The Democrats Failure and Our Future

Here’s what I have to say to American liberals and leftists: instead of listening to the strategists, who don’t believe it’s possible to dramatically change our society, can we finally be bold and listen to the artists and the outsiders and the radicals and the freaks and the avant-garde and the base and the youth and the anarchists and all those who don't want to do business as usual with the limousine liberalism of both the elite Democrats and Republicans? Can we listen to the dreamers instead of the doubters?

This is the dream of solidarity and coalition among the down and out that the leadership of the Democratic Party has abandoned, favoring instead a chummy cosmopolitanism with the globe-trotting financial brokers whose ultimate allegiance is to capitalism, not to country. The white majority has chosen white identity politics and rejected this, but our response should not be more anemic liberalism or our own version of a limited identity politics.

Trump has led a revolution, but it will not be the kind that leads to a more just society. The version he offers is the strongman’s revolution, executed from the top in the name of those on the bottom. Even as they are entertained by the spectacle of a shoot-from-the-hip president and by the scapegoating of undocumented immigrants, even as they yawn at the videos of black people shot dead, they will not likely see genuine economic change, for it is doubtful that a strongman can or will create more and better jobs for them. A strong man, by definition, respects other strong men, not the weakness of the masses or of women.

www.latimes.com...

The future of politics is changing. The future of the Democratic party is changing. What I said in my "Thank you Donald Trump" thread was only a prelude. I feel I left out the most important part. If Hillary had won, it would have been the death of liberalism and the Democratic party for good after her Presidency was up. But now, thanks to Donald Trump, we're seeing a resurgence of liberal thought and values. Maybe it was planned like this? (This is a conspiracy site, after all.)

Having someone and something to stand against has revitalized the Democratic movement and it's supporters. I see a return to classic liberal values, and a movement away from identity politics. If there's one thing the left has in abundance, it's artists and writers. You can laugh all you want at people that are "artists" and "writers" but they hold a power to change minds that simple facts and figures don't. This article is a call to arms for all the creatives on the left to become political again, and it's happening.

Not only in people I know personally around the country, but everywhere. As a writer, I'm excited to wake up and see the news everyday. The amount of 180's Trump has already done before even being inaugurated leads me to believe these next four years will be gold for writers on the left. A whole generation has turned political overnight, and they aren't on the right.

(I got a new phrase from this article, "limousine liberalism")

Once again, thank you Donald Trump. (Never thought I'd actually be saying that.)

Choose your words wisely is all I can say. Everyone who has attacked Trump got weaker while he got stronger. Journalism is suppose to be objective in that it does not form an opinion, only forms facts and let's the reader decide.

A good example of this is when Hillary said during the debate to use fact checker on Trump. It sounds like a great idea on the surface but dig deeper and it is a LW attack dog.

Fact checker uses a meter, it doesn't say if something is true or false. Like Hillary stealing items from the WH which she did and had to return those items. This is the fact checker determination:

There is a grain of truth to this claim, but we found multiple problems -- the amount is off, and "stolen" is an inaccurate word to describe Clinton’s actions. Also, despite the graphic's use of the word "force," it’s important to note that law enforcement did not come into play in this episode

Do you see the bias? "grain of truth" "amount off". It's this kind of journalism that angers people and one of the main reasons she lost. Keep doing it and it will be impossible for Democrats to ever recover.


STEAL - take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.


Nothing in the definition says anything about law enforcement getting involved for it to be considered stealing.

a reply to: underwerks

Ha.

A call to action huh?
Becoming paralyzed with hipster outrage is all I see. Their idea of activism is who can be more offended over the most mundane trivialities.

The left's loudest voices were the most impotent when their cause needed them most.

They showed once again that outside of retweets and Facebook shares they couldn't be bothered to stand against their generation's "Hitler", racism and hate incarnate President-Elect Trump.

And what did they do when they learned that likes don't cure cancer or elect Presidents? They threw temper tantrums and had cry-ins.

Give me a break.

This is what 8 years of "hope and change" got you. A generation of weak do nothings who expect to be handed whatever they want without putting in the work.

Come back when you actually accomplish something.

originally posted by: underwerks
The white majority has chosen white identity politics and rejected this, but our response should not be more anemic liberalism or our own version of a limited identity politics

White people! amirite!!!

scapegoating of undocumented immigrants,

This just in, illegal aliens will now be referred to as "undocumented immigrants"
also, crack dealers are now just "undocumented pharmacists"

they yawn at the videos of black people shot dead,

that's what happens when you attack police, yep.
But when that isn't the case, outrage is across the board. cameras on cops!
sadly the big blm martyrs are almost all a bunch of thugs trying to kill cops...you don't attack police, that's how you get shot.

I see a return to classic liberal values, and a movement away from identity politics.

From the article you put forward, not off to a good start given its almost exclusively buried in identity politics.

looks like its gonna be 8 years of this nonsense. doubling down...yeah, the liberals woke up indeed..and voted for Trump to send a message or actively chose not to vote.

a reply to: underwerks

What you're actually experiencing is an echo chamber. The left didn't care about it's own supporters for the last 8 years (when they voted blue), during the election (when they were all suddenly deplorable), or after (when the left wants to invalidate their vote in favor of their preferred result). They'd have to win back the contingent of their own previous supporters first, and I think we all know how that's working out. Trump would have to royally mess up for blue to have a chance for the foreseeable future. But, yeah, just keep reading your polls and thinking people give a **** about what celebrities think.
The left is willing to block a street over a fair election, detouring ambulances that has already cost people their lives, and you think anyone actually cares about their opinions but themselves? Not a chance in hell.
Additionally, I'm an artist. A performing musician for the past 20+ years. Not only do I not give a flying fart about what someone else thinks just because they know a few chords on the guitar their mom bough for them, but they don't actually care about each other's opinions either. That is, unless it perfectly matches their own, and is presented in a safe space on a cruelty-free faux moleskin notebook via snapchat.
What you actually have is an entire generation that seems to think you can solve a problem they created by just doing more of what caused the problem in the first place. If you have a timeline for when that might fix itself, I'd love to hear it. My guess is it will change just in time for them to start voting conservative... as with the generations before them. But yeah, someone who has acquired nothing, telling me what I should do with the results of my efforts? No thanks.

originally posted by: LifeMode
Choose your words wisely is all I can say. Everyone who has attacked Trump got weaker while he got stronger. Journalism is suppose to be objective in that it does not form an opinion, only forms facts and let's the reader decide.

A good example of this is when Hillary said during the debate to use fact checker on Trump. It sounds like a great idea on the surface but dig deeper and it is a LW attack dog.

Fact checker uses a meter, it doesn't say if something is true or false. Like Hillary stealing items from the WH which she did and had to return those items. This is the fact checker determination:

There is a grain of truth to this claim, but we found multiple problems -- the amount is off, and "stolen" is an inaccurate word to describe Clinton’s actions. Also, despite the graphic's use of the word "force," it’s important to note that law enforcement did not come into play in this episode

Do you see the bias? "grain of truth" "amount off". It's this kind of journalism that angers people and one of the main reasons she lost. Keep doing it and it will be impossible for Democrats to ever recover.

The election is over, Trump won. He no longer has the quality of becoming stronger while his detractors become weaker. He isn't operating from a position of cultural power anymore. The game changed on election night.

originally posted by: SaturnFX

originally posted by: underwerks
The white majority has chosen white identity politics and rejected this, but our response should not be more anemic liberalism or our own version of a limited identity politics

White people! amirite!!!

scapegoating of undocumented immigrants,

This just in, illegal aliens will now be referred to as "undocumented immigrants"
also, crack dealers are now just "undocumented pharmacists"

they yawn at the videos of black people shot dead,

that's what happens when you attack police, yep.
But when that isn't the case, outrage is across the board. cameras on cops!
sadly the big blm martyrs are almost all a bunch of thugs trying to kill cops...you don't attack police, that's how you get shot.

I see a return to classic liberal values, and a movement away from identity politics.

From the article you put forward, not off to a good start given its almost exclusively buried in identity politics.

looks like its gonna be 8 years of this nonsense. doubling down...yeah, the liberals woke up indeed..and voted for Trump to send a message or actively chose not to vote.

Actually it'll be 4 years. 4 short years. I respect your opinion, but reality doesn't agree with you.

It's obvious were going to need a "Safe Space Crybaby" Forum added for all the posters who still can't cope with Trump winning the election.

a reply to: underwerks

The co-opting of the liberal label was one of the travesties of 20th century progressivism. It's good to see that some are interested in taking it back from the far left.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
It's obvious were going to need a "Safe Space Crybaby" Forum added for all the posters who still can't cope with Trump winning the election.

How is talking about a political movement being a "crybaby"? I'm happy Trump won. It breathed new life into my ideology.

a reply to: bender151

What you're actually experiencing is an echo chamber.

That's what I got from this thread and the OP's previous one. I could definitely be wrong, but it seems he is linking HIS discovery of modern-liberalism with the birth of modern-liberalism itself.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: underwerks

The co-opting of the liberal label was one of the travesties of 20th century progressivism. It's good to see that some are interested in taking it back from the far left.

I agree. It's going to be a long hard road getting back to classic liberalism but it's already begun. People are excited about it.

originally posted by: underwerks
Actually it'll be 4 years. 4 short years. I respect your opinion, but reality doesn't agree with you.

It will if the left gets their poop together and actually does kick out the identity politics from the whole party. The safe space, micro-aggression, racist, sexist, cisphobes from the party and gets people back in line with a more traditional libertarian/leftist mentality of education, liberties, a focus on individual happiness and collective help that stops seeing color, gender, and sexual preference as a consideration and simply focuses on help for poor, disabled, and the elders and otherwise facilitates as many options as possible to let people find their own happiness.

But I doubt they will. I genuinely think they will double down on this puritanical, racist, sexist witch hunt that made soo many leftists (myself absolutely included) disgusted at what has become in the last few years.

Time will tell.

reality doesn't agree with reality given Clinton will almost definitely win...according to everyone...who completely dismissed what the non progressives were saying

originally posted by: LifeMode
Choose your words wisely is all I can say. Everyone who has attacked Trump got weaker while he got stronger. Journalism is suppose to be objective in that it does not form an opinion, only forms facts and let's the reader decide.

Hillary was an incredibly qualified candidate, but not personable...she miscalculated in thinking that she could rest on simply attacking Trump vs. convince the American people she could do something for them and actually connecting.

Even with that...Trump ranks 43 out 45 Presidents on the popular vote, only two other Presidents in history took office with less of the people voting for them.

And while I agree on your take of Journalism, a President is judged more on his actions and results...He will continue to blame media, but those that voted for him will be reading their paychecks, not the papers.

The election is over, Trump won. He no longer has the quality of becoming stronger while his detractors become weaker. He isn't operating from a position of cultural power anymore. The game changed on election night.


Control of the House, Senate and Presidency. The "cultural power" voted. They now have all the power.

a reply to: underwerks

How anyone can claim that Trump's presidency will be the catalyst to divisiveness or an unjust society is speaking out of ignorance as to what's happened in the last eight years.

These type of predictive op-ed pieces do nothing but fuel hatred in and of themselves--the author is fear-mongering to those most apt to believe such soothsaying (the apathetic youth who might find this cross their social-media feed), and if these dire predictions come true, I will chock it up to being a self-fulfilling prophecy more than the way that it would have naturally happened, because these media types have been feeding this nonsense into Americans' heads since this past election cycle started, and now that Trump won, they are in overdrive trying to scare people into believing this stuff.

Here's a novel idea--let's wait and see how the Trump presidency shapes up before we start prematurely ejaculating such nonsensical ramblings. Not one person that I know who classifies themselves as 'conservative' "yawns at videos of black people shot dead" or want's a "shoot-from-the-hip president," nor are the "entertained...by the scapegoating of undocumented immigrants."

There are myriad 'creatives' around the country who hold libertarian ideals, too--the implication that most are classic liberals is, in my experience (and I hold a BFA in Graphic Design), being too kind. Most of whom with which I have interacted are super-progressive, divisive individuals, more than one of whom called me out as racist when I would speak out against Obama's policies, or completely base their opinions on feeling more than logic or facts. I literally had a professor tell me that he didn't want me participating in classroom critiques because when I called out problems with design (backed with reason and logic as to why I saw it as a problem), it would hurt some students' feelings. This professor is now the head of that art department.

So, the prospect of reinvigorating such a voting bloc does not, to me, represent a resurgence of classic liberalism, but instead a larger group of vitriolic, divisive people, no matter what their political ideology.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: underwerks

How anyone can claim that Trump's presidency will be the catalyst to divisiveness or an unjust society is speaking out of ignorance as to what's happened in the last eight years.

These type of predictive op-ed pieces do nothing but fuel hatred in and of themselves--the author is fear-mongering to those most apt to believe such soothsaying (the apathetic youth who might find this cross their social-media feed), and if these dire predictions come true, I will chock it up to being a self-fulfilling prophecy more than the way that it would have naturally happened, because these media types have been feeding this nonsense into Americans' heads since this past election cycle started, and now that Trump won, they are in overdrive trying to scare people into believing this stuff.

Here's a novel idea--let's wait and see how the Trump presidency shapes up before we start prematurely ejaculating such nonsensical ramblings. Not one person that I know who classifies themselves as 'conservative' "yawns at videos of black people shot dead" or want's a "shoot-from-the-hip president," nor are the "entertained...by the scapegoating of undocumented immigrants."

There are myriad 'creatives' around the country who hold libertarian ideals, too--the implication that most are classic liberals is, in my experience (and I hold a BFA in Graphic Design), being too kind. Most of whom with which I have interacted are super-progressive, divisive individuals, more than one of whom called me out as racist when I would speak out against Obama's policies, or completely base their opinions on feeling more than logic or facts. I literally had a professor tell me that he didn't want me participating in classroom critiques because when I called out problems with design (backed with reason and logic as to why I saw it as a problem), it would hurt some students' feelings. This professor is now the head of that art department.

So, the prospect of reinvigorating such a voting bloc does not, to me, represent a resurgence of classic liberalism, but instead a larger group of vitriolic, divisive people, no matter what their political ideology.

You don't have to be a psychic to see how Trumps presidency will be received. You actually think the divisiveness that's already a product of him is going to vanish?

People are angry, which is a good thing. That anger is driving them to learn about the political process and make themselves a part of it through their art.

Just because what I said makes you afraid, doesn't mean its fear mongering.


ETA: Do you even know what "classical" liberalism is?

"We will never be united as a people until we can all forcibly come together and hate everything about Trump, then we can call ourselves classical liberals to further confuse everyone."

-The Authoritarian Left

Classical liberalism is a political ideology that values the freedom of individuals — including the freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and markets — as well as limited government. It developed in 18th-century Europe and drew on the economic writings of Adam Smith and the growing notion of social progress.

www.chegg.com...

originally posted by: DBCowboy
"We will never be united as a people until we can all forcibly come together and hate everything about Trump, then we can call ourselves classical liberals to further confuse everyone."

-The Authoritarian Left

Source?