I have just spent the best part of three weeks travelling around the United States, filming episodes for TRIGGERnometry and speaking with people from different sides of the political spectrum.
Any realistic hope of uniting the shouty anti-woke right with traditional liberals probably depends on people with clear views but moderate modes of expression who are respected by both groups. People like you Konstantin. Don’t worry. I’m not suggesting that you stand for elected office.....yet.
I'm not sure that I agree with your assessment about moderate politicians. True, it may alienate the right and left fringes, but they're just that: fringes. If you sit down with a moderate conservative right now it should become pretty clear that they probably don't want to vote for Trump, or many of the other politicians who are similarly grotesque. However, they WILL pull the lever for Trump again if it's between him and someone who wants to defund the police and "disrupt" the gender binary and the nuclear family.
I think that if there was simply a less ideological politician, even one who labels himself a Democrat, who said very clearly in the face of this craziness, "no, we're not going to do that", this person could have a great deal of support from the common person. I think the more difficult thing to get past is the party apparatus itself which actively tries to reduce the signal for certain candidates and amplify the signal for others.
The problem is that both the 'shouty Right' and the ''quiet Liberals' have no common doctrine, thus they agree there is a problem but how to solve it requires a mix of the two the becomes mutually agreeable. But this 'middle way' if you like would only be a temporary alliance of convenience. It may be as KK says: It creates a space for a moderate unifying politician to come through the middle and unite the two, but this disunity between the two wings who agree there is a problem but not on the methods to solve it could keep us divided and allow the Loonies to run the asylum.
How about this as, not a doctrine, but a unifying principle:
"If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind." JS Mill, On Liberty chp. 2
All very well but suppose that one person thought all other ideas are invalid, and that they had the power to make that happen. KK talked about those who supported free speech tactically so that they could be heard. That implies at present they have no power, but if they did they would become as tyrannical as the WOKE in suppressing alternative ideas.
That's why even in the libertarian paradise, the State still retains that all important function of sole legitimate coercion. Hobbes first, then Locke, then Mill.
There is certainly no unity candidate that I can see atm in the US. Maybe much depends on the choices of candidate for VP at the next Presidential election.
As a side issue, why on earth doesn’t Biden dump Harris? There’s an opportunity going begging there.
Hi Mark, I am not an American but it is early days yet to dump Harris. But if he did not I would surmise Harris is not dumped because she is no intellectual or political competition for Biden, and that she keeps the WOKEtards happy. He can burnish his Equity credentials.
Have you read The Weaponization of Loneliness: How Tyrants Stoke Our Fear of Isolation to Silence, Divide, and Conquer by Stella Morabito? This is why liberals whisper.
Man! You write so well. Superb article.
Any realistic hope of uniting the shouty anti-woke right with traditional liberals probably depends on people with clear views but moderate modes of expression who are respected by both groups. People like you Konstantin. Don’t worry. I’m not suggesting that you stand for elected office.....yet.
I'm not sure that I agree with your assessment about moderate politicians. True, it may alienate the right and left fringes, but they're just that: fringes. If you sit down with a moderate conservative right now it should become pretty clear that they probably don't want to vote for Trump, or many of the other politicians who are similarly grotesque. However, they WILL pull the lever for Trump again if it's between him and someone who wants to defund the police and "disrupt" the gender binary and the nuclear family.
I think that if there was simply a less ideological politician, even one who labels himself a Democrat, who said very clearly in the face of this craziness, "no, we're not going to do that", this person could have a great deal of support from the common person. I think the more difficult thing to get past is the party apparatus itself which actively tries to reduce the signal for certain candidates and amplify the signal for others.
The problem is that both the 'shouty Right' and the ''quiet Liberals' have no common doctrine, thus they agree there is a problem but how to solve it requires a mix of the two the becomes mutually agreeable. But this 'middle way' if you like would only be a temporary alliance of convenience. It may be as KK says: It creates a space for a moderate unifying politician to come through the middle and unite the two, but this disunity between the two wings who agree there is a problem but not on the methods to solve it could keep us divided and allow the Loonies to run the asylum.
How about this as, not a doctrine, but a unifying principle:
"If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind." JS Mill, On Liberty chp. 2
All very well but suppose that one person thought all other ideas are invalid, and that they had the power to make that happen. KK talked about those who supported free speech tactically so that they could be heard. That implies at present they have no power, but if they did they would become as tyrannical as the WOKE in suppressing alternative ideas.
That's why even in the libertarian paradise, the State still retains that all important function of sole legitimate coercion. Hobbes first, then Locke, then Mill.
Clearly, offending people and being aggressive about an issue won’t necessarily win you friends. That said, sane Lefties need to grow a backbone.
There is certainly no unity candidate that I can see atm in the US. Maybe much depends on the choices of candidate for VP at the next Presidential election.
As a side issue, why on earth doesn’t Biden dump Harris? There’s an opportunity going begging there.
Hi Mark, I am not an American but it is early days yet to dump Harris. But if he did not I would surmise Harris is not dumped because she is no intellectual or political competition for Biden, and that she keeps the WOKEtards happy. He can burnish his Equity credentials.
Have you read The Weaponization of Loneliness: How Tyrants Stoke Our Fear of Isolation to Silence, Divide, and Conquer by Stella Morabito? This is why liberals whisper.