This is a non-reputable, rail-thin analysis by a Koch-funded right-wing think tank (the Manhattan Institute) citing another Koch-funded right-wing think tank (t

This is a non-reputable, rail-thin analysis by a Koch-funded right-wing think tank (the Manhattan Institute) citing another Koch-funded right-wing think tank (the Heritage Foundation) for supporting data. It is peppered with weasel words ("Some observers blame leftist professors...") and worn-out ideological canards ("helicopter parents," "snowflakes", "illiberal activists who reject open debate and a marketplace of ideas"). I'm seeing a lot of comments pointing out that the thesis of this argument rests on a confusing conflation between "socialism" and "Scandinavian-style social democratic policies." I actually think the article gets this right. American news media and mainstream politicians have spent the entire lifespan of most millennials arguing that the US can't have basic first-world social programs because those programs are "socialist." Whatever one thinks of socialism proper, this is a deliberate rhetorical confusion meant to draw an equivocation between modern European social democratic states, South American socialist states, and communist states like the DPRK. The article reproduces this rhetorical device, then asks why "today's kids love" policies in the massive ideological grab-bag now encompassed by that term. No wonder!