[KB] Questions for discussion at my panel
Edward C Appel
edwardcappel at frontier.com
Fri Jun 23 19:57:23 EDT 2017
Good point, Bob, on the "top 1 percent" as modification of the general thesis that Edsall and the political scientists he's building his case on advance. If we say that, in general, numbers of perons with good middle-class and above incomes gravitate to the left via the "higher education" and "higher income" standards on the scale of conservative to liberal---that makes more sense than going by average income itself. More of the very top earners are surely still in league with the parties of the right.
Whose hide, after all, is being rescued by the Republican House and Senate healthcare bills now in play? Not "rescued," actually, but grossly overindulged?
Ed
--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 6/23/17, <wessr at oregonstate.edu> wrote:
Subject: Re: [KB] Questions for discussion at my panel
To: "Edward C Appel" <edwardcappel at frontier.com>
Cc: "kb at kbjournal.org" <kb at kbjournal.org>, "CarrolCox" <cbcox at ilstu.edu>
Date: Friday, June 23, 2017, 2:02 PM
I agree with Ed that Burke's "Destiny
of Acceptance Frames" provides
the
broad standpoint needed to consider current shifts.
I would formulate these shifts
somewhat differently, however, mainly
more broadly.
Consider that in the 1700s and 1800s,
democratic culture helped
capitalism
defeat the aristocracy economically, politically, and
finally culturally. Remnants of the aristocracy
remain (e.g., UK's
monarchy), but in
the 1900s the defeat of the aristocracy was completed.
But in the 1900s, democratic
culture started legalizing unions and
passing laws restraining capitalism. Democratic
culture began to
become a problem rather
than a solution for capitalist expansion.
Today, authoritarian culture
may be more useful to capitalist
expansion than democratic culture (China?).
Perhaps the rise is
quicker in the US
than in Europe. Maybe, more hopefully, having seen
the rise in the US, Europe may be reacting
against it.
Education, as
Ed suggests, may be especially important insofar as
different levels of education may track
different responses to
authoritarianism.
Education does correlate with income, but when you
get to the top 1% you're dealing with a
difference that makes a
difference
("dark money").
Such shifts take time to play out but
Burke's acceptance/rejection
does
provide a standpoint from which to track what is
happening.
Bob
Quoting Edward C Appel <edwardcappel at frontier.com>:
> Burkophiles,
>
> At the risk of being
reprimanded again for injecting current
> politics into our sacrosanct parlor
discussion, allow me to respond
> to
Carrol’s response to Herb’s conference panel
question.
>
> Many
factors account for Clinton’s “loss” to Trump in 2016.
I put
> “loss” in quotation marks
because, if the U.S. were actually a
>
democracy, Clinton would have won by almost three million
votes.
> Everything’s gerrymandered
to beat the band, including our outdated
> Electoral College. You can read the
chapter “Program” in CS as a
>
paean to democracy as a discursive necessity.
>
> But let’s get to
the most intriguingly proleptic Burkean commentary
> on 2016, “The Destiny of Acceptance
Frames” in ATH. Trump’s
>
irregular burlesque-cum-factionally tragic campaign
discourse
> (that’s how I see it)
went with, and signaled, the frame-breaking we
> surely must note in the altered voting
patterns in rustbelt states
> like
Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. A must-read essay
on
> this potentially tectonic shift
appeared in yesterday’s NYTimes:
>
“The End of the Left and the Right as We Knew Them,” by
Thomas
> Edsall. The frame-breaking is
occurring across the Western world,
>
most notably in recent elections in the U.K. (June 8),
France, the
> Netherlands, and
Austria.
>
> Across
the board, the new and most prominent demographic
indicators
> of left vs. right are
education and income: Those with college and
> advanced degrees go left; with high school
or less, they go right.
> The same
with income: Kensington in London, the richest voting
> district in the UK, went Labour on June 8
for the first time ever.
> The
formerly class-based politics is being replaced by
> culture-based. Labor/social-democratic
parties lost ground
> precipitously in
all recent European elections, except in England.
> And there, it was enhanced Labour
Party-voting in Conservative
>
districts that inflated their vote total. Now, it’s “a
more racially
> and zenophobic
politics, on the one hand, and a politics
> capitalizing on increasing levels of
education and open-mindedness
> in the
electorate, on the other.”
>
> The upshot, as Edsall seems to see it,
translated into Burkean
> terms:
Don’t expect too much from the symbolic species. What is
> required of the left is “some
thoughtful and humane co-optation in
>
the form of deference to our limits and boundaries.”
>
> Reckoning by their
pieties and allegiances, how much accelerating
> “diversity” and social marginalization
can the working class,
> already beset
by economic globalization, absorb?
>
> Ed
>
>
--------------------------------------------
> On Wed, 6/21/17, Cox, Carrol <cbcox at ilstu.edu>
wrote:
>
> Subject:
Re: [KB] Questions for discussion at my panel
> To: "kb at kbjournal.org"
<kb at kbjournal.org>
> Date: Wednesday, June 21, 2017, 9:23
PM
>
> The black
voters of Philadelphia
> stayed home on
election day, and that gave Pennsylvania
> & the election to Trump.
>
> Actually, the 2016
election was decided by what
> Obama
did and (more importantly ) did not do in the first
> two years of his presidency.
>
> Carrol
>
> -----Original
Message-----
> From: KB [mailto:kb-bounces at kbjournal.org]
> On Behalf Of Edward C Appel
> Sent: Monday,
>
June 05, 2017 10:05 AM
> To: Edward C
Appel;
> HERBERT W. Simons
> Cc: gayle simons; kb at kbjournal.org;
> Cem Zeytinoglu
>
Subject: Re: [KB] Questions
> for
discussion at my panel
>
> Great questions, Herb! Thanks a bunch.
Looking
> forward to our panel.
>
>
>
> Ed
>
--------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 6/5/17, HERBERT W. Simons <hsimons at temple.edu>
> wrote:
>
> Subject: Questions
> for discussion at my panel
> To: "Edward
>
C Appel" <edwardcappel at frontier.com>
> Cc: "Cem Zeytinoglu" <czeytinogl at po-box.esu.edu>,
> "David Blakesley" <dblakes at clemson.edu>,
> "gayle simons" <gaylesimons at yahoo.com>,
> kb at kbjournal.org,
> "David C. Williams" <dcwill at fau.edu>
> Date: Monday, June 5, 2017, 9:48 AM
>
> KB CONFERENCE
Session on
> TRUMP Herb Simons
>
> 1.
> What does discourse
> about Trump in the media
> tell us about who
> “we” are? Who “they” are? i.e.
our
>
> beliefs and
values;
>
>
> 2.
> What
roles are played by money and
> power:
e.g.,
> in the GOP on issues like
> climate control?
>
>
> 3.
> Assess U,S. news media re Trump,
> including SMS,
>
Cable, social media, radio.
> How did
GOP achieve control? Was
> Edelman
> right on
> media?:
a passing parade of
> symbols? Ritual
elements?
> Theater? Dramatic
> in
> outline;
empty of detail?
>
>
4.
>
>
Investigative journalism: liberal? Unbalanced?
> Immature? Praiseworthy
>
> 5.
> Is there a deep
>
state in the U.S.? A media elite?
>
Intel
> CIA, academies??
FBI,infotainment?
> Role
> of old money?Do we amuse ourselves to
death?
> (Postman)
>
>
> 6.
> RE
explaining Trump what’s Rhet
>
theory/crit’s
> distinctive
> contribution
>
> a.
>
Mercieca on threats, appeals to pity? Ad
> hominem?
> Ad
populum? Trish Roberts on
>
demagoguery. Trump as cult
> leader
>
> b.
>
> Appel & others
on burlesque, truthful
>
> hyperbole, ridicule, satire, role of
political
> cartoons?
>
>
> c.
>
Fishman on Trump’s
> boasts—e.g.
I’m rich; I own
> them; they
> owe me.
>
> 7.
> What
can (or does) Burkean theory/criticism
> contribute? E.g., Dramatism,Perspetive
by
> incongruity, 4
> master tropes?
>
Hitler’s “battle”, paradox,
>
dialectic?
>
>
> 8.
>
What’s admirable about Trump?
>
What’s the secret
> of his allure?
His
> power to persuade? His
distinctive
>
>
contribution? His
> successes with the
white
> working class? With
evangelicals?
> His
> tweets?
>
> 9.
> The
investigations of Trump & CO’s
>
alleged
> wrongdoing?
>
>
>
10.
> Impeachment debates; the obstruction
of
> justice
>
issue? Trump & Putin& other
>
Russians; Trump &
> Flint.
>
>
>
11.
> Hacking issue
>
>
>
12.
> Subverting the Presidential election
>
>
>
13.
> How will it all turn out?
> --
>
> Herbert W. Simons,
>
> Ph.D.
> Emeritus Professor of
> Communication
>
Dep't of Strategic
>
Communication, Weiss Hall 215
>
Temple
> University, Philadelphia
19122
> Home phone:
> 215 844 5969
> http://astro.temple.edu/~hsimons
> Academic Fellow, Center for
Transformative
> Strategic
> Initiatives (CTSI)
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
> KB mailing list
>
KB at kbjournal.org
> http://kbjournal.org/mailman/listinfo/kb_kbjournal.org
>
_______________________________________________
> KB mailing list
>
KB at kbjournal.org
> http://kbjournal.org/mailman/listinfo/kb_kbjournal.org
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
> KB mailing list
> KB at kbjournal.org
> http://kbjournal.org/mailman/listinfo/kb_kbjournal.org
>
More information about the KB
mailing list