*The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure*

That is the new book by Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff, due out September 4, you can now pre-order it here.  Here is my earlier Conversation with Jonathan.


The book is subtitled The Kids These Days!

To be fair, it is much better than the original subtitle: "You kids get off my lawn!".

They don't want to be on your lawn. They are too busy no-platforming to stand on lawns.

Who handed them platforms? Platforms are for adults. You kids get off my platform!

Amazon: "The generation now coming of age has been taught three Great Untruths: their feelings are always right; they should avoid pain and discomfort; and they should look for faults in others and not themselves." Is this a book about our president?

Total buuuurrrn! Cause Trump is like, a bad guy.

No. He's like totally a tremendous guy. The best.

No, he qualifies as not merely tremendous, but genius....and a very stable genius at that!

16 months late, rayward.

Finally the truth about liberals, er “progressives “.

I must admit Conservatives are coherent. They have blamed the same generation - the youngest one - for the last 100 years. Won't those suffragettes stop playing that MTV music? Where are their husbands?

I think you mean consistent.

That, too, but they are coherent as in "having its parts related in an organized and reasonable way". There thought has only one part, which is also the whole. How could you misarrage the only item?

yeah, because blaming someone else for their problems is something conservatives NEVER do.

They do it all the time, as indeed a lot of people do. People gonna people. But it is a conservative principle that we should prudently acknowledge this, and that social engineering of the kind pushed by the left is wildly optimistic ... and will result in social spasms of rage when success is not achieved.

Here we can reference the post election anti-Trump fervour for example. First he was compared to Hitler and Berlusconi, and said to be an ally of Putin. Now he's condemning Putin, has expelled diplomats (spies) and hasn't lifted any sanctions for his "friend", while our troops have killed ~200 Russian mercenaries. I'm a moderate and I see the far left as more fanatical than the far right, these days.

Whatever you think of the "far left," they are not the ones currently holding the Presidency and Congress.

Conservative principles sound like they could be cool, the Republican party should try them some time.

They should. So should every party, even the redistributionist ones.

When I want to get people off the topic of politics, I tell them I'm fiscally liberal but socially conservative. Works every time.

That's also what Liz Lemon's awful boyfriend Dennis the Beeper King said he was. It was a joke about his ridiculousness.

So, "the centrist" is still confused about early opposition to Trump, as the FBI breaks down his lawyer's door.

And a payoff to a porn star is not "Berlusconi" in the least.

I haven't had time to research the reasoning behind this lawyer thing. Do you mind forwarding me a source that gives some logic for me to follow and believe that Trump has committed wrongdoing?

'and believe that Trump has committed wrongdoing'

Who said that Trump was involved in things like bank fraud, wire fraud, and campaign finance violations? That was his attorney Michael Cohen.

Trump, an unimpeachable source concerning himself, denies any and all knowledge of his attorney's actions in this regard, which tripped inquiries from both City National Bank in Beverly Hills and First Republic bank in New York due to suspicious payments.

One hopes, as part of draining the swamp, that allegations of bank and wire fraud related to campaign finance violations will finally be treated seriously by Republican appointees in the Justice Dept., after all those years of the Clinton Foundation being protected while apparently dealing uranium on the black market in Benghazi - or something like that. Maybe the latest Republican enquiries into such matters will finally clear that up. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/fbi-seizes-records-related-to-stormy-daniels-in-raid-of-trump-attorney-michael-cohens-office/2018/04/09/e3e43cf4-3c30-11e8-974f-aacd97698cef_story.html?noredirect=on

The answer is in your link. "fbi-seizes-records-related-to-stormy-daniels"

Mueller doesn't have anything on Trump so he need to keep fishing. I thought this probe was supposed to be confined to Russian influence on the election. We've already heard that Trump had nothing to do with it, so shut down the fishing expedition.

As you know, some investigations are indeed fishing expeditions, looking to turn up some sort of unrelated wrongdoing, or to lure targets into committing coverup crimes. Hello Kenneth Starr.

Others are methodically working their way to the top on a foundation of subordinates flipping over on their bosses.

ECF, you have set up a trailing defense. A guy's lawyer is arrested for service to the guy, and you say "maybe the guy is in the clear."

Maybe, but maybe he wasn't such a great guy.

The country elected a horny jerk, whose every principle that wasn’t about him, screamed lifetime Democrat. And you lot started talking about fascism and how to resist it.

^^^ Good comment.

Which of Trump's "principles" aren't about him? Wait... does he have any principles?

Once elected, he very clearly opened the authoritarian toolbox, and also very clearly has behaved in ways that energizes his hard right supporters.

Whatever Trump may have thought about gays when he was a private citizen is irrelevant now.

@Centrist - Never lose sight of who the "horny jerk" was running against.

Brian, I am going to diagnose that your mood is at odds with your beliefs.

"annual deficits as a share of US economy:

Obama’s second term
4.1%, 2.8%, 2.4%, 3.2%

Trump’s first term
3.5%, (projected) 4%, 4.6%, 4.6%

(updated w/new CBO estimates)"

- from @JohnJHarwood

So? Fascists are socialists, or what socialists degenerate into when they become nationalists. How is a lifetime Democrat who hates free trade and loves big spending, who decided to turn nationalist on run on a populist anti-immigration platform, inconsistent with that? That's more or less the same path that actual fascists have followed in the past.

And we know nazis are socialists because the english translation of the german acronym has that word in it

Nazis are nazis. But the German national socialists of the 20s 30s and 40s were command economy types who didn't believe in liberty at all. (We know from eyewitnesses, participants and historians that if you didn't join various pro-government groups or "societies", or show sufficient enthusiasm, you were encouraged to do so. That is, you weren't really at liberty to NOT participate. Of course a lot of Germans participated willingly.)

A truer centrist would be able to see quite a flavors of dissenters.

How does Bruce Bartlett fit your model?

And indeed is "shouting fascism" just a way to discard what is now well documented authoritarianism?

"well documented authoritarianism?"

You and rayward prove the first law of progressivism - projection.

Once again, you are 16 months too lat in your ciricism

An easy example is yesterday's foolish attempt. Surrounded by the military and security apparatus, the President claims that a legally executed warrant is an attack on the country.

As usual, the only defense possible is that Trump is too stupid to know what he is saying and where he is saying it.

The only thing that statement has to do with authoritarianism is being against it.

I don't know man, should I let you mutter on your way out that "a legally executed warrant, indeed rule of law, is the authoritarianism we should fear?"

The fact of the matter is no, Mueller is defending our rights as citizens of a great republic, and not throwing us to the whims of the oligarchs.

Come on, Berlusconi was enjoying the services of a minor aged prostitute. Trump is much classier than that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_surrounding_Silvio_Berlusconi#Ruby_Rubacuori

"The centrist" drops the words "spasms of rage," but the truth is, the is the part of the cycle where Trump critics have all the fun.

is concerned about the growing inability of Americans to live and work and cooperate across party lines.

How does one "live across party lines"? Or work across party lines? The always significant analysis of the incomprehensible Trump election victory shows that party lines aren't really all that they're made out to be. Wasn't his victory, in fact, a rejection of party politics? Sure, there's a kaleidoscope of opinions among the citizenry but those opinions are heterodox enough that most people could be in either party if they so chose. All but the most politicized are able to live and work, especially if they're not too vociferous about their opinions on controversial matters.

I have no idea if it is accurate, but there is a growing concern among researchers that the nation is indeed polarizing beyond the polling place.


Americans must understand that either they hang together or they will be hanged separately.

It's the nature, actually the duty, of researchers to be concerned. Otherwise, they would not be doing the research.

If the political debates are about paving the roads and hiring the chief of police people can work across party lines. When it starts getting to be about whether the government or the market picks the winners and losers, immigration, wars, abortions, non-normative sex, then the questions are existential or ontological, and territorial. These aren't matters that are settled by a vote; people either believe in a position or they don't. At best democracy is an agreement to count the rifles on either side and go home rather than stay and fight. The life-defining stuff was supposed to have been settled with the country's founding on core principles. As consensus fragments on core principles and government becomes ever larger, politics become more divisive.

It is my observation that many of the people who argue in favor of the market picking the winners and losers are perfectly happy to take the mortgage interest deduction.

It's their money. Why not?

Yeah it's a dumb argument to call someone a hypocrite just for paying their expected tax even if they oppose the way the code is set up.

+1. Yeah it's an obvious fallacy with many equivalents ("how can a libertarian cash a welfare cheque?" etc). McMike loses a point for not being classically trained in logic.

I thought I was in the coddled generation. Baby boomers. I resent any group being more coddled.

Sounds like a big dose of conventional wisdom that I will be ignoring.

Go ahead and ignore them. But what makes you think they will ignore you?

You may not care about the revolution/war, etc., but it cares about you, etc.

I initially read that as "curdling."

Which works too.

Pot, meet kettle.

Will the Millenials write a similar novel about younger cohorts in 50 years? Each generation is coddled in its own way. Boomers had to wait until later in life to be catered to. Their patience has really paid off.

"Boomers had to wait until later in life to be catered to."

That seems like a really silly statement. Baby boomers were famously coddled from the get go. They were the post war babies and lavished with the largesse of an exceptionally well off America from the very start. Granted later generations also received these benefits, but the contention that Boomers had to wait until later in life to be catered to is just factually incorrect.

The oldest boomers are 73 years of age, hardly old enough to be a member of the US Congress. As of 2012: http://nailheadtom.blogspot.com/2012/12/californias-most-prominent-politicians.html

It's always the youth, but that's because the youth has yet to learn what the generations before them have. It's not that they are irredeemable; they will learn. The key is to ensure they don't do much damage voting for extremists like Bernie or Warren who never grew up in the meanwhile. That means reminding them that even though they think they have it all figured out they are really really wrong.

Yes, they should have to wait their turn to royally screw things up like their parents are.

McMike's McDonaldsonian analysis: fast, cheap, and sh*tty for the consumer.

Where's the beef?

Is that you, Prince Charles? 😉

Sadly, I think Jonathan Haidt is becoming an ideologue. I still think moral foundations theory is interesting and a healthy tonic for all on the right and the left but he seems to want to make his career bones by only providing a critique of the left. Not wrong really, just skewed and thereby less powerful.
His response to TC’s query about what he finds disgusting was illuminating in its lameness. Really, SJWs are what disgust you? Cmon man. He tries to recover with the bit about the honey coated grasshopper (true disgust btw) but he’s already displayed his irrationality.

You might read "The Burden of Bad Ideas" by Heather MacDonald.

I have high regard for his last book and am familiar with his latest project. But I take the title as a signal that this will be a dopamine rush for Boomers about how Millennials are X Y and Z. I'll wait for reviews before proceeding further.

Comments for this post are closed