I continued that Corner conversation about Katie Couric into my column. It first appeared in the LAT yesterday. Matt Yglesias asks in response:
…I’m left wondering, does he really think that American nationalism is insufficiently present in American television news? Like, sincerely believe that in a way that would make this a subject worth arguing about?
Well, the answer is yes. I’m not asking for more populism in the news, though some quarters could use more than others. In fact, I’m not primarily concerned with the news at all. I’m concerned with elites, like Couric, who think any nationalism at all is embarrassing and outdated. Oh, and for the record, I don’t really like the word “nationalism” in this context, but I think it works for purposes of the conversation.
Meanwhile Winds of Change has a long response to Yglesias, arguing that liberalism is desperately in need of some more nationalism in contrast to Yglesias’ what’s-the-fuss-over-the-fourth-of-July stance. Indeed, I thought this was somewhat in vogue these days. I thought liberals and progressives were mounting quite an ambitious project to revive an American progressive tradition distinct to our own soil and all that. It seems to me you can’t tout the importance of that American progressives and that tradition without at least understanding the role American nationalism played.