Well, philosophy isn't for everyone, but if someone signs up for the course, they're expected to learn the material. It's fine to contradict Nietzsche, and many have done so brilliantly, but that involves wrestling w his arguments, which requires first being open to understanding them

they weren't able to explain what Nietzsche (or whoever) thought by the end of the course, and that I didn't care if they agreed with it as long as they understood it.

Most students understood and we worked w thinkers who argued thoughtfully in defense of God (Augustine, Kierkegaard) but some students were upset that we were trying to "stop them from believing in God." I explained that it doesn't matter to me what they believe, but that I wasn't doing my job if/

Well put. When I was a TA for intro to philosophy courses, we sometimes marked essays that consisted of some variation of "Nietzsche is wrong bc he contradicts the Bible" (not even paraphrasing here). I explained to students that this isn't an argument or even an inquiry, but a dogmatic assertion./

Thank you for saying this, I needed it. I've been bewildered by the endless posts rejecting violence & instantly inserting, as if they can't help themselves, a criticism of Kirk's politics, not realizing that maybe, just for a *moment*, critique can be less important than ordinary humanity

Consistent with Arlie Hochschild's research on lost pride among white working class

Counterproductive to divine grace, perhaps, but not international relations.

And they're joining the civilian militia in the thousands

This is the way

This was always the case

Ideologues can't do politics. Politics is an endlessly messy wrangle full of compromises and tiny, tiny wins that take eons, where you celebrate getting half a sentence of the legislation you drafted into someone else's bill. The DSA are purists who prefer to go down proudly with the ship

Maga isn't a conservative movement