3 ms·

>Perhaps most troubling of all, our democracy seems to be teetering on the brink of crisis—a crisis rooted in a fundamental contest between two opposing visions

>Perhaps most troubling of all, our democracy seems to be teetering on the brink of crisis—a crisis rooted in a fundamental contest between two opposing visions of what America is and what it should be; a crisis that has left the body politic divided, angry, and mistrustful, Put your finger on the Median republican line starting in 1994: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charts-americas-political-divide-1994-2017/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charts-americas-political-d... In 2004 the median republican moved left of 1994. However, in 2017 only 1 line has really changed position. Now place your finger on 1994 Democrat. Their line has only moved left. Political divide is occurring almost entirely on the Democrat spectrum. The divide started between 2004 and 2011 according to the graphs. The explanation is quite simple. Obama's presidency in 2009. That makes this article quite interesting as it was written by the source of the divide. >This contest is not new, of course. In many ways, it has defined the American experience. It’s embedded in founding documents that could simultaneously proclaim all men equal and yet count a slave as three-fifths of a man. The "first black president" was going to have identity politics problem. Yet here he is a sentence after asserting race. The left-wing then is very quick to call Trump a white supremacist and racist. Put Trump aside, he's done. >I don’t know. What I can say for certain is that I’m not yet ready to abandon the possibility of America—not just for the sake of future generations of Americans but for all of humankind. Now put that in the above concern. It's the democrats who are dividing the USA. It's the identity politics of Obama that caused the schism. To heal the divide you have to identify the above problem and find the fix. However, one thing is for sure. During a political divide like this, the 2 sides refuse to talk to each other and often make decisions that will only exacerbate the problem.

dragonwriter 6y ago
> Put your finger on the Median republican line starting in 1994: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charts-americas-political-d https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charts-americas-political-d... Thee problem with that is that several of the questions that make it up are assessments of current conditions, not pure ideology. If (as is, in fact, the case) the underlying facts changed away from Democrats preferences over the studied time on those issues, Democrats with constant preferences would appear to move left (and, conversely, an apparently stationary position on those issues# would represent a rightward shift in preferences.) Conversely, see: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/10/31/the-republican-party-has-lurched-towards-populism-and-illiberalism https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/10/31/the-repu...
- sleepysysadmin 6y ago
  >Thee problem with that is that several of the questions that make it up are assessments of current conditions, not pure ideology. Common problem with political compass type verification. In fact becomes even more complicated when there's more than 2 political parties in an election system. >If (as is, in fact, the case) the underlying facts changed away from Democrats preferences over the studied time on those issues, Democrats with constant preferences would appear to move left (and, conversely, an apparently stationary position on those issues# would represent a rightward shift in preferences.) For sure, we can't really deny the political divide. You can't deny when it started to happen. >Conversely, see: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/10/31/the-repu https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/10/31/the-repu... That is certainly a measurement. I don't believe that is the only factor in play. If that link wasn't paywalled and I could go into the depth of the evaluation. I would best that this has far more to do with negative rights and positive rights. Trump I would suspect is a classical liberal. The problem is that 'liberalism' has been usurped by the positive rights crowd and now illiberalism is where classical liberals are fighting against positive rights. Meanwhile on the Democrat far left, folks like AOC are pushing for extreme positive rights. Overall though I feel like we are side skirting the actual concern. If the identity politics of Obama created the political schism we are seeing. The road to fixing the schism will have to come from the democrats. Obama misplayed his 2 terms in office and increased the divide greatly. The perception of election fraud is only going to force the republicans to the right. Increasing divide.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > Trump I would suspect is a classical liberal. Trump I would suspect has nothing resembling a coherent political philosophy and couldn't understand classical liberalism, and he's certainly, of recent prominent politiciana of either party, the one that least often cites and most often explicitly dismisses norms of classical liberalism; the centrist (relatively) wings of both major American parties are grounded in classical liberalism (which is why, when those wings were dominant in both parties, we had the brief neoliberal consensus period), their peripheries are more diverse in major influences.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> Put your finger on the Median republican line starting in 1994: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charts-americas-political-d https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charts-americas-political-d... Thee problem with that is that several of the questions that make it up are assessments of current conditions, not pure ideology. If (as is, in fact, the case) the underlying facts changed away from Democrats preferences over the studied time on those issues, Democrats with constant preferences would appear to move left (and, conversely, an apparently stationary position on those issues# would represent a rightward shift in preferences.) Conversely, see: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/10/31/the-republican-party-has-lurched-towards-populism-and-illiberalism https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/10/31/the-repu...

sleepysysadmin 6y ago
>Thee problem with that is that several of the questions that make it up are assessments of current conditions, not pure ideology. Common problem with political compass type verification. In fact becomes even more complicated when there's more than 2 political parties in an election system. >If (as is, in fact, the case) the underlying facts changed away from Democrats preferences over the studied time on those issues, Democrats with constant preferences would appear to move left (and, conversely, an apparently stationary position on those issues# would represent a rightward shift in preferences.) For sure, we can't really deny the political divide. You can't deny when it started to happen. >Conversely, see: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/10/31/the-repu https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/10/31/the-repu... That is certainly a measurement. I don't believe that is the only factor in play. If that link wasn't paywalled and I could go into the depth of the evaluation. I would best that this has far more to do with negative rights and positive rights. Trump I would suspect is a classical liberal. The problem is that 'liberalism' has been usurped by the positive rights crowd and now illiberalism is where classical liberals are fighting against positive rights. Meanwhile on the Democrat far left, folks like AOC are pushing for extreme positive rights. Overall though I feel like we are side skirting the actual concern. If the identity politics of Obama created the political schism we are seeing. The road to fixing the schism will have to come from the democrats. Obama misplayed his 2 terms in office and increased the divide greatly. The perception of election fraud is only going to force the republicans to the right. Increasing divide.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > Trump I would suspect is a classical liberal. Trump I would suspect has nothing resembling a coherent political philosophy and couldn't understand classical liberalism, and he's certainly, of recent prominent politiciana of either party, the one that least often cites and most often explicitly dismisses norms of classical liberalism; the centrist (relatively) wings of both major American parties are grounded in classical liberalism (which is why, when those wings were dominant in both parties, we had the brief neoliberal consensus period), their peripheries are more diverse in major influences.