It’s widely known that Chris Hughes, the entitled brat who bought The New Republic, has succeeded in wrecking the once-venerable flagship of American liberalism. But does the magazine have to descend to self-parody and infantilism?
Check out this one:
Staff writer Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig thinks the term pejorative, or at least skews public discourse toward an unbalanced end. To which I can only say: I certainly hope so!
Here’s the conclusion of her argument:
Our share in democracy arises not from what we can pay into it, but from the fact that we are persons and personhood confers certain obligations and dues.
Whereas “taxpayers” is strewn throughout political documents, “people” is associated with populist and revolutionary movements, and not for nothing. Power to the people, the evergreen revolutionary slogan trumpeted by popular fronts around the world, has a ring that power to the taxpayers does not precisely because it demands an inclusive view of public goods. The same could be said about the first line of the U.S. Constitution: “We the Taxpayers” would have been an odd construction for a nation born from a revolt against British taxation. So let’s leave “taxpayer” to the IRS and remove it from everyday speech. With every thoughtless repetition of the word, we’re carrying political water.
It’s pretty transparent why the left would we prefer not to point out that not all of our “people” are taxpayers these days. I’m reminded of the time during the 1984 campaign when a reporter asked actor Warren Beatty, a supporter and women-supplier to Gary Hart, about Hart’s “new ideas.” Beatty said: “He stands for ‘new ideas.’ And ‘new ideas’ mean, ‘You pay, motherfucker.’”
Among other things The New Republic has lost is Beatty’s clarity.