3 ms·

The left needs to stop giving the right a cudgel with which to beat them every election. It's a cudgel of culture-war memes and badvocate tik-toks that resonate

The left needs to stop giving the right a cudgel with which to beat them every election. It's a cudgel of culture-war memes and badvocate tik-toks that resonates with voters more than corruption, autocracy, debt, wars, and the dismantling of our democracy. Meanwhile the DNC gerontocracy hires an army of feckless corpo-humanoid consultants to issue press releases listing all the people Dems fight for - a list that happens to leave out men and white people. It's fine though. It's fine.

mullingitover 14d ago
> listing all the people Dems fight for - a list that happens to leave out men and white people. Unions: famously devoid of men and white people. Maybe you mean they don't specifically put men and white people at the top of their hierarchy?
- wallst07 14d ago
  Here we see a small glimpse into why Democrats can't win.
  - mullingitover 14d ago
    Four years ago democrats were in control of the White House and both houses of Congress, and it took economic calamity, high inflation and gas prices, to break that (the same thing that's about to happen to republicans). Voters aren't that deep. For better or worse, no matter how badly partisans wish them to, identity politics don't matter nearly as much as basic economic issues.
- simpaticoder 13d ago
  I mean what I wrote: that the list does not include men or white people. It's not that they're at the top, they aren't on the list. To elucidate more my own 90's era influenced view, is that a list of identities is..."silly" comes to mind but isn't strong enough. "Stupid" is perhaps accurate, but lacks erudition. Perhaps "self-sabotaging" is best, as it reflects my understanding of corpo-politics as a cynical, amoral enterprise that has one goal: to win. It is a sad irony that perhaps this is an example of WHY such an enterprise cannot and perhaps should not attempt any big moral moves. It will always be ham-handed and cause harm. Take the overt anti-male attitude of the left. That immediately alienates 50% of the population. Full stop. This is not just white men, but black men, Asian men, Latin men. It's all men. I hate this (I use the word "hate" advisedly) because it is bigotry masquerading as compassion, and it fundamentally undermines any claim to principled moral superiority the left has, or ever had. After all, if it is correct to bias against men today, what does that do to previous arguments that bias against women was wrong yesterday? Plus, on a more practical note, you simply can't win elections when you alienate 50% of the population. I'm under no illusion that I can convince you, or anyone on the left, to change. I've no doubt that the reflexive "he's a sexist, racist, ist-ist" would be your first defense. But I'd hope that, in a moment of clarity, you'd look at the apparently unthinkable victory of Trump, especially the second term, and realize that such policies and attitudes cannot win general elections in the US even against a convicted felon, a rapist, a liar, twice-impeached, and a self-aggrandizing narcissist who is doddering into geriatric solipsism. If you can't beat him with these views, I daresay you can't beat anyone.

mullingitover 14d ago

> listing all the people Dems fight for - a list that happens to leave out men and white people. Unions: famously devoid of men and white people. Maybe you mean they don't specifically put men and white people at the top of their hierarchy?

wallst07 14d ago
Here we see a small glimpse into why Democrats can't win.
- mullingitover 14d ago
  Four years ago democrats were in control of the White House and both houses of Congress, and it took economic calamity, high inflation and gas prices, to break that (the same thing that's about to happen to republicans). Voters aren't that deep. For better or worse, no matter how badly partisans wish them to, identity politics don't matter nearly as much as basic economic issues.
simpaticoder 13d ago
I mean what I wrote: that the list does not include men or white people. It's not that they're at the top, they aren't on the list. To elucidate more my own 90's era influenced view, is that a list of identities is..."silly" comes to mind but isn't strong enough. "Stupid" is perhaps accurate, but lacks erudition. Perhaps "self-sabotaging" is best, as it reflects my understanding of corpo-politics as a cynical, amoral enterprise that has one goal: to win. It is a sad irony that perhaps this is an example of WHY such an enterprise cannot and perhaps should not attempt any big moral moves. It will always be ham-handed and cause harm. Take the overt anti-male attitude of the left. That immediately alienates 50% of the population. Full stop. This is not just white men, but black men, Asian men, Latin men. It's all men. I hate this (I use the word "hate" advisedly) because it is bigotry masquerading as compassion, and it fundamentally undermines any claim to principled moral superiority the left has, or ever had. After all, if it is correct to bias against men today, what does that do to previous arguments that bias against women was wrong yesterday? Plus, on a more practical note, you simply can't win elections when you alienate 50% of the population. I'm under no illusion that I can convince you, or anyone on the left, to change. I've no doubt that the reflexive "he's a sexist, racist, ist-ist" would be your first defense. But I'd hope that, in a moment of clarity, you'd look at the apparently unthinkable victory of Trump, especially the second term, and realize that such policies and attitudes cannot win general elections in the US even against a convicted felon, a rapist, a liar, twice-impeached, and a self-aggrandizing narcissist who is doddering into geriatric solipsism. If you can't beat him with these views, I daresay you can't beat anyone.