Readers of Commentary had a mixed reaction to Jonah Goldberg?s recent description of the president as a ?neo-socialist.?
The magazine prints (subscriber link here) a pair of letters praising Goldberg?s assessment, along with another pair that blast the piece as ? to offer one example ? ?pseudo-intellectual baloney.?
In responding to the critics, Goldberg offers this interesting aside:
I think it is a serious challenge to discuss the ideology of self-described liberals, given their predilection for rejecting the idea that they have any ideology at all. This infuriating tactic has successfully freed many liberals from the obligation of stating, or defending, any useful first principles beyond vague platitudes of social justice and generalized do-goodery. The problem with such ?pragmatism? is that it always results in arguing for an ever greater role for the government, as we?ve seen with Obama?s own alleged pragmatism. As James Ceaser has written, ?Pragmatism is the magic word to describe what liberals want, but do not want to argue for.?
