There has been a lot of talk about how Trump represents a unique threat to America. He is routinely referred to as a dictator or a fascist, etc. You don’t have to look too hard to find these articles or even pay close attention to American politics to encounter these arguments.
It’s true he has impulses that lean towards authoritarianism, and he certainly employs colorful rhetoric when describing his politics. Yet, for some reason, he and the MAGA types never frightened me the way the left does. Maybe it is because he is ideologically free. It’s also, perhaps, because his style of politics is much more out in the open, and he doesn’t have much pretense about what he stands for. We know where he stands, and he doesn’t surprise nearly anyone at this point. What actually does bother me about Trump is just how incompetent and unprincipled he is. He could fumble his way into some sort of war and doesn’t seem to take the gravity of his office too seriously.
But at worst he is a political authoritarian, someone who wants to control public institutions to not determine what you think, but to limit your political power. Yes, this is bad stuff, but what frightens me much more, if I’m being honest, is what is emerging on the left, which is more subtle yet seems like a more formidable threat to liberalism.
I want to note why new leftist worry me.
The first problem I see on the new left is its growing and radical new ideology of destruction. The old left use to be a body politic that, at least ostensible, argued in favor of American traditions that needed to be preserved. In many ways they had conservative instincts and sought to preserve yet tweak things to make the lives of everyone better off.
Their basic position was that America was imperfect but could be improved through policy. That it had the correct foundations to build on yet did not live up to its promise without government intervention. Unlike the Republican party, they claimed to care about the little guy, and wanted to tweak the status quo to ensure the vulnerable were included whenever America rose as a country. The left I grew up made genuine attempts to stress they were patriots, and that they had no over the top designs to redefine the American way of life. This left were mostly “Blue dog democrats,” meaning economically populist yet socially conservative. It wasn’t that long ago that their nominee, Obama, ran on a platform in defense of traditional marriage.
But the new left isn’t like this at all. They truly have a revolutionary impulse to tear down what they inherited and start anew, and while they do know what they are against, they don’t always know exactly what they are for.
What they are against is anything to do with tradition. You see them complain about american flags being displayed, make remarks about white Christianity, anything to do with the police, etc. The history of America is not to be proud of but to be criticized. But they have no real plan on how to govern, they just want to tear things down and figure out what to build in its place afterwards. It is an empty ideology not built on nothing of substance.
This makes them a bit hard to pin down, and is why they seem to just make up new rules out of thin air, like what constitutes racism, what is a woman and the use of pronouns, and what is white supremacy.
This is a common theme of all revolutionary politics and isn’t something new. They have no real principals other than seeking power for themselves and vanquishing whatever is in their way.
They never fully admit this, but instead argue for some sort of grand political project, like a more inclusive society or for social justice, or whatever. A major, if not the most important mantra, of the new leftist, is to be in favor of the vague notions of diversity, equity and inclusion, yet this is just as empty as it sounds, and in practice is an excuse to abuse power.
It really is just a power grab but not a principled stance in pursuit of a better future. This is why in addition to targeting conventional wisdom, they also target long held political institutions that sought to dilute public power, like the first amendment (you have probably heard them carve out exceptions for hate speech), the filibuster, religious freedom, and because it rules unfavorable nowadays, the supreme court.
So, this is one of the reasons I find the new left so worrisome, because they have some sort of utopian vision but what they really stand for is some sort of blank slate revolution.
The second aspect that bothers me is how willing they seem to use brute force along with their infiltration of our institutions.
A lot, if not most of this, is about how they want to control your speech. You can not even question some of their claims or you will be ostracized from polite society.
Cancel culture is a real thing and we have seen it often, don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
James Damore was fired from Google when he wrote an internal memo arguing that men and women have different preferences and therefore life tradeoffs, which explains why there are not more women engineers. During the height of BLM riots, David Shor tweeted a paper (authored by a black political scientist if that matters) that riots and disorder could lead to a backlash that favors Trump. He was also fired. And then there was Daniel Elder who can’t print his music or find singers for his songs because he posted a statement against arson during BLM.
There are many other anecdotes on this matter and is why so many, in the workplace and on college campuses especially, feel as if they can’t voice any skepticism of the new left narrative, let alone any contrary views. Censorship of discussion is a big part of their strategy.
In addition to policing your speech, they have shown hints of using law enforcement to pursue their enemies that stand in the way. The FBI probed “catholic terrorist.”
From the WSJ
“The document defined “radical-traditionalist Catholics” as those who attend the Latin Mass and who frequently adhere to “anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant, anti-LGBTQ, and white supremacist ideology.” The agents relied on half-baked “open-source” reporting from liberal outlets to justify more bureau investigation.”
Elon Musk is being investigated for lots of reasons, like not hiring enough refugees, among others.
And it is not just our department of justice that they have politized, but nearly all other major institutions.
You can see this happening in nearly everywhere.
Here is one on Disney.
You see it in our public education, which doesn’t need a link because it should be so obvious but here is one.
We see it at ESPN, Bud Light, Ford, etc.
It is clearly in big tech, like google, facebook, etc. Remember that it censored the Hunter laptop story.
The reason they get away with it is because of “Longmarchism” which is a term used to describe how radicals have incrementally take over institutions that govern society, from both public and private sector institutions.
How did they get embedded into these institutions? The short and easy answer is because they just want it more. They are not afraid to voice their opinions for their cause and will do whatever they can when pursuing them, which includes silencing their opponents. To pick just one example that demonstrates this, look at the recent public conversation regarding AI and racism where some are worried “How AI could perpetuate racism, sexism and other biases in society.” I just don’t think conservatives would consider to voice their opinions so openly about such a thing, and frankly, the side that wants it more will always win against the side the just wants to be alone, so the new leftist make considerable gains in influencing our institutions despite them not holding terribly popular views.
It is curious why these institutions that presumably stand for profit maximization take stands on issues that are not held by a significant part of the country, and the main reason why is because these corporations underestimated the damage that these DEI officers and HR departments can do to its priorities.
The last thing I’ll note is the copulation of the media, or at least the mainstream outlets, and how they shape the public narrative to be favorable for the new left.
The Atalanta mass murder in massage parlors was about sex addiction, but the media framed it as anti-Asian hate.
Here is a more recent example regarding Ireland. Look at how the NYT framed it.
Anyway, this is just a first draft of some thoughts. Will publish more on this in the near future.