LaVar Hosting Jeopardy July 26-30 Stan Account 👁

What finally worked? Bill Clinton's godawful third way bullshit. I don't like it. I don't support it. In one way or another he sold out basically every single group that I think politicians exist to defend, but he won.

Was it bc of the ideology or bc of other structural factors, like the 3rd party candidacies? I dunno. But I think it's a mistake to ascribe all caution to "they're selling us out to the bankers." Some of it is a legitimate fear of Republicans gaining even more power.

Playing to the center has worked pretty well in American politics since Eisenhower at least. I can understand caution before throwing that to the wind.

THAT SAID, the other thing is, some things are playing to the center for votes. Other things are putting x on the table because y is so important.

Passing the CR... eh, you can make a halfhearted tactical argument that they successfully removed the CHIP as a bargaining tool for Republicans but to me it was 95% seeing that the shutdown wasn't a winning issue and caving like cowards. Blameworthy.

On the other hand, putting the wall on the table for Trump in exchange for a meaningful DACA fix? That's playing politics. And yes, it's grotesque. But as a politician your JOB is to be the one to say "yes, I pick this great evil over this greater evil."

Right or wrong, that's the responsibility we entrust to them. And when you go into that negotiation, you go in with the hand voters have given you. Right now, voters (well voters + vote suppression + gerrymandering + sorting) have given Republicans a much stronger hand.

Anyway, I know I would be offended at people making all these apologias for whiteness. You want to say: they're the bad guys, we can't trust them, they need to change or get out of the way or both.

But also... I do make these apologias for whiteness. Bc so often we misunderstand our enemy. I don't see Democrats as an enemy the way I see whiteness as an enemy (not white people, but whiteness as an idea and a structure), but even if you do a clear understanding is valuable.

When I actually try to persuade white folks about racism (rarer and rarer these days, I'm afraid) I go into it with a serious, thoughtful analysis of what value whiteness has to white folks and how damaging it can be to give up the view of the world white supremacy offers.

So we need to go into prying the Democratic party (or some phoenix-transformed version of it) out of neoliberalism's cold dead hands with a serious, thoughtful analysis of not only the crony capitalist benefits of neoliberalism, but the historical electoral benefits of centrism.

And at the end of the day, until the revolution comes not just in politics but in human souls, we're gonna be sharing power people who feel differently from us and who do not want the best for everybody that we want the best for. That's just the deal.

And so we should not be in the habit of dismissing every "greater good" choice as so much betrayal and neoliberal shilling. We need to evaluate those choices carefully, and when we think they've gone wrong that's a GREAT reason to call your Dem reps.

But we should also be studying these negotiations. Cause otherwise, we'll end up putting something unacceptable on the table in order to secure our priorities, be that police reform or immigration reform or universal healthcare.

Anyway, enough whining from me. Tomorrow I'll rant about how establishment Democrats ain't shit instead of just RTing it. But idk maybe these historical/analytical lenses could be useful.