government, communities of competence, etc., has much of a shot.
(6) So while I have a lot in common with the relatively small handful of left thinkers who are interested in decentralization, self-government, mutual aid, etc., I find the modern US right is a lot more congenial than the modern US left. My core objective — a far more decentralized US polity — is shared by the mainstream right.
(7) Also, I like National Review and have for a long time. I don’t agree with everything in the magazine, but a number of NR staffers are friends and intellectual allies. I intend to write more for them.
— Reihan · Mar 27, 04:57 AM · #
“My core objective — a far more decentralized US polity — is shared by the mainstream right.”
Only when they aren’t running the government.
— Steven Donegal · Mar 27, 04:32 PM · #
That’s interesting, Reihan, and helpful, and thank you for it. I’m interested to know more about what that opposition to materialism means in practical terms, and I’d also be intrigued by what you think about a guy like Razib Khan, whose work I know you enjoy and who is a dedicated materialist.
— Freddie · Mar 27, 04:37 PM · #
This comment thread sure took a heartwarming turn. CW, actually reading what Reihan’s written? What next?
And Freddie, I don’t think the right-wing “real America” line is more than a few hours older than the claim that fatass carbon-belching SUV-driving exurb-dwelling Appleby’s-eating overbreeding flyover country troglodytes are keeping us from the liberal Golden Age. Residential sorting has rotted everyone’s brains at roughly the same rate.
— Matt Frost · Mar 27, 05:27 PM · #
Present company was excluded, of course. But I take your point. Withdrawn!
— Freddie · Mar 27, 05:51 PM · #
Matt-
I used to read the Corner everyday. I would fairly frequently correspond with Jonah Goldberg and Sutterford and derbyshire. I respected Ponnuru and Lowry. I even joked around with Klo about her Romeny infatuation. But Goldberg published that silly book and then Obama got elected and the COrner as a publication, went total retard. Those people—in general—just lost it. A microcosm of the process might be the writings of Victor Davis Hanson. Before Obama he was kind of dumb but nothing really stood out. But seeing Obama elected must have given him a stroke or something because he became obsessed and clearly lost touch with reality. So I never read Reihans blog because I didn’t like that neighborhood. It wsn’t something I consciously thought out, it was just instinct.
And Reihan (thanks for the long reply), you working for the NR is a good example of what I’m talking about when I talk about (what I see as) your surprisingly support of, and participation in, the conventional right-wing (John mcCain was another example). The NR (in my opinion) is not a realistic address for creating a new conservativism, or for promoting new policy ideas. It is an operative arm of the conservative movement as much as Fox news is. I don’t understand why you would work for them. In my opinion, it affects you credibility, not with me, but in terms of getting people to listen to you, which you have to do in your line of work to accomplish anything. I read your blog. You have lots of interesting ideas. But I can’t imagine that anyone there is gives the smallest crap about ideas, it’s all about promoting the conservative momevent, which in their eyes, is basically the dispicable GOP.
I’m not saying you should join the left (how every you do that), though I do think that you are right that there are plenty of left leaning chicks and dudes that are interested in self sufficient communities. But I would like to see you somehow put some distance from the Conservative system. Rod Dreher has that distance. Sullivan has it. The people here at TAS have it. The conservative movement is gross right at the moment. I don’t see how you can lend it your support. At the very least your going to get thier cooties on you.
I hope you don’t see this as an attack on you personally. And maybe I’m totally full of shit. Maybe I am mispercieving the situation. After all, this is a comment on a blog. But this has been something I didn’t quite get.
I think if our politics are going to change for the better, it in that zone you mention where you had things in common with left. It’s going to take people leaving both dumb-ass, intellectually entrenched sides. Not forming a third party or anything, but creating new ground level attitudes about how things ought to be. It’s like the gays. Young people don’t give a shit about the gays. That attitude is a starting to affect our politics. I think the same thing can happen for self-sufficient communities. Or better urban planning. Or spending less on the military. Or a rational heath care system. But part of creating new attitudes is admiting that the old systems are broken.
— cw · Mar 28, 03:08 AM · #
You know, on second thought, I shouldn’t write stuff like this. From what I’ve seen of him, Reihan knows what he’s doing. It’s not right to criticize his choices. Never mind.
— cw · Mar 28, 03:30 AM · #
I couldn’t understand certain parts of this post, but I assume I only need to learn a bit more regarding this, because it certainly sounds interesting and kind of though-proviking! By the way, how did you first get started with this?
— supra shoes · Mar 31, 03:35 AM · #