Jilani's analysis is correct, but the title of this piece is misleading. It suggests that, having been apprised of these realities, progressives will acknowledge them and their implications and, if nothing else, be more strategic. The problem is that the progressives who make these claims about the electorate and their favored candidates…
Jilani's analysis is correct, but the title of this piece is misleading. It suggests that, having been apprised of these realities, progressives will acknowledge them and their implications and, if nothing else, be more strategic. The problem is that the progressives who make these claims about the electorate and their favored candidates/policy agenda almost certainly will not acknowledge that the election tested their dream and found it wanting. AOC is a perfect example. Yes, she's politically talented, though I won't call her "brilliant" as my social circles demand. How brilliant is it to undercut moderate dems in districts she could never be elected in? My long experience as a women's studies prof is relevant here. My students--and tens of thousands just like them all across the US--are learning from their English professors, their women's studies professors, their cultural anthropology professors, their ethnic studies professors, and oh so many others that no amount of data should get in the way of their "radical" belief system and that all who try to browbeat with them "facts" constitute a kind of "deep academia" of disloyalists who should be unmasked and punished. The depressing reality is that, in many disciplines, universities are steadily pumping out the kinds of young adults who, like their true compatriots on the right, would rather punish the oppressors than conform their views to data and sober analysis.
In a zoom class the day after the election, one of my students posted in the chat the claim that if Bernie had been the Dem nominee, the election would've been a landslide for the Dems. Other students clapped. I've tried before, and I'm sure I'll try again, but I know from experience that there was nothing I could have said that would have caused those students to think twice. Showing them data and analysis? You know how Fox News viewers respond to "data"? Yeah, it's like that.
Honest question: do you think the students who claimed Bernie would’ve won in a landslide changed their views since 11/4? At that time, it didn’t look good for Biden, and as someone who aligns with progressives more than centrist democrats, I was saying the same thing on that day. However, once it became clear that Biden would win, I acknowledged that going with the more moderate candidate was the better strategy. Especially after seeing the peaceful celebrations over the weekend, which I don’t think would have been so widespread had Bernie hypothetically won the election.
Hi Tim: Thanks for your comment, which encourages me to be more nuanced in my response to the article. I run something like the experiment you're suggesting often on various tenets of my students' belief system, assessing beliefs before and after students confront new information. What's changed in recent years is the intensity and consistency of many students' responses to this pedagogy when the topic is one in which they have a political and (therefore) emotional stake. I'd say that about one third of my students will respond to having a core view challenged in the way you describe, or at least with surprise and curiosity (score!). That leaves about two thirds. Those are the young adults so many of us see as driving trends that are inimical to the (former) aims of higher education.
It is really difficult when the two isolated sides believe they are advocating 'fact driven' beliefs but don't realize that both of their fact sets are selected to reinforce a dogmatic ideology that was chosen before any evidence was considered. A very well put comment, thank you.
Jilani's analysis is correct, but the title of this piece is misleading. It suggests that, having been apprised of these realities, progressives will acknowledge them and their implications and, if nothing else, be more strategic. The problem is that the progressives who make these claims about the electorate and their favored candidates/policy agenda almost certainly will not acknowledge that the election tested their dream and found it wanting. AOC is a perfect example. Yes, she's politically talented, though I won't call her "brilliant" as my social circles demand. How brilliant is it to undercut moderate dems in districts she could never be elected in? My long experience as a women's studies prof is relevant here. My students--and tens of thousands just like them all across the US--are learning from their English professors, their women's studies professors, their cultural anthropology professors, their ethnic studies professors, and oh so many others that no amount of data should get in the way of their "radical" belief system and that all who try to browbeat with them "facts" constitute a kind of "deep academia" of disloyalists who should be unmasked and punished. The depressing reality is that, in many disciplines, universities are steadily pumping out the kinds of young adults who, like their true compatriots on the right, would rather punish the oppressors than conform their views to data and sober analysis.
In a zoom class the day after the election, one of my students posted in the chat the claim that if Bernie had been the Dem nominee, the election would've been a landslide for the Dems. Other students clapped. I've tried before, and I'm sure I'll try again, but I know from experience that there was nothing I could have said that would have caused those students to think twice. Showing them data and analysis? You know how Fox News viewers respond to "data"? Yeah, it's like that.
Honest question: do you think the students who claimed Bernie would’ve won in a landslide changed their views since 11/4? At that time, it didn’t look good for Biden, and as someone who aligns with progressives more than centrist democrats, I was saying the same thing on that day. However, once it became clear that Biden would win, I acknowledged that going with the more moderate candidate was the better strategy. Especially after seeing the peaceful celebrations over the weekend, which I don’t think would have been so widespread had Bernie hypothetically won the election.
Hi Tim: Thanks for your comment, which encourages me to be more nuanced in my response to the article. I run something like the experiment you're suggesting often on various tenets of my students' belief system, assessing beliefs before and after students confront new information. What's changed in recent years is the intensity and consistency of many students' responses to this pedagogy when the topic is one in which they have a political and (therefore) emotional stake. I'd say that about one third of my students will respond to having a core view challenged in the way you describe, or at least with surprise and curiosity (score!). That leaves about two thirds. Those are the young adults so many of us see as driving trends that are inimical to the (former) aims of higher education.
It is really difficult when the two isolated sides believe they are advocating 'fact driven' beliefs but don't realize that both of their fact sets are selected to reinforce a dogmatic ideology that was chosen before any evidence was considered. A very well put comment, thank you.