The Democrats are in a bizarre hypnotic trance where their leadership seems incapable of resisting even the craziest demands of their left wing. At some point they will remember that elections are about winning the vote.
Craziest demands? I agree with the author that the culture wars are a distraction and annoying as F**K but the real issues - lower prescription drugs, subsidies for daycare, paying for dental with Medicare, putting green energy front and center - these cannot be conflated with the rest of what the dems are doing - the left is fighting for these issues and it is about time. Every 'everyday' American (I hate that term) will benefit from this bill and it needs to pass. This isn't about being too left or progressive. These are sorely needed changes.
Dems need to give up and let local control take over the local schools and work on the real issues.
The left pushes a variety of economic issues. I disagree with many of their positions, but take these views seriously and support some of them. The rich/poor gap in the US is large and growing, and this seems bad. What drives me nuts is linking these legitimate issues to what I consider bizarre and alienating cultural signifiers whose effect is to make the entire Democratic brand deeply toxic to a large fraction of the electorate.
Here's the thing, tho. Democrats ARE the party of the college-educated elites. Those that run the country. And these have fundamental BELIEF they SHOULD have contempt and condescension towards those under them, right?
The Democrats have maxed their vote harvesting machine ... And and impressive machine it is (75% of *mail in* ballots went to McAuliffe). Now they need to start winning back actual humans who show up at polls with IDs and vote. The other issue is Dems cannot veer from radical politics because the activists and harvesters that do the street work are paid for and motivated by the extremists in the party. I don't expect anything but double down from the Dems.
While I agree with this, I think it means trouble for the democrats. Identity and equity aren't policy preferences to them the way that something like carbon credits might be. Instead, identity and equity are moral issues. To crib from John McWhorter, asking democrats to lighten up on identity and equity would be like asking them to accept that pedophiles just have different opinions.
Losing elections isn't enough to do it. In their minds, they're fighting evils like racism. You don't just stop fighting evil because you're losing.
God willing, this isn't all Democrats. Those of us with some sense have to take some charge. It is interesting, by the way, that in uber progressive Seattle, three radical candidates (for mayor, City Council, City Attorney) apparently lost.
That's interesting. My Bing feed alerted me this morning to every progressive victory in the country (and McAuliffe's loss was featured several rows down from the top), but I was pretty sure that wasn't the whole story.
You're right, The Woken view their cause as moral and thus won't back down. That's exactly why forums like Persuasion need to make the case that they're wrong. Not just impolitic, but wrong on both moral and empirical grounds. Their case of systemic racism/sexism/genderism can be easily disproved. And the social results of their hateful ideology is purely destructive. They build nothing but resentment.
"Of course, Democrats shouldn’t stop fighting for justice or cultural progress..."
I realize that Persuasion has a progressive sensibility, but every once in a while you should consider whether what you're fighting for is really justice or progress.
I like the results (especially Herring losing!), but let’s be real - Virginia is BLUE! So many people have moved to VA from failed States like New Jersey, PA, NY and IL and settled in Eastern Loudoun county and Fairfax county.
Youngkin didn’t win - McAuliffe set himself on fire. He honestly believes and stated as much that parents should have NO SAY in their child’s education…
That was played on an endless loop in VA..
It doesn’t take a genius to see what happened.
Bottom line: don’t read too much into the VA results. I really wish we could but I don’t think that’s realistic…
From my vantage point in a dark Blue suburb, the angst against the brand of identity politics espoused by the democratic party is real and growing. This is from people who organized against Trump, proudly displayed Black Lives Matter yard signs last year, and are reliable blue tribe members in many ways. The push back is quiet, but really there and growing, transcending "bad" candidates. "Present discrimination to remedy past discrimination" WILL drive voter behavior. Exhibit A is Virginia, more to come.
My point is simply that occasionally R’s win in blue states. It doesn’t represent a sea change.
Let’s just hope the voting rules don’t change to what California has - it will be a permanent one party state. Say so long to democracy…it will just be an illusion…
Murphy is almost Biden like in his dazed and confused approach to governing. Murphy should be losing by 10%. The fact he'll likely win in a squeeker is a testament to New Jersey corruption.
I'm not sure if the Democratic Party is ready to listen. We are primarily a two-party system but parties change over time and balance is often created by reshaping each party's focus as perspectives naturally change. However, when things get so out of balance the shifts are more like strong, short earthquakes and right now, there is a huge rupture as we can't talk or connect with each other. After being a lifelong member, I left the Democratic party and it was liberating. I look for intellectual discourse where I can find it and that has sent me on a journey of discovery, one of which led me to Persuasion.
While losing elections isn't exactly the goal of political parties, perhaps there is a silver lining to the fiasco in Virginia.
The Democratic congress has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to pass infrastructure and social spending laws but has been mired in bickering. It's so simple: pass the infra bill; get the economy moving again; have a fighting chance at the mid-terms. But no, progressives and centrists can't agree on anything and risk going down in flames next year.
If losing an eminently winnable election isn't enough to shock the Democrats out of their preoccupations, nothing will.
The way you described McAuliffe's website makes it sound a lot like the governor had nothing to do with it, but instead a gang of young operatives were sent down from 430 S Capitol Street SE to "help out" with messaging. It is difficult for me to believe the governor of a state like Virginia could be so tone deaf and clueless.
But then this is the guy who thought he could secure victory by campaigning alongside Randi Weingarten, so maybe he really is that tone deaf and clueless.
The argument over what is taught in schools was critical. Democrats need to distance themselves from "Critical Race Theory" which, in fact, is not taught in schools and will never be. It is a sophisticated social science theory which is appropriate for juniors and seniors in college as well as graduate school.
I'm quite sure the argument over school curricula was critical. I'm also quite sure that those railing against "critical race theory" don't know what it is. Further, they don't care what the academic definition is. They care that there are types of teaching (things like having students identify their oppressor / oppressed identities) which they find objectionable, offensive, or harmful to their children. I suspect these are not terribly widespread teaching methods, but they most definitely exist and it's not hard to find examples.
What democrats should distance themselves from is those very practices. However, they seem unwilling or unable to do so. Every time they say "CRT is not taught in schools" or otherwise engage this argument on the level of definitional pedantry, another moderate votes Republican in disgust or despair.
I'm sorry. But anyone saying CRT isn't taught in schools is (in term I recently learned) creating a strawman argument. I'll give You an example: Kendi was asked about being the Father of CRT. His reply, I was BORN about the time CRT was created.
Weeel, segregating kids for ANY reason by the COLOR OF THEIR SKIN? Goes on repeatedly. This didn't just start recently. I didn't save the link, but talk amongst CRTers led to this comment: "I've BEEN teaching ANTI-US History for ten YEARS." (emphasis added) 1619 Project comes under the heading of CRT. See?
Funny thing I saw on a Substack:
Antiracism = Racism
Racism = Woke
Author said he should sell T-shirts.
I would add that all that which goes under the broad umbrella of CRT leads one to:
SJW = INjustice. And this is one-a the PRIMARY beliefs of Biden, because he showed he was woke in his Executive Order from the first day in office, Jan 20.
I hope you are wrong and we can enable schools to teach the basic history of slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, etc. not a social science theory. If you are right we are doomed to a Republican majority in most elections. Look at the results in Virginia.
I've been a solid Dem since McGovern in '72. (Okay, there was Dubya, but I'll defend that only if NECESSARY.)
I'm not at ALL sure what You mean by social science theory. That's what the 1619 Project is. Actually history SCHOLARS say (in my own words) it's just a bunch-a made up stuff to make America look bad and Blacks to look good. NHJ said HERSELF, "It's not history. It's an origin story." Funny THAT. It's being TAUGHT as history.
You might wanna look into the actual TEXT of the laws banning CRT in the red states. Ones I read say TO teach history of slavery (tho not specifically saying Jim Crow, IIRC). The laws prohibit kids from being MADE to feel bad about being EITHER "oppressors" or, worse yet, "oppressed." When based on immutable characteristics, like skin color or sex. See?
WAS Dem. Never interested in politics at ALL until start of year. What do I FIND? Dems the party of the elites who look down on, basically, all the rest-a us. Now? DEAD CENTER. I'll NEVER vote for Biden because he's gone woke. NEVER vote for Trump because he has NO CHARACTER. (I know... Old-fashioned concept. Ah well...) If it's between those two, I'll sit it out.
I dunno how many people understand how CRT is gonna doom a whole generation of kids to mediocrity. Not that, in the 21st Century, we really NEED anybody who can deal with white racist ideas like merit, showing up on time, MATH! &c., &c. So it goes.
A social science theory is a complex review of facts which reaches a systematic conclusion. It is suitable for teaching at the college level. Yes, CRT is being extended to elements like "woke" simple minded anti- meritocracy and feel bad because you are an oppressor. These elements have been added to the CRT theory, unfortunately. And Democrats do have a problem with"elitism" but ironically their "elitism" is based on a misuse of the term "meritocracy"; they think that they are where they are because of their merit. Yes, a few are, but most are there because of luck, family background, being in the right place at the right time. For example a families wealth today is dependent on their parents or grandparents ability to buy a house in the right place and see their primary investment grow and pass on that wealth to their children. In any case I am so sorry that you are unwilling to vote against Trump(ers) with a vote for Biden. I hope you will change your mind.
I DID vote against Trump. But then I saw what BIDEN was up to. When it comes to the lesser of two evils, there was so little, IMV, as to make no never mind. Actually told Younger-Sister that I'd never vote for a DEMOCRAT again, based on Biden going full-on woke.
YES, I read the Tyranny of Merit. A similar argument made in the 1950's was in The Rise of the Meritocracy. And I get mad at one central criticism of racism being the inability of Black people with Merit to rise in the current system (see Caste by Wilkerson). All people should be able to have decent jobs with dignity and good wages!
Certainly SOME college-educated Democrats, not in any sense truly democrats, believe they are entitled to govern
FDR, Groton and Harvard, did not look down on people. I wish some recent Presidents and candidates for that high office would read his “garden hose” speech about Lend Lease
Without least hint of condescension, in words any six year old could understand
I've been sitting here for about 12 hours, and I'm plumb dense. What is "Groton and Harvard?" I've got three links to the garden hose speech, but will hafta to look at them tomorrow.
The Democrats are in a bizarre hypnotic trance where their leadership seems incapable of resisting even the craziest demands of their left wing. At some point they will remember that elections are about winning the vote.
Craziest demands? I agree with the author that the culture wars are a distraction and annoying as F**K but the real issues - lower prescription drugs, subsidies for daycare, paying for dental with Medicare, putting green energy front and center - these cannot be conflated with the rest of what the dems are doing - the left is fighting for these issues and it is about time. Every 'everyday' American (I hate that term) will benefit from this bill and it needs to pass. This isn't about being too left or progressive. These are sorely needed changes.
Dems need to give up and let local control take over the local schools and work on the real issues.
The left pushes a variety of economic issues. I disagree with many of their positions, but take these views seriously and support some of them. The rich/poor gap in the US is large and growing, and this seems bad. What drives me nuts is linking these legitimate issues to what I consider bizarre and alienating cultural signifiers whose effect is to make the entire Democratic brand deeply toxic to a large fraction of the electorate.
Zactly!
Yes, yes, and yes again !
Democrats cannot be the party of contempt for and condescension to our “deplorable “ fellow citizens
Here's the thing, tho. Democrats ARE the party of the college-educated elites. Those that run the country. And these have fundamental BELIEF they SHOULD have contempt and condescension towards those under them, right?
The Democrats have maxed their vote harvesting machine ... And and impressive machine it is (75% of *mail in* ballots went to McAuliffe). Now they need to start winning back actual humans who show up at polls with IDs and vote. The other issue is Dems cannot veer from radical politics because the activists and harvesters that do the street work are paid for and motivated by the extremists in the party. I don't expect anything but double down from the Dems.
While I agree with this, I think it means trouble for the democrats. Identity and equity aren't policy preferences to them the way that something like carbon credits might be. Instead, identity and equity are moral issues. To crib from John McWhorter, asking democrats to lighten up on identity and equity would be like asking them to accept that pedophiles just have different opinions.
Losing elections isn't enough to do it. In their minds, they're fighting evils like racism. You don't just stop fighting evil because you're losing.
They might be moral issues, but all they do with them is engage in signalling, nothing concrete, so they can't be very important to them.
God willing, this isn't all Democrats. Those of us with some sense have to take some charge. It is interesting, by the way, that in uber progressive Seattle, three radical candidates (for mayor, City Council, City Attorney) apparently lost.
I helped vote down the progressives even though I'm center-left. I hope Dems realize they are playing with fire.
Exact same with me. One of the anti-Oliver mailers was perfect--it showed her tweets saying we needed to defund the police.
That's interesting. My Bing feed alerted me this morning to every progressive victory in the country (and McAuliffe's loss was featured several rows down from the top), but I was pretty sure that wasn't the whole story.
You're right, The Woken view their cause as moral and thus won't back down. That's exactly why forums like Persuasion need to make the case that they're wrong. Not just impolitic, but wrong on both moral and empirical grounds. Their case of systemic racism/sexism/genderism can be easily disproved. And the social results of their hateful ideology is purely destructive. They build nothing but resentment.
"Of course, Democrats shouldn’t stop fighting for justice or cultural progress..."
I realize that Persuasion has a progressive sensibility, but every once in a while you should consider whether what you're fighting for is really justice or progress.
I like the results (especially Herring losing!), but let’s be real - Virginia is BLUE! So many people have moved to VA from failed States like New Jersey, PA, NY and IL and settled in Eastern Loudoun county and Fairfax county.
Youngkin didn’t win - McAuliffe set himself on fire. He honestly believes and stated as much that parents should have NO SAY in their child’s education…
That was played on an endless loop in VA..
It doesn’t take a genius to see what happened.
Bottom line: don’t read too much into the VA results. I really wish we could but I don’t think that’s realistic…
From my vantage point in a dark Blue suburb, the angst against the brand of identity politics espoused by the democratic party is real and growing. This is from people who organized against Trump, proudly displayed Black Lives Matter yard signs last year, and are reliable blue tribe members in many ways. The push back is quiet, but really there and growing, transcending "bad" candidates. "Present discrimination to remedy past discrimination" WILL drive voter behavior. Exhibit A is Virginia, more to come.
I dunno, Heime, Ciattarelli and Murphy are neck-and-neck in New Jersey. Isn't that unusual?
Chris Christie was NJ Governor for two terms.
My point is simply that occasionally R’s win in blue states. It doesn’t represent a sea change.
Let’s just hope the voting rules don’t change to what California has - it will be a permanent one party state. Say so long to democracy…it will just be an illusion…
Murphy is almost Biden like in his dazed and confused approach to governing. Murphy should be losing by 10%. The fact he'll likely win in a squeeker is a testament to New Jersey corruption.
I'm not sure if the Democratic Party is ready to listen. We are primarily a two-party system but parties change over time and balance is often created by reshaping each party's focus as perspectives naturally change. However, when things get so out of balance the shifts are more like strong, short earthquakes and right now, there is a huge rupture as we can't talk or connect with each other. After being a lifelong member, I left the Democratic party and it was liberating. I look for intellectual discourse where I can find it and that has sent me on a journey of discovery, one of which led me to Persuasion.
Same here.
While losing elections isn't exactly the goal of political parties, perhaps there is a silver lining to the fiasco in Virginia.
The Democratic congress has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to pass infrastructure and social spending laws but has been mired in bickering. It's so simple: pass the infra bill; get the economy moving again; have a fighting chance at the mid-terms. But no, progressives and centrists can't agree on anything and risk going down in flames next year.
If losing an eminently winnable election isn't enough to shock the Democrats out of their preoccupations, nothing will.
The way you described McAuliffe's website makes it sound a lot like the governor had nothing to do with it, but instead a gang of young operatives were sent down from 430 S Capitol Street SE to "help out" with messaging. It is difficult for me to believe the governor of a state like Virginia could be so tone deaf and clueless.
But then this is the guy who thought he could secure victory by campaigning alongside Randi Weingarten, so maybe he really is that tone deaf and clueless.
Dear JT
You are surely not dense
I am perhaps too terse
Groton and Harvard are, respectively, the school and college where FDR was educated. Deeply patrician in his day
And one thinks too of the jolly old patriots in the House of Lords. As one noble peer said of his Chamber: “No damned nonsense about merit”
Ooops. TYTY. No, not too terse. My niece went to Harvard, but I'd never heard-a the colleges there. TY again. :)
Haha! SEE. Pure dense. Groton SCHOOL. Boarding school in MA, I thin' it was.
I heard-a this Harvard guy. But not Monsieur Groton. I'll hafta read some of his articles. Is he a YouTuber?
The argument over what is taught in schools was critical. Democrats need to distance themselves from "Critical Race Theory" which, in fact, is not taught in schools and will never be. It is a sophisticated social science theory which is appropriate for juniors and seniors in college as well as graduate school.
I'm quite sure the argument over school curricula was critical. I'm also quite sure that those railing against "critical race theory" don't know what it is. Further, they don't care what the academic definition is. They care that there are types of teaching (things like having students identify their oppressor / oppressed identities) which they find objectionable, offensive, or harmful to their children. I suspect these are not terribly widespread teaching methods, but they most definitely exist and it's not hard to find examples.
What democrats should distance themselves from is those very practices. However, they seem unwilling or unable to do so. Every time they say "CRT is not taught in schools" or otherwise engage this argument on the level of definitional pedantry, another moderate votes Republican in disgust or despair.
I'm sorry. But anyone saying CRT isn't taught in schools is (in term I recently learned) creating a strawman argument. I'll give You an example: Kendi was asked about being the Father of CRT. His reply, I was BORN about the time CRT was created.
Weeel, segregating kids for ANY reason by the COLOR OF THEIR SKIN? Goes on repeatedly. This didn't just start recently. I didn't save the link, but talk amongst CRTers led to this comment: "I've BEEN teaching ANTI-US History for ten YEARS." (emphasis added) 1619 Project comes under the heading of CRT. See?
Funny thing I saw on a Substack:
Antiracism = Racism
Racism = Woke
Author said he should sell T-shirts.
I would add that all that which goes under the broad umbrella of CRT leads one to:
SJW = INjustice. And this is one-a the PRIMARY beliefs of Biden, because he showed he was woke in his Executive Order from the first day in office, Jan 20.
I hope you are wrong and we can enable schools to teach the basic history of slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, etc. not a social science theory. If you are right we are doomed to a Republican majority in most elections. Look at the results in Virginia.
I've been a solid Dem since McGovern in '72. (Okay, there was Dubya, but I'll defend that only if NECESSARY.)
I'm not at ALL sure what You mean by social science theory. That's what the 1619 Project is. Actually history SCHOLARS say (in my own words) it's just a bunch-a made up stuff to make America look bad and Blacks to look good. NHJ said HERSELF, "It's not history. It's an origin story." Funny THAT. It's being TAUGHT as history.
You might wanna look into the actual TEXT of the laws banning CRT in the red states. Ones I read say TO teach history of slavery (tho not specifically saying Jim Crow, IIRC). The laws prohibit kids from being MADE to feel bad about being EITHER "oppressors" or, worse yet, "oppressed." When based on immutable characteristics, like skin color or sex. See?
WAS Dem. Never interested in politics at ALL until start of year. What do I FIND? Dems the party of the elites who look down on, basically, all the rest-a us. Now? DEAD CENTER. I'll NEVER vote for Biden because he's gone woke. NEVER vote for Trump because he has NO CHARACTER. (I know... Old-fashioned concept. Ah well...) If it's between those two, I'll sit it out.
Another CORE BELIEF of CRT:
https://twitter.com/sullydish/status/1458090427551297537
I dunno how many people understand how CRT is gonna doom a whole generation of kids to mediocrity. Not that, in the 21st Century, we really NEED anybody who can deal with white racist ideas like merit, showing up on time, MATH! &c., &c. So it goes.
A social science theory is a complex review of facts which reaches a systematic conclusion. It is suitable for teaching at the college level. Yes, CRT is being extended to elements like "woke" simple minded anti- meritocracy and feel bad because you are an oppressor. These elements have been added to the CRT theory, unfortunately. And Democrats do have a problem with"elitism" but ironically their "elitism" is based on a misuse of the term "meritocracy"; they think that they are where they are because of their merit. Yes, a few are, but most are there because of luck, family background, being in the right place at the right time. For example a families wealth today is dependent on their parents or grandparents ability to buy a house in the right place and see their primary investment grow and pass on that wealth to their children. In any case I am so sorry that you are unwilling to vote against Trump(ers) with a vote for Biden. I hope you will change your mind.
Did You read "The Tyranny of Merit: What’s Become of the Common Good?" by any chance, M. Bould? https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/50364458-the-tyranny-of-merit I did, and it confirms Your views.
I DID vote against Trump. But then I saw what BIDEN was up to. When it comes to the lesser of two evils, there was so little, IMV, as to make no never mind. Actually told Younger-Sister that I'd never vote for a DEMOCRAT again, based on Biden going full-on woke.
YES, I read the Tyranny of Merit. A similar argument made in the 1950's was in The Rise of the Meritocracy. And I get mad at one central criticism of racism being the inability of Black people with Merit to rise in the current system (see Caste by Wilkerson). All people should be able to have decent jobs with dignity and good wages!
I do not agree with JT entirely
Certainly SOME college-educated Democrats, not in any sense truly democrats, believe they are entitled to govern
FDR, Groton and Harvard, did not look down on people. I wish some recent Presidents and candidates for that high office would read his “garden hose” speech about Lend Lease
Without least hint of condescension, in words any six year old could understand
I read this: http://docs.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/ODLLPC2.HTML I assume that's what You meant, M. Auspitz. Found this short one interesting: https://www.historycentral.com/FDR/FDR_Lendlease.html
Interesting, as History wasn't most knowledgeable subject for me. Found a whole gov SITE which was interesting. Mebbe look into more, later. https://edsitement.neh.gov/lesson-plans/lesson-4-fdr-and-lend-lease-act
TYTY for education. :)
I've been sitting here for about 12 hours, and I'm plumb dense. What is "Groton and Harvard?" I've got three links to the garden hose speech, but will hafta to look at them tomorrow.
Oh? Mebbe I should-a said WHO are Groton, and Harvard?