4 ms·

The 'left' has been captured. It used to be that aristocrats without money (Grachii, Marius, Caesar) would make promises to the proletariat to gain power, and

The 'left' has been captured. It used to be that aristocrats without money (Grachii, Marius, Caesar) would make promises to the proletariat to gain power, and duly pay off their debt if/when successful. This ticked off the aristocrats with money, who now - after all these centuries - figured it out. They also make a lot of noise and promises, but, critically, not of monetary value. Just general progress, cheap ...

TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
It's more complicated than that. When I put on my tin foil hat (listen to that crinkling...) I wonder if the old redistributive working class left wasn't deliberately undermined by a push towards a more abstract, more divisive, and less politically coherent academic/intellectual left which focused on tokenism and identity politics over economic enfranchisement. It's not so much that civil rights and feminism weren't important - because they were. It's more that at some point the third-wayers pushed hard to make them more important than fundamental concerns about class and economic inequality. The latter affected much larger numbers of voters and ignoring the issues made the left much weaker as a political force. The reason I'm suspicious is because this is the line taken by some supposedly left-wing newspapers like The Guardian in the UK, and also the DNC in the US. Whatever the motivation, the political effect is always to keep economic populism off the policy table. Trump has promised to change that, and voters like that idea. But of course he won't. Given his background and connections, there is no chance at all that he's going to be a firebrand economic populist. The absolute best his voters can expect is some token payback projects. But he's mostly just going to keep using race and immigration as a misdirection from the problems caused by the establishment's economic policies.
- harrumph 10y ago
  > I wonder if the old redistributive working class left wasn't deliberately undermined by a push towards a more abstract, more divisive, and less politically coherent academic/intellectual left which focused on tokenism and identity politics over economic enfranchisement. Do not wonder: this is exactly what has happened. Maybe not intentionally, but it happened. Having their material conditions ignored is exactly why working class Obama voters walked away and gave us Cheeto Jesus. The only HRC supporters I saw active this cycle were managerialist turds who, to these voters, represent the people who talk and think like the guy on the microphone here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3ttxGMQOrY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3ttxGMQOrY
- pjc50 10y ago
  Civil rights and feminism didn't get quite so much economic pushback. Whereas any proposed change to economic organisation would encounter extremely well-funded opposition. That made it easier for a corporate-friendly version of those ideas to be promulgated (e.g. equal pay for female CEOs as male CEOs, corporate-sponsored floats at Pride). Not everyone in the movements would have been entirely on board with this kind of "selling out", but it actually helped get mainstream adoption. Would you rather your ideas were (a) totally ignored apart from occasional condemnation or (b) promoted in a watered-down version insincerely by big businesses? It's not an easy choice.
- eli_gottlieb 10y ago
  >When I put on my tin foil hat (listen to that crinkling...) I wonder if the old redistributive working class left wasn't deliberately undermined by a push towards a more abstract, more divisive, and less politically coherent academic/intellectual left which focused on tokenism and identity politics over economic enfranchisement. Tinfoil hat? That's Thomas Frank's latest book. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/01/books/review/listen-liberal-and-the-limousine-liberal.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/01/books/review/listen-libera...

TheOtherHobbes 10y ago

It's more complicated than that. When I put on my tin foil hat (listen to that crinkling...) I wonder if the old redistributive working class left wasn't deliberately undermined by a push towards a more abstract, more divisive, and less politically coherent academic/intellectual left which focused on tokenism and identity politics over economic enfranchisement. It's not so much that civil rights and feminism weren't important - because they were. It's more that at some point the third-wayers pushed hard to make them more important than fundamental concerns about class and economic inequality. The latter affected much larger numbers of voters and ignoring the issues made the left much weaker as a political force. The reason I'm suspicious is because this is the line taken by some supposedly left-wing newspapers like The Guardian in the UK, and also the DNC in the US. Whatever the motivation, the political effect is always to keep economic populism off the policy table. Trump has promised to change that, and voters like that idea. But of course he won't. Given his background and connections, there is no chance at all that he's going to be a firebrand economic populist. The absolute best his voters can expect is some token payback projects. But he's mostly just going to keep using race and immigration as a misdirection from the problems caused by the establishment's economic policies.

harrumph 10y ago
> I wonder if the old redistributive working class left wasn't deliberately undermined by a push towards a more abstract, more divisive, and less politically coherent academic/intellectual left which focused on tokenism and identity politics over economic enfranchisement. Do not wonder: this is exactly what has happened. Maybe not intentionally, but it happened. Having their material conditions ignored is exactly why working class Obama voters walked away and gave us Cheeto Jesus. The only HRC supporters I saw active this cycle were managerialist turds who, to these voters, represent the people who talk and think like the guy on the microphone here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3ttxGMQOrY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3ttxGMQOrY
pjc50 10y ago
Civil rights and feminism didn't get quite so much economic pushback. Whereas any proposed change to economic organisation would encounter extremely well-funded opposition. That made it easier for a corporate-friendly version of those ideas to be promulgated (e.g. equal pay for female CEOs as male CEOs, corporate-sponsored floats at Pride). Not everyone in the movements would have been entirely on board with this kind of "selling out", but it actually helped get mainstream adoption. Would you rather your ideas were (a) totally ignored apart from occasional condemnation or (b) promoted in a watered-down version insincerely by big businesses? It's not an easy choice.
eli_gottlieb 10y ago
>When I put on my tin foil hat (listen to that crinkling...) I wonder if the old redistributive working class left wasn't deliberately undermined by a push towards a more abstract, more divisive, and less politically coherent academic/intellectual left which focused on tokenism and identity politics over economic enfranchisement. Tinfoil hat? That's Thomas Frank's latest book. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/01/books/review/listen-liberal-and-the-limousine-liberal.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/01/books/review/listen-libera...