This one probably reflected my personal feelings/ambivalence/frustration/depression/sadness as much as any that you've written. My mom asked me yesterday if I was going to watch the debate and I told her I didn't plan to as I knew it would only depress me. I used to be SO engaged in politics and now I find that I can hardly look at the headlines. Trumps success, despite the list of attributes that you articulated so well, just boggles my mind and leaves me wondering how half of the US population can see the world so differently than I do. Which makes me question everything. Which makes me fearful of the future. Which makes me withdraw from participation. Which makes me feel guilty that I'm letting those who think this is a good direction for the world to go to win...
Your post could have been written by me, except that I could never write it half as well as you did. But it also gave me some modicum of hope. Maybe all is not lost.
Great distillation of the paradox of Trump and what it tells us about where we are heading. Like you I have tuned out of hearing him talk, felt that viewing the debate would be unedifying and cringeworthy (watched ten minutes and found what I expected). And yet I keep coming back to the question of why a majority of Americans could possibly vote for him after having experienced who he is. Blue collar workers seem to be voting against their self interest and evangelicals against their moral principles. I’ve read many pieces that try to explain people’s motivation to vote for him but find the answers incomplete.
I’m interested in hearing more about your thesis. In The Righteous Mind Jonathan Haidt compares the moral pillars underlying liberal and conservative ideologies. He then demonstrates how conservatives use these moral principles to cling to past traditions (current paradigm) whereas liberals use theirs to agitate for change. I’m not yet convinced that progressives (except perhaps a small percentage) need/want to blow up the existing paradigm as much as evening the score for the winners and losers, but perhaps I’m wrong. Eager to hear more from your blog!
I enjoyed reading this, Shawn. The question about who these debates are for exactly is very interesting. It definitely feels like it's all just a spectacle.
I would characterize your list as “liberalism” or more to the point, “common sense”. Progressivism as a quote-unquote brand has been tarnished by its focus on the childish cult of identity instead of on delivering gains and returns that are universal and uplifting for all, regardless of skin color or sexual orientation. If we’re talking about well-executed and non-identity-drenched policies in the areas you mention, then yes, I agree that most have broad support.
Again, I think we simply disagree about the extent to which progressivism is "identiy-drenched." I may simply be unaware of stuff you're bothered by, or blind to it, or I perceive it differently because I'm sympathetic to some of it in ways you are not. The complaint that the left has become a cult of identity usually feels to me like a talking point, a vague grievance, without much specificity around the damage its causing. Mainly it seems that some people are annoyed to have to hear about race and gender so much. None of that represents assumptions about your own views, though this is not something I plan to focus my writings on.
RE your other point, the hostility to things you consider "liberal" that I'm calling progressive far predates the identity stuff you're reacting to, but I'll get there in subsequent writings here. I look forward to more of your well-considered counterpoints!
Your thoughts about Trump and the lifetime of psychic pain he’s inflicted on us in only 8 years resonates. I e given up asking WHY and have accepted that it IS, and it will be over at some point.
Regarding the statement, “why do progressives and progressive ideas have so much trouble breaking through and often face open hostility, despite enjoying broad appeal?” - progressives have no such broad appeal, neither for their ideas nor anything else. The last truly progressive ideas to make major traction and headway were gay rights/marriage and marijuana legalization. Today’s progressives worship at the cult of identity and have squandered any moral high ground and relevance in huge swaths of the country. MY progressivism, such that it is , is spent trying to dramatically expand the social safety net and reinstating abortion rights, but progressives today spend their time play-acting as useful idiots in support of religious theocrats and jihadists halfway around the world.
So I guess I question the statement a bit. If you’re talking about progressives of the 1950s fighting for common cause with the working class, sure. But I’m not blind to what progressivism has morphed into over the past decade, and it repels me. Like MAGA, I believe this too shall pass.
I would distinguish progressivism as a political philosophy from the kind of rhetorical / activist brand you're referring to. I don't agree with you that it's all been subsumed by a cult of identity, though that's there fore sure, and when I refer to broad appeal, I am thinking of polls that reflect public support for issues like universal healthcare, tax policies that would target the super wealthy, gun control, public schools, the environment and climate change, etc.
This one probably reflected my personal feelings/ambivalence/frustration/depression/sadness as much as any that you've written. My mom asked me yesterday if I was going to watch the debate and I told her I didn't plan to as I knew it would only depress me. I used to be SO engaged in politics and now I find that I can hardly look at the headlines. Trumps success, despite the list of attributes that you articulated so well, just boggles my mind and leaves me wondering how half of the US population can see the world so differently than I do. Which makes me question everything. Which makes me fearful of the future. Which makes me withdraw from participation. Which makes me feel guilty that I'm letting those who think this is a good direction for the world to go to win...
Your post could have been written by me, except that I could never write it half as well as you did. But it also gave me some modicum of hope. Maybe all is not lost.
Great distillation of the paradox of Trump and what it tells us about where we are heading. Like you I have tuned out of hearing him talk, felt that viewing the debate would be unedifying and cringeworthy (watched ten minutes and found what I expected). And yet I keep coming back to the question of why a majority of Americans could possibly vote for him after having experienced who he is. Blue collar workers seem to be voting against their self interest and evangelicals against their moral principles. I’ve read many pieces that try to explain people’s motivation to vote for him but find the answers incomplete.
I’m interested in hearing more about your thesis. In The Righteous Mind Jonathan Haidt compares the moral pillars underlying liberal and conservative ideologies. He then demonstrates how conservatives use these moral principles to cling to past traditions (current paradigm) whereas liberals use theirs to agitate for change. I’m not yet convinced that progressives (except perhaps a small percentage) need/want to blow up the existing paradigm as much as evening the score for the winners and losers, but perhaps I’m wrong. Eager to hear more from your blog!
I enjoyed reading this, Shawn. The question about who these debates are for exactly is very interesting. It definitely feels like it's all just a spectacle.
Enjoyed this, though I had some differences of opinion with your definitions in paragraph 5. Seems rather didactic to me.
I would characterize your list as “liberalism” or more to the point, “common sense”. Progressivism as a quote-unquote brand has been tarnished by its focus on the childish cult of identity instead of on delivering gains and returns that are universal and uplifting for all, regardless of skin color or sexual orientation. If we’re talking about well-executed and non-identity-drenched policies in the areas you mention, then yes, I agree that most have broad support.
Again, I think we simply disagree about the extent to which progressivism is "identiy-drenched." I may simply be unaware of stuff you're bothered by, or blind to it, or I perceive it differently because I'm sympathetic to some of it in ways you are not. The complaint that the left has become a cult of identity usually feels to me like a talking point, a vague grievance, without much specificity around the damage its causing. Mainly it seems that some people are annoyed to have to hear about race and gender so much. None of that represents assumptions about your own views, though this is not something I plan to focus my writings on.
RE your other point, the hostility to things you consider "liberal" that I'm calling progressive far predates the identity stuff you're reacting to, but I'll get there in subsequent writings here. I look forward to more of your well-considered counterpoints!
Your thoughts about Trump and the lifetime of psychic pain he’s inflicted on us in only 8 years resonates. I e given up asking WHY and have accepted that it IS, and it will be over at some point.
Regarding the statement, “why do progressives and progressive ideas have so much trouble breaking through and often face open hostility, despite enjoying broad appeal?” - progressives have no such broad appeal, neither for their ideas nor anything else. The last truly progressive ideas to make major traction and headway were gay rights/marriage and marijuana legalization. Today’s progressives worship at the cult of identity and have squandered any moral high ground and relevance in huge swaths of the country. MY progressivism, such that it is , is spent trying to dramatically expand the social safety net and reinstating abortion rights, but progressives today spend their time play-acting as useful idiots in support of religious theocrats and jihadists halfway around the world.
So I guess I question the statement a bit. If you’re talking about progressives of the 1950s fighting for common cause with the working class, sure. But I’m not blind to what progressivism has morphed into over the past decade, and it repels me. Like MAGA, I believe this too shall pass.
I would distinguish progressivism as a political philosophy from the kind of rhetorical / activist brand you're referring to. I don't agree with you that it's all been subsumed by a cult of identity, though that's there fore sure, and when I refer to broad appeal, I am thinking of polls that reflect public support for issues like universal healthcare, tax policies that would target the super wealthy, gun control, public schools, the environment and climate change, etc.