The recriminations on the left continue, this article focuses on "divide and conquer" not working as well as they hoped.
"But how should this diversity shape our politics? The standard liberal answer for nearly a generation now has been that we should become aware of and “celebrate” our differences. Which is a splendid principle of moral pedagogy — but disastrous as a foundation for democratic politics in our ideological age. In recent years American liberalism has slipped into a kind of moral panic about racial, gender and sexual identity that has distorted liberalism’s message and prevented it from becoming a unifying force capable of governing.""Distorted liberalism's message"? I searched for any sense of what that message was supposed to be, and I believe I found the authors view here:
"Class, war, the economy and the common good". We've come a long way from "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness (purpose)". The "pursuit of happiness" is a HUGE mistake ... happiness is a SIDE EFFECT of doing what you were meant to do! I HIGHLY recommend Dennis Praeger's book, "Happiness Is A Serious Problem" on this topic.
By the time they reach college many assume that diversity discourse exhausts political discourse, and have shockingly little to say about such perennial questions as class, war, the economy and the common good.
The column is longer than it needs to be. It is human nature to want to be "moral" (or at least more moral than the next guy), and the main "morality" that the left thought they discovered was diversity -- feminists, blacks, hispanics, muslims, gays and most recently, the 58 genders of Facebook, became the heroes, replacing the founding fathers, religious saints, the successful, etc.
The basic liberal argument is "more free stuff" -- Bernie was certainly on that theme, and had Hillary and the DNC not cooked the books, he might well have beat her using the old standard lefty theme. Maybe not -- the last big dump of "free stuff", BOcare had shown itself to be VERY expensive to the us poor schmucks that had to PAY for the 20 million who got the BOcare for "free".
Given the number of people that I've personally been made aware of that are as MAD AS HELL that their insurance costs went up by thousands of dollars a year due to BOcare, I'd guess that for the 20 million votes BO bought with BOcare, he probably lost 20 million at least in people that had to pay dearly to purchase those votes.
BOcare broke one of the BIG Democrat rules -- rob from the UPPER quintile! Convince the bottom 4 quintiles that they really can get lots of free stuff and SOMEONE ELSE will pay. It's ok to try to make that sound as "moral" as you can ... "It's not FAIR that those people have all that money, so taking it at gunpoint is very "moral""-- but you don't want to get too detailed about that sort of moral posturing.
The nice thing about fake focus group "morality" is that you can change it with a memo -- the bad thing is that sometimes people catch on that it is just a bit shallow.
Probably better to return to the old standards of FREE STUFF, envy and OTHERS being responsible for everything bad / perceived inadequacies of the Democrat chosen group. Class warfare and envy are the staples of "liberalism" for a very good reason -- they work!
'via Blog this'