[pissant]

That's alot of gobbleygook to say Ann is kicking butt and naming names.

[Kenny Bunk]

As these examples make clear, liberal political theory often casts itself in the role of rule maker – or better, game designer. It devotes much of its time to worrying about what rules must be instituted in order to act politically, and it concerns itself primarily with how to justify those rules in a way that gives them the appearance of universality and neutrality.

Very good tactics for the writer of an academic paper. He says this fifty times and in fifty different ways. i.e., that American liberalism can not prevail democratically. Gosh, Joe Stalin could have saved them the trouble.

[Candor7]

Coulter and her ilk in fact succeed in a political critique of mainstream political liberalism in America and that the failure of liberalism to recognise this fact lies at the heart of many of its problems –...........>>>>>>>>>>

The failure of Liberalism is that liberals DO NOT think. Them simply emote their politics. Idjits!

Of course Samuel A. Chambers & Alan Finlayson thnk they can think.....result: Gobbledeegook!

( If Liberals had brains they would be Republicans)

[antisocial]

I’m convinced that reading more than about a page of that gobbeltygook would cause one permanent brain damage.

[RogerD]

That's alot of gobbleygook to say Ann is kicking butt and naming names.

They say more than that, if you have the stomach to read all the drivel in search of the occasional soggy nugget. The authors clearly admit to one of Ann's biggest points about liberals - that they see people for their group identities and not as individuals. See paragraph 29 from the article:

If liberal thought does recognise a new political form, then it instinctively asks questions such as ‘Can and should this form be accommodated within the given order of liberal interest groups?’ and ‘How might that order be altered so as to find or create a space for this new identity or group?’

Wouldn't it be wonderful if the authors actually considered Ann's content with an open mind while they were analyzing her methods, if they read her words when Ann rejects identity politics and thought about why her writing appeals to so many individuals despite what liberals see as our interest group identities?

A couple of relevant Ann quotes:

“Don't liberals ever have to pony up at least one example of a powerful privileged white male trampling on the rights of a powerless black woman in order to keep droning on about powerful privileged white males? Every real-life example invariably turns out to be a hoax, among the most spectacular the Tawana Brawley case and now the Duke lacrosse case.”

And her quote from Claude Allen: “I realized after the fact that I agree more with the Republican Party platform, that it talked about independence, that it talked about individual responsibility, individual rights, it talked about the ability to guarantee opportunities, not outcomes … that was very much what my family stood for.”

A final note on the arrogance of those whom Ann describes as suffering from elitism (a descriptor that they find hateful): "the Coulterist critique emanates from within and is made possible by liberalism" shows an amazingly out of touch view of what liberalism stands for. It's the Constitution as written that guarantees the rights we were endowed with by our Creator, the rights that make Ann's writing possible.

[Bubba_Leroy]

[Tax Government]

I wonder how many Starbucks 5-shot espresso drinks it took for the author to write all that...

[bruinbirdman]

#47 "Our argument for a deepening and furthering of pluralisation along multiple dimensions has two crucial corollaries: 1) it suggests a different approach to the practice of political theory, in which the political theorist becomes less of a planner and more of an explorer, 2) it exposes the conflict between liberalism and democracy and reveals a preference for the latter. "

It took a while for them to get to this point, but I thought that was where they were going..

I am only at #47, more later.

yitbos

[bruinbirdman]

"Our final response also proves paradoxical: one only beats Coulterism by joining it. That is to say, one should not respond by defending the universals that Coulterism attacks but by joining in that attack and by seeking to proliferate the number of forms they take. Thus, the challenge is to prevent Coulter from re-occupying the universal, and this means to do to her what she has sought to do to liberalism. Coulter wants a dirty fight; perhaps we should respect her wishes."

Well, pissant, after reading the whole thing, your one line best sums it up, "That's alot of gobbleygook to say Ann is kicking butt and naming names."

"Our final response also proves paradoxical: one only beats Coulterism by joining it. That is to say, one should not respond by defending the universals that Coulterism attacks but by joining in that attack and by seeking to proliferate the number of forms they take. Thus, the challenge is to prevent Coulter from re-occupying the universal, and this means to do to her what she has sought to do to liberalism. Coulter wants a dirty fight; perhaps we should respect her wishes. "

The whole article is a put down of ideologically inflexible reactionary liberals

The last paragraph could be a call for liberals to use the Coulterism method to attack liberalism itself and get with their interpretation of modern political reality.

yitbos

[jack308]

If “Brevity is the soul of wit” it’s obvious this author is a moron.

[upsdriver]

15. Understood in this context, we would contend that ‘Coulterism’ is one of the most important political developments of our time.

The writer gets this right. The left hates Ann because she doesn't allow them to set the debate rules, The rest of the right would do well to mimic more of what Ann Coulter does. Be fearless, confident, in their face ......... and smile!:) pisses off liberals

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

Thus, the challenge is to prevent Coulter from re-occupying the universal, and this means to do to her what she has sought to do to liberalism. Coulter wants a dirty fight; perhaps we should respect her wishes.

Translation: Coulter's kicking liberal butt and we don't know how to stop her.

who ya gonna call when ya wanna bust a liberal?

[the_conscience]

Fascinating!

Thanks.

[Tzimisce]

...you paid millions of dollars in grants for this! :D

Have a nice day. :)

[Lancey Howard]

[NeoCaveman]

Coulterism?

Where do I sign up.