As for the latest manifestation of New York Times perversity, it's simply acting according to its nature. Kristof, of course, was just the hired implement; the paper chose to run his piece and is fully responsible for its publication. I've heard Israel has threatened to sue the paper for defamation, which may well not be winnable in a New York City courtroom, but I hope Israel does it anyway.
Opportunism is a big part of the problem. The performative virtue-signaling is not about virtue but about procurement of advantage or gain by whatever posturing or positioning will do the trick. It amounts to a kind of fashion whoredom, which, like the sexual kind, can and does pay.
Curious how the spiritual impulse begins again to feel so radical. I appreciate your broadening perspective, dare I say forays toward wisdom.
As for the latest manifestation of New York Times perversity, it's simply acting according to its nature. Kristof, of course, was just the hired implement; the paper chose to run his piece and is fully responsible for its publication. I've heard Israel has threatened to sue the paper for defamation, which may well not be winnable in a New York City courtroom, but I hope Israel does it anyway.
Regarding Kristof, this may be of interest:
freebeacon.com/media/times-columnist-kristofs-father-fought-on-nazi-side-in-world-war-ii/
The apple didn't fall far from the tree.
Kristof should have known better anyway, but the Times certainly should have.
Opportunism is a big part of the problem. The performative virtue-signaling is not about virtue but about procurement of advantage or gain by whatever posturing or positioning will do the trick. It amounts to a kind of fashion whoredom, which, like the sexual kind, can and does pay.