"I think this—and so many other reactions I’ve seen and others like Salena Zito have well documented and categorized—is largely because of one fault Democrats have. Progressives who hold to the ideal that power dynamics and persecution are to be praised and idolized find themselves on a merry-go-round of denouncement. One day, it’s woman power, and the next, TERFs are evil succubi. One day, Jews are expected to vote Democrat, and the next, Jews and Israel are the entire problem with the world."
Meanwhile we have a Missouri Senate candidate advocating for hunting members of his own party[1]. Now, to be fair to Greitens (which is more than that creep deserves), I do think that the video is in jest, but Republicans seem to be as eager and adept at shooting in a circle as Democrats, as well as rewriting their history as well. I submit that the hatred you think voters have for busybody Democrats is probably spread a bit more evenly between both parties than this being a Democratic-specific phenomenon.
Let me clarify the point. It’s one thing to go after other members of one’s own party for being insufficiently gun crazy or Trump-loving, or churchy. It’s another thing entirely to embrace large swaths of the culture one day and then demonize the same people the next day. It’s beyond simple hypocrisy to do that.
You mean like the GOP's about face on international free traders? The only slur that I see the GOP throw around these days worse than "globalist" might be "groomers" (a largely meaning-free term given how large it's been expanded to include as many political opponents as possible).
A few years back, Ted Cruz wrote a book called "One Vote Away" that argued that a number of rights we hold dear are only one Supreme Court vote away from being taken away. In one chapter, he argued that we almost lost our right to free speech because the Citizens United decision was a 5-4 decision, and had one justice voted differently, free speech would be dead in America. At the core of the case was the question of whether it was appropriate for the gov't to put limits on speech (in the form of money) of corporations and other organizations.
That book was published in 2020. Less than two short years later in 2022, we have Ron de Santis using the power of the Florida state government to go after Disney because Disney exercised its freedom of speech by publicly signalling its disapproval of the law de Santis was pushing in Florida. de Santis was all too eager to use the levers of the State to try and penalize Disney for its speech. Instead of adopting the 2020 Cruz position and condemning the Florida governor, the GOP applauded him and lined up in support (including "One Vote Away" Ted Cruz).
I agree 100% that Democrats' myopic focus on identity politics has made it difficult to determine who's on the sh*t list today (there doesn't seem to be any predicable model or principle behind it other than who's leading the race in the Oppression Olympics at any given moment), but as the GOP has also embraced its own form of identity politics, I don't see it behaving functionally different than the Democrats when it comes to turning on former allies and fellow travelers who don't line up with the day's Orthodoxy. It's just as mercurial and capricious (witness all the folks who denounced Trump on Jan. 6th and have made an about-face since then), and just as nimble at turning on a dime - principles be damned - to demonize those who are not totally on-board with the day's Sparklemotion (just ask Liz Cheney).
It's the politics of getting elected or re-elected. Whatever it takes to squeeze out that last 1% of the vote. That is largely why positions are inconsistent. Why would anyone vote for or defend a politician who is certain to disagree with one's beliefs 80% of the time? Polarization will remain a factor until a sufficient number of conservatives capitulate. Progressives never will.
Also, Democrats lost their monopoly on being the national busybodies and nanny-staters the moment Trump decided to go after California's air emission standards, and the GOP lined up behind him. And the governor of Florida suggesting that parents be investigated by the State for taking children to drag shows[1] doesn't indicate that the GOP is getting back to a "live and let live" ethos (if it actually had one in the first place).
Chris and Steve are both correct. Pair of pants have two legs. Both of you adept at approaching the subject from differing perspectives. Probably should have collaborated on a post on this subject.
If I was a bit enthusiastic in my responses, it's probably because I recently had a conversation with a family member where I wanted their take on the new "Obi Wan Kenobi" show, and discovered my relative has been boycotting Disney since the "Lightyear" kiss kicked off the latest culture war food fight (which is 100% fine), and he was convinced Disney was trying to "force" something on him. I let the comment slide in the interest of comity, but was really itching to bring up the State of Florida's reaction to Disney's political speech, especially since it was this same relative who insisted I should read the Cruz book after a discussion where I was insisting that we were NOT driving off a cliff (this was pre-Jan. 6th) and SCOTUS (even w/ RBG) was weighted in his favor. So, this has been percolating for a good part of the week for me.
I think I agree with Steve on everything else in this post other than circular firing squads being a uniquely Democratic Party problem or that Democrats are using dubious ideological propositions to alienate vast swaths of voters that they praised not shortly before.
Incidentally, I think it's a Long Term Good Thing that Latinos and Asians - who have been demonized for ages by Democrats with the Model Minority stereotypes - are drifting towards the GOP. Perhaps Democrats will learn that they need to actually craft appealing policies to attract voters instead of assuming that group identity will always do the heavy lifting for them. It'll be interesting to see how far down the GOP goes down that same road in their own special way (#MAGA because Trump's against the right people) before discovering the limits to those appeals. (I expect this will be on full display in 2023 and 2024 when it becomes evident inverse-identity politics isn't a useful tool for generating any useful or internally-consistent policy.)
So what do you think of the Obi Wan Kenobi series? I have enjoyed the first season. By and large agree with you above comments. Could generate a post just on these observations.
It's AWESOME. I really enjoyed the entire thing. People who are hung up on Moses Ingram's role have their heads up their tailpipes. Honestly, well-done Star Wars.
Moses Ingram was great and her role fixed an issue in the Skywalker Saga that's bugged me incessantly since "Revenge of the Sith". I don't know if it's in the cards or not, but I'm really hoping she shows up elsewhere in the Star Wars universe (don't want to say more for fear of spoilers, as I may have gone too far already).
Related to Steve's point on the Left's Villains of the Week, Politico has an interesting article[1] about the conflict not being a Leftists vs. Centrists, but Lumpers (folks pushing for comprehensive change) vs. Splitters (folks who believe that progress can happen on separate independent tracks):
"The fight is becoming bitter. On one side are people who believe in what can be thought of as a unified field theory of political and social change. Diverse issues, from climate change to abortion rights to racial equity, are seen as intimately interwoven, and progress on one priority will only be achieved with simultaneous progress on other fronts. On the other side are people who don’t much buy this theory — and roll their eyes impatiently at theoretical arguments of any sort if they stand in the way of practical results on the specific issues they care most urgently about."
"One way to think of the contest roiling the progressive movement is between 'lumpers' and 'splitters.' The lumpers see American society in need of a sustained and comprehensive overhaul, and are wary of people, even potential allies, who don’t share this synoptic worldview. A core assumption is a commitment to 'intersectionality' — the concept that contemporary power arrangements reflect historic and overlapping patterns of discrimination on grounds of race, class and gender and that progress on specific issues must include challenging the underlying power structure."
"The splitters prefer to take one issue at a time, and are happy to accept an ally on, say, climate change or gun control, even if that person doesn’t share their views on abortion rights or how to remedy systemic police violence against Black people. In their view the choice isn’t sweeping progress versus incremental gains. It is incremental gains versus no progress at all."
There seems to be a similar thing happening within the GOP where you could plausibly substitute "#MAGA" for "intersectionality" and see the same kinds of conflicts playing out in the Republican party.
(And I'm done threadjacking for the day. Thanks for your patience with me!)
"I think this—and so many other reactions I’ve seen and others like Salena Zito have well documented and categorized—is largely because of one fault Democrats have. Progressives who hold to the ideal that power dynamics and persecution are to be praised and idolized find themselves on a merry-go-round of denouncement. One day, it’s woman power, and the next, TERFs are evil succubi. One day, Jews are expected to vote Democrat, and the next, Jews and Israel are the entire problem with the world."
Meanwhile we have a Missouri Senate candidate advocating for hunting members of his own party[1]. Now, to be fair to Greitens (which is more than that creep deserves), I do think that the video is in jest, but Republicans seem to be as eager and adept at shooting in a circle as Democrats, as well as rewriting their history as well. I submit that the hatred you think voters have for busybody Democrats is probably spread a bit more evenly between both parties than this being a Democratic-specific phenomenon.
[1] https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2022/6/21/23177718/eric-greitens-missouri-senate-campaign-ad-rinos
Let me clarify the point. It’s one thing to go after other members of one’s own party for being insufficiently gun crazy or Trump-loving, or churchy. It’s another thing entirely to embrace large swaths of the culture one day and then demonize the same people the next day. It’s beyond simple hypocrisy to do that.
You mean like the GOP's about face on international free traders? The only slur that I see the GOP throw around these days worse than "globalist" might be "groomers" (a largely meaning-free term given how large it's been expanded to include as many political opponents as possible).
A few years back, Ted Cruz wrote a book called "One Vote Away" that argued that a number of rights we hold dear are only one Supreme Court vote away from being taken away. In one chapter, he argued that we almost lost our right to free speech because the Citizens United decision was a 5-4 decision, and had one justice voted differently, free speech would be dead in America. At the core of the case was the question of whether it was appropriate for the gov't to put limits on speech (in the form of money) of corporations and other organizations.
That book was published in 2020. Less than two short years later in 2022, we have Ron de Santis using the power of the Florida state government to go after Disney because Disney exercised its freedom of speech by publicly signalling its disapproval of the law de Santis was pushing in Florida. de Santis was all too eager to use the levers of the State to try and penalize Disney for its speech. Instead of adopting the 2020 Cruz position and condemning the Florida governor, the GOP applauded him and lined up in support (including "One Vote Away" Ted Cruz).
I agree 100% that Democrats' myopic focus on identity politics has made it difficult to determine who's on the sh*t list today (there doesn't seem to be any predicable model or principle behind it other than who's leading the race in the Oppression Olympics at any given moment), but as the GOP has also embraced its own form of identity politics, I don't see it behaving functionally different than the Democrats when it comes to turning on former allies and fellow travelers who don't line up with the day's Orthodoxy. It's just as mercurial and capricious (witness all the folks who denounced Trump on Jan. 6th and have made an about-face since then), and just as nimble at turning on a dime - principles be damned - to demonize those who are not totally on-board with the day's Sparklemotion (just ask Liz Cheney).
It's the politics of getting elected or re-elected. Whatever it takes to squeeze out that last 1% of the vote. That is largely why positions are inconsistent. Why would anyone vote for or defend a politician who is certain to disagree with one's beliefs 80% of the time? Polarization will remain a factor until a sufficient number of conservatives capitulate. Progressives never will.
Term limits might help.
Also, Democrats lost their monopoly on being the national busybodies and nanny-staters the moment Trump decided to go after California's air emission standards, and the GOP lined up behind him. And the governor of Florida suggesting that parents be investigated by the State for taking children to drag shows[1] doesn't indicate that the GOP is getting back to a "live and let live" ethos (if it actually had one in the first place).
[1] https://reason.com/2022/06/10/drag-show-ron-desantis-kids-family/
Chris and Steve are both correct. Pair of pants have two legs. Both of you adept at approaching the subject from differing perspectives. Probably should have collaborated on a post on this subject.
If I was a bit enthusiastic in my responses, it's probably because I recently had a conversation with a family member where I wanted their take on the new "Obi Wan Kenobi" show, and discovered my relative has been boycotting Disney since the "Lightyear" kiss kicked off the latest culture war food fight (which is 100% fine), and he was convinced Disney was trying to "force" something on him. I let the comment slide in the interest of comity, but was really itching to bring up the State of Florida's reaction to Disney's political speech, especially since it was this same relative who insisted I should read the Cruz book after a discussion where I was insisting that we were NOT driving off a cliff (this was pre-Jan. 6th) and SCOTUS (even w/ RBG) was weighted in his favor. So, this has been percolating for a good part of the week for me.
I think I agree with Steve on everything else in this post other than circular firing squads being a uniquely Democratic Party problem or that Democrats are using dubious ideological propositions to alienate vast swaths of voters that they praised not shortly before.
Incidentally, I think it's a Long Term Good Thing that Latinos and Asians - who have been demonized for ages by Democrats with the Model Minority stereotypes - are drifting towards the GOP. Perhaps Democrats will learn that they need to actually craft appealing policies to attract voters instead of assuming that group identity will always do the heavy lifting for them. It'll be interesting to see how far down the GOP goes down that same road in their own special way (#MAGA because Trump's against the right people) before discovering the limits to those appeals. (I expect this will be on full display in 2023 and 2024 when it becomes evident inverse-identity politics isn't a useful tool for generating any useful or internally-consistent policy.)
So what do you think of the Obi Wan Kenobi series? I have enjoyed the first season. By and large agree with you above comments. Could generate a post just on these observations.
It's AWESOME. I really enjoyed the entire thing. People who are hung up on Moses Ingram's role have their heads up their tailpipes. Honestly, well-done Star Wars.
Moses Ingram was great and her role fixed an issue in the Skywalker Saga that's bugged me incessantly since "Revenge of the Sith". I don't know if it's in the cards or not, but I'm really hoping she shows up elsewhere in the Star Wars universe (don't want to say more for fear of spoilers, as I may have gone too far already).
Related to Steve's point on the Left's Villains of the Week, Politico has an interesting article[1] about the conflict not being a Leftists vs. Centrists, but Lumpers (folks pushing for comprehensive change) vs. Splitters (folks who believe that progress can happen on separate independent tracks):
"The fight is becoming bitter. On one side are people who believe in what can be thought of as a unified field theory of political and social change. Diverse issues, from climate change to abortion rights to racial equity, are seen as intimately interwoven, and progress on one priority will only be achieved with simultaneous progress on other fronts. On the other side are people who don’t much buy this theory — and roll their eyes impatiently at theoretical arguments of any sort if they stand in the way of practical results on the specific issues they care most urgently about."
"One way to think of the contest roiling the progressive movement is between 'lumpers' and 'splitters.' The lumpers see American society in need of a sustained and comprehensive overhaul, and are wary of people, even potential allies, who don’t share this synoptic worldview. A core assumption is a commitment to 'intersectionality' — the concept that contemporary power arrangements reflect historic and overlapping patterns of discrimination on grounds of race, class and gender and that progress on specific issues must include challenging the underlying power structure."
"The splitters prefer to take one issue at a time, and are happy to accept an ally on, say, climate change or gun control, even if that person doesn’t share their views on abortion rights or how to remedy systemic police violence against Black people. In their view the choice isn’t sweeping progress versus incremental gains. It is incremental gains versus no progress at all."
There seems to be a similar thing happening within the GOP where you could plausibly substitute "#MAGA" for "intersectionality" and see the same kinds of conflicts playing out in the Republican party.
(And I'm done threadjacking for the day. Thanks for your patience with me!)
[1] https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/06/23/the-new-battles-roiling-the-left-00041627
I'm a splitter. I know lumpers, and they annoy the heck out of me...