13 Comments

Great analysis, spot on!

Expand full comment

Excellent analysis. You earned a sub!

Though I tend to avoid using the term “Liberal” because the term has so many different meanings, I agree with your categories and analysis.

My one disagreement is that I think that you underestimate the extent to which the Center-Left is adopting authoritarian methods, such as censorship and harassing the opposition. This is not coming from the Utopian Left, but the Center-Left in North America and Europe. And the practice is decidedly illiberal.

I say more here:

https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/the-left-has-hit-a-historical-dead

Expand full comment

Thanks, Michael!

I don't actually disagree that professionals in the center left are driving a lot of the problems. The question is whether this is ideologically their own idea, due to adopting left utopian ideas out of solidarity, or cowardice. I think it's a bit of all of the above. But I also think the solution has to start with knocking the professionals out of their bubble and making them see themselves again as sensible ideological center liberals.

Expand full comment

I am actually writing a series of articles on that very topic.

I think that it is rooted in the unachievable goal of Equality which is central to all ideologies of the Left, how the Left makes that goal central to a person’s moral identity, and their unwillingness to confront this fundamental contradiction. This leaves the Center-Left vulnerable to manipulations by Utopians who refuse to compromise with reality.

If the Left focused on achievable goals that actually helped the disadvantaged, they could make a real difference, but that means giving up their claim to a higher morality:

https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/why-progress-and-upward-mobility

In other words, it is a lack of Honesty and Moral Courage.

Expand full comment

Can't wait to read it! The other part I think is a disagreement over whether people are fundamentally good or disappointing. If you think people are inherently good, you think policies will work that don't work if many people are in fact disappointing.

Expand full comment

My stock response. If you have seen it before I’m sorry, if not enjoy.

After the election the Democratic Party (my party) must rethink many of its policies as it ponders its future.

To be entrusted with power again Democrats must start listening to the concerns of the working class for a change. As a lifelong moderate Democrat I share their disdain for many of the insane positions advocated by my party. We are no longer the patriotic, sensible party of FDR and JFK.

Democrat politicians defy biology by believing that men can actually become women and belong in women’s sports, rest rooms, locker rooms and prisons and that gay kids should be mutilated in pursuit of the impossible.

They believe borders should be open to millions of illegals which undermines workers’ wages and the affordability of housing when we can’t house our own citizens.

They discriminate against whites, Asians and men in a futile effort to counter past discrimination against others and undermine our economy by abandoning merit selection of students and employees.

Democratic mayors allow homelessness to destroy our beautiful cities because they won't say no to destructive behavior. No, you can’t camp in our city. No, you can’t shit in our streets. No, you can’t shoot up and leave your used needles everywhere. Many of our prosecutors will not take action against shoplifting unless a $1000 of goods are stolen leading to gangs destroying retail stores. They release criminals without bail to commit more crimes.

The average voter knows this is happening and outright reject our party. Enough.

Expand full comment

Tghe author writes: "This is the New Deal coalition first established under Franklin Roosevelt. Demographically, it was an alliance of working people, professionals, the middle-class, Black voters, and marginalized groups."

The New Deal coalition did *not* contain professionals, nor did it include women.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F1a31cf92-e1da-478b-b134-79f6e8af3e61_615x255.gif

Expand full comment

I think part of the answer is that liberal technocracy failed to achieve certain goals that left liberals assumed as part of their worldview was possible. For instance, education reform didn’t actually teach everyone to learn to code nor close all the racial gaps. Shoving more people into college just left them with worthless degrees and student loans.

In addition, let liberal social norms led to lower and later family formation amongst professionals, and to be very blunt young single professional ladies are an inherently unstable group.

Right liberals had their own failure in the housing crash of 2008 and the failure of the war on terror. Romney also failed to win Hispanics over.

Now, I’ve got my own thoughts why these things happened (the bell curve, subsidization of single life). But the failure of liberals basically discredited them around the time social media came along. And Obama second term leaned into early woke in order to win re-election. Hillary then did again because she just goes with the flow.

Expand full comment

I think there's an aspect here that's on the money. When liberal ideas didn't lead to the expected results, some people doubled down on bad ideas to force through the results they didn't get without realizing their theory of how things worked was actually the problem.

Expand full comment

+1

Most people don't have a "theory of how things work" or if they do its based on assumptions they haven't really questioned much and simply inherited. They have "vibes" which is a mix of ideas and feelings that isn't totally logical or consistent.

Democratic feedback loops are less "people figure out better working model of how the world works" and more "I touched that hot stove and it's HOT! I won't touch that again."

That's why we go through cyclical patterns on things like crime. If you asked people how many unarmed black men are killed by the police every year I doubt that you would get an answer more accurate today then in 2020. Nor would they know much about criminal justice statistics and practices. They didn't learn a bunch of new facts and come up with a new worldview.

But in 2020 there was this vibe of "we've got to do something about this" and in 2024 there is a vibe of "we did something and it was a fucking disaster". In 2040 people will have forgotten (and a new generation of young people will grow up without experiencing) that touch the stove moment on crime. And so we will likely make all the same mistakes again.

Of course there is value in this. Its better to take your hand off the stove then keep it there because you've got a complicated intellectual theory about how what your smelling isn't really burning flesh, that's all just misinformation! It's an improvement to be partly right part of the time versus stubbornly wrong in a disastrous way.

In general, I think the best we can do is set up good feedback loops. This is why I tend to favor less government intervention in things, it's harder to iterate and change government policy compared to private decision making. So for instance private schools adapted to COVID way faster than public schools, and this is one reason I favor school vouchers as a way to improve feedback loops.

It's also why we shouldn't ask too much of government, because when it sets a bad or impossible goal it's got the ability to basically force everyone down that path even as you get new data showing its wrong.

Expand full comment

I think this is because most people think knowledge is just copying what other people tell them. There are only a few who actually understand the situation and have the judgement to figure out what's going on. This leads to the vibe loops you mentioned. The great mass of "experts" are just repeating what other people told them is true, so they jerk from one conventional wisdom to another. Every once in a while an actual expert looks at the situation and figures out what we really need to do.

Expand full comment

Pro(re)gressives

Expand full comment

Great insight.

Expand full comment