Home > Critical Thinking, Current Affairs, Dystopia, Musings, Philosophy sans Sophistry, Reason, Secular Religions, Skepticism > Why Allegedly ‘Progressive’ Political Parties Keep Losing Elections: 2

Why Allegedly ‘Progressive’ Political Parties Keep Losing Elections: 2

In the previous part of this series, I wrote about how the weird focus of ‘leftist’ parties throughout the west has caused their electoral downfall over the past two, and in some cases more, decades. You will be aware that their focus on issues such as gender pronouns, contemporary feminism, identity politics, political correctness, gun control, environmentalism and other issues which most people either don’t care about or actively despise are a significant part of why they keep losing elections. As I also mentioned in that post, LIEbral and other leftist parties stopped caring about the real concerns of the working class many decades ago. But what caused supposedly leftist parties throughout the west to embrace performative ‘wokeness’ decades before that particular term entered our popular lexicon. In other words, why did that trend start?

In my opinion, this shift occurred at around the same time that credentialism became the latest excuse to sustain the lie known as meritocracy. Confused.. see, prior to the 1970s, the cadre of leftist or left-leaning parties came from the real ‘working class’ aka people who actually worked with their hands for a living and had no illusions about being petit bourgeoisie. However most of the cadre of these parties after the 1970s and especially after 1980s came from the credentialed “professional” class. Unlike their working class predecessors who harbored no illusions about the nature of class struggle, most of these credentialed weasels harbored delusions of being just a few steps away from becoming rich or at least petit bourgeoisie. It should be noted that this shift did not occur in just Anglo countries. Indeed, the magnitude of this particular change was larger (if less visible) in other west-European countries such as Scandinavian and Germanic countries

It is therefore not surprising to see that formerly socialist, LIEbral and other left-wing parties in the west are run by people who look the same, talk the same and act the same- irrespective of the countries they claim to represent. But why does any of this matter? After all, don’t these ‘leftist’ parties win elections once in a while and allegedly provide vocal opposition to right-wing parties. Well.. as it turns out in real life, LIEbral and supposedly left-leaning parties in power almost never try to reverse the negative effects of previous right-wing rule. In fact, more often than not they reach an accommodation with right-wing parties to further immiserate the working classes.. all in the name of “pragmatism”. And why wouldn’t they? The top cadre of these LIEbral and left-wing parties don’t perceive themselves as working class. Instead, they see themselves as part of the same “meritocracy” which created extreme socio-economic inequality. But if they are no better than right-wing political parties, why do they lose elections more frequently than them.

It comes down to something the ‘left’ does which the right’ does not- at least when compared to the ‘left’. To put it bluntly, the “enlightened left” in addition to screwing over the working class in cooperation with the ‘right’ repeatedly tries to display its moral superiority to the proles- whose interest it claims to represent. That is why those in LIEbral circles are always chasing the latest opportunity for overt virtue display- whether it is adopting children from Africa, supporting the transgender ideology, pretending to care about intersectional feminism, lecturing about the ‘sins’ of consumption while living large houses, often staffed by desperate immigrant servants and travelling around the world in private airplanes to exclusive resorts. There is a reason why slurs like ‘limousine liberal’ were so effective in 1980s. This is why all those ‘celebrity’ endorsements have virtually no effect on voting patterns and why Trump defeated HRC in 2016.

To make matters worse, if that is even possible, these “enlightened” idiots have managed to antagonize the working class in another way. Ever heard of plastic straw bans in certain cities, trying to ban incandescent lightbulbs, trying to force people to buy often shoddily made and expensive LED bulbs which last for far fewer hours than advertised, forcing people to buy poorly made “environmentally friendly” low-flow toilets, legislating fuel-economy standards that often have the opposite effect, trying to destroy reasonably well-paying jobs in the natural gas and oil industry, trying to destroy what are often the only half-decent jobs in poor coal-mining regions. I could go on and on.. but you get the picture. LIEbrals and left-wing types are busy trying to destroy whatever little joy there is left in lives of working class people- and all of this so they can circle-jerk with their ilk about their “moral superiority” via acts of performative “wokeness”.

Right-wing assholes, with all their malice towards the working class, are not delusional enough to fuck over their voters via such effeminate and passive-aggressive means. And to add insult to injury, let us focus on what these LIEbrals and left-wing types done to improve the lives of the most vulnerable among the working class? Have they been able to reduce the extremely high incarceration rates in USA to any significant degree? Have they been able to resists the growing police-surveillance state in this country? Have they been able to actually improve the lives of undocumented immigrants they claim to love? Have they been able to do anything about the massive de-industrialization of this country over past four decades? Have they done anything substantive to end all those foreign ‘interventions’ aka wars that are costly and unwinnable?

While this critique largely focuses on the numerous public failings of the LIEbral and left-wing political parties and class in USA it is, with some modifications, applicable to similar parties throughout the west. In the next part, I will finally go into why the obsession of LIEbrals and left-wing types with “environmentalism” and “climate change” is likely to further alienate the working class. Then again, LIEbral types are heavily into performative “wokeism” rather than seizing and wielding power for those who elect them. Will also go into how LIEbrals have deliberately ignored the negative effects of corporate consolidation, monopolies and oligopolies on the working class.

What do you think? Comments?

  1. MikeCA
    December 23, 2019 at 1:36 pm

    “In my opinion, this shift occurred at around the same time that credentialism became the latest excuse to sustain the lie known as meritocracy. Confused.. see, prior to the 1970s, the cadre of leftist or left-leaning parties came from the real ‘working class’ aka people who actually worked with their hands for a living and had no illusions about being petit bourgeoisie. However most of the cadre of these parties after the 1970s and especially after 1980s came from the credentialed “professional” class.”

    In the 19th and the first half of the 20th century, there were many very smart people in the working class. Their families could not afford to send them to college, so even though they were smart, they ended up with working class jobs. These people were the leaders who organized the labor movement and became left leaning politicians.

    After World War II the GI bill in the USA allowed huge numbers of smart working class young men to go to college and they got professional and managerial jobs. They generally married college educated women and they sent their children to college. By 1970 or 1980 there were far fewer people in the working class who were smart enough to go to college. People in the working class generally marry partners that are only high school graduates and they generally don’t send their kids to college.

    This little notice trend has fundamentally change the nature of the class distinction and is why few left-leaning politicians actually come from the working class today.

    Left-leaning candidates want to make college free for everyone, and I am mostly in favor of that, but we are already sending almost everyone to college who is qualified to go to college. Free college will solve the huge student debt problem, but it really does not help the working class. There are a few working class families who have kids qualified to go to college that don’t go because of cost, but not very many any more.

    • December 24, 2019 at 5:22 pm

      you sound like those HBD weirdoes quite frankly. Not everyone who doesn’t want to spend 4 extra years with their “ass in class” or work in an “open office” under fluorescent lights is low IQ….

      • MikeCA
        December 25, 2019 at 12:49 pm

        I never mentioned IQ. HBD people believe intelligence is a one dimensional quality that can be measured by an IQ test. It should be obvious to anyone that intelligence is multidimensional. Some are really good at math, some are good at language, some are good at 3d visualization, some are good at reading peoples emotions.and some are good at seeing and creating things in new ways.

        Getting into a good college requires working hard in high school. It is not just natural intelligence, it is work habits and willingness to work hard. Part of that is cultural. I’ve seen some Asian parents push their children very hard to do well in school and pay absurd prices for tiny run down houses in the best school districts. College educated parents are more likely to encourage their children to go to college.

        There is no question that some people find school, high school or college, too boring and those are sometimes the most creative people. Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, the founders of Apple, both were college drop outs.

      • December 25, 2019 at 4:25 pm

        While I would love to joust with you point by point, I’ll try to cut to the chase of the matter so to speak. The “elitism” of the left/Democratic party isn’t a new thing because “smart” working class guys got the GI Bill after WW2 and became managers. George Orwell wrote about this before WW2….
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_to_Wigan_Pier
        (Yeah, he’s talking about England where there is a more formal “class” system but still…)

  2. Yusef
    December 24, 2019 at 10:23 am

    Social Darwinism you idiotic twit.

    I want to contact Matt Taibbi and let him know that now along with McCarthyite “leftists” or is it “democrats” or is it “neoliberals” or is it “silicon valley asshole sucks” we have those in the taint of Social Darwinism, too.

    • MikeCA
      December 24, 2019 at 11:55 am

      I recommend you contact a writing instructor and learn to express your thoughts in coherent sentences rather than run on word salads. Also, it would be useful if you had some thoughts other than just random name calling.

      • Yusef
        December 25, 2019 at 12:51 pm

        I recommend you contact a history professor and learn what this crap you think is cogent and coherent results in, twit. You’ve lost your moorings, probably through a combination of flattery and senility. I’m quite sure my name calling is both precise and accurate.

  3. December 24, 2019 at 5:26 pm

    “According to federal campaign records reviewed by Bloomberg, Sanders and Warren lead in Amazon spending among the 2020 candidates in the first nine months of 2019, with a little over $233,000 and $151,000, respectively. (The pair lead the next closest candidate, Cory Booker, by almost $100,000.)”

    http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/12/sanders-warren-condemn-amazon-as-campaigns-use-its-services.html

    But,but I thought those Democratic Socialists were gonna save us from Bad Bezos (Bargain Basement as you call him…)

  4. Yusef
    December 25, 2019 at 4:34 pm

    I think a crucial factor in the failure of “progressive parties” to merit being called “progressive” is their utter failure to advocate spending on vital infrastructure, especially education. Not only has this represented a losing departure from “progressive” politics, but it has pushed these “progressives” way past the positions occupied by right wingers. American right wingers in the period 1945 to 1975 or so used to understand and support investment in infrastructure much more than “progressives” do at present.

    Look at this:

    https://www.historynet.com/was-the-usa-ever-no-1-in-education.htm

    “As recently as 20 years ago, the United States was ranked No.1 in high school and college education. Much of the boom in American education during the second half of the 20th century was fueled by the Montgomery G.I. Bill, which provided scholarships and student loans to veteran service personnel returning from World War II. Having matured on the battlefield, thousands of returning troops eagerly seized the opportunity to improve their postwar prospects in the civilian world, leading to a transformation of the American middle class in the 1950s and 1960s.

    In 2009, the United States was ranked 18th out of 36 industrialized nations. Over that time, complacency and inefficiency, reflective of lower priorities in education, and inconsistencies among the various school systems contributed to a decline.”

    California, I think it is important to note, used to have the best public education of the states, and is now not even in the top half. (From time to time I have seen it with the lowest ranking of all.)

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/reneemorad/2018/07/31/states-with-the-best-public-school-systems/#492e48e43897

    People like MikeKaKa obviously like to think their lives were successful because they themselves are superior and will never understand they benefited most from public supports which they have never truly fought to support and extend to others, even children. (See above.) They are on an ego trip and they are assholes. There is nothing nice to say about them.

    • MikeCA
      December 26, 2019 at 12:24 am

      “I think a crucial factor in the failure of “progressive parties” to merit being called “progressive” is their utter failure to advocate spending on vital infrastructure, especially education.”

      You do understand that it is the conservative parties, ie Republican, that started a war on public education following the court rulings that public schools must be desegregated. The idea was to shift public funding to private schools, which would be mostly segregated. It is true that Democrats have sometimes bought into the charter school nonsense, but that is because charter schools are popular with middle class parents.

      “People like MikeKaKa obviously like to think their lives were successful because they themselves are superior and will never understand they benefited most from public supports which they have never truly fought to support and extend to others, even children. (See above.) .”

      I attended a high quality state university. My father was a minister. He was able to afford to pay my tuition, which was reasonable in those days, but my family was far from wealthy. I worked in a sheet metal stamping factory for slightly more then minimum wage during the summer. I recently found my UAW membership card from when I worked there. When I went to graduate school, I had a NDEA Title IV fellowship that paid my tuition and paid me some money for rent and living expenses each month. I also worked during the summer in graduate school.

      While I had a couple of post-doc at prestigious universities, I spent most of my professional life as a software engineer. I had exactly one class in computer programming in all of my university education. If there is one thing that I learned in graduate school, it was that I could teach myself anything I needed to know by reading and studying on my own. I taught myself to be an outstanding programmer.

      I voted no on prop 13 which cut funding to public education in California, but it passed anyway. I have voted for Democrats that have tried to increase funding for public education.

      “They are on an ego trip and they are assholes There is nothing nice to say about them.”

      When you have nothing nice to say, don’t say anything at all.

      • Yusef
        December 26, 2019 at 8:41 am

        You are remarkably obtuse and miss the point nearly each and every time.

        I never said your family was wealthy. I said you had benefited from public supports available when you were a student and much less so now. In your inimitable fashion you actually are dumb enough to give specific examples of public supports available to you, less so now.

        More public schools were high quality then than now and it was more likely the state university you were able to attend was high quality than now. That’s another expression of public benefit you personally enjoyed which has become less and less common until we reach the current deplorable state of affairs.

        You worked to pay part of your education, but what you fail to account for is that union representation of your work made it more likely your compensations for work were much more favorable then than now. The unions are moribund now and the working student is SOL. Thus the high debt loads and the very sad, unforgivably sad phenomena of students making an effort to achieve a better future while incurring debts they’ll spend their future trying to repay. That you had union representation then and students likely do not have it now is yet another perfect illustration of the way you benefited from what is no longer supplied.

        I think the reason you missed my point and likely a reason you do so very generally is what you saw in my comment was an opportunity to tell us all how great you are. Not how rough others now have it compared to you, but how you are wonderful. You saw an opportunity to brag. That’s what is important to you. This also confirms a point I made that you believe your life was successful because you yourself are superior. Thanks, MikeKaKa, for the terrific illustrations.

        I’m mildly interested in your biographical information and private anecdotes, but these can’t and shouldn’t be used as if they prove general features of any kind. I say this while knowing you yourself are a superb example of a too large subclass of people.

        It’s nice you voted against prop 13. Prop 13 initiated the departure of broad public support for educational infrastructure. It was conservatives originally backing it. The problem is the “progressives” by and by followed their lead. That’s AD’s point and you remain oblivious. You’re blind to what “progressives” actually support. Take a look at the analogues of HRC’s Arkansas educational initiatives , WJC’s educational reforms , and No Child Left Behind. You can’t say you truly fought for education when you vote for and support HRC, as you continue to do. (No matter whom else you’ve given your worthless votes.)

      • MikeCA
        December 26, 2019 at 2:39 pm

        “You are remarkably obtuse and miss the point nearly each and every time.”

        “I never said your family was wealthy. I said you had benefited from public supports available when you were a student and much less so now. In your inimitable fashion you actually are dumb enough to give specific examples of public supports available to you, less so now.”

        LOL.

        In response to your claim, I listed out all the public educational benefits I could remember. Talk about obtuse.

        My point was that of course I benefited from public support of education. Everyone who attends any public school does. I benefited more than most because I got a PhD, but I had to work hard to qualify for those benefits.

        Companies don’t just offer you good jobs because you show them a diploma and they don’t pay you good salaries for 40 years because you have a piece of paper. You have to work hard and be constantly learning new things to have a long, successful career.

        In the 1970s conservatives (Republicans now) started a war on public education. If public schools had to be integrated, conservatives wanted to destroy them so that parents would send their children to religious or for profit schools. Yes some Democrats have gone along with some of their ideas, like charter schools because lots of middle class parents actually like some charter schools.

        Attacking Democrats for the war on public education is attacking the only people who are trying to save public education. Republicans are still pushing ideas like school vouchers to send tax dollars to religious schools.

        You and AD seem to be running a disinformation operation with the goal of blaming Democrats for the bad ideas that Republicans have been pushing for the last 50 years.

        It’s pretty obvious what your real goals are.

      • Yusef
        December 27, 2019 at 10:24 am

        I’ll give this one more try.

        I’m afraid this is going to be another feeble one, for the weight of hopelessness and futility is upon me.

        “My point was that of course I benefited from public support of education. Everyone who attends any public school does.”

        That was your point, alright. The problem is, I had never said nor intended to mean you’d denied getting support nor that it was big surprise to me “everyone does who attends any public schools.” My points were two-fold: 1) Today, people in your position back in the 60s-70s would, if you were passing through the American system today, RECEIVE LESS public support than back then. Your experience does not compare with the contemporary student’s experience. You do not perceive the glaring differences in situations in a way I find unsettling and unnerving. (Of course I expect you to deny this one way or another.) 2) You believe you earned and deserved your support, i.e. merited it, in a way students today would not or do not merit theirs.

        Both #1 and #2 are monstrous and frightful. American education was of higher quality in the 60s-70s, and it was affordable. It’s not affordable NOW and there’s no good reason for that whatsoever. Do you need this spelled out and detailed? I may have made an error in judgment thinking to do so was unnecessary, but my real suspicion is your problem is elsewhere. That you merited your treatment and ensuing rewards, through “hard work” and otherwise, and working class kids today don’t, is even worse.

        I’m going to try to emphasize the loathsomeness of the latter item. You had said there were no longer enough smart and worthy working class kids who would genuinely benefit from a college degree. Okay. In 2019, 27-30% of American adults have college degrees. By your reckoning, this means 70-73% of the American adult population is not fit. You do the math. You literally believe you are superior to millions of your fellow “citizens”. (Whom you’ve stood to become second class citizens, and I say “second class citizen” is an oxymoron. It is you who are the moron.)

      • MikeCA
        December 27, 2019 at 12:53 pm

        “Both #1 and #2 are monstrous and frightful. American education was of higher quality in the 60s-70s, and it was affordable. It’s not affordable NOW and there’s no good reason for that whatsoever. ”

        I’m not really convinced that the quality of education is worse today than it was in the 60s-70s, but there is no question that college costs have gotten completely out of control. Education is mainly funded at the state level, and generations of conservative led cost cutting has driven up the cost of college. I would point out the it was the Obama administration that force a number of for profit college scams out of business and ordered loan forgiveness for many of the students who were cheated by these scams. The Trump administration revoked many of those rules allowing for profit colleges to cheat students, leaving them deeply in debt for worthless degrees.

        “You had said there were no longer enough smart and worthy working class kids who would genuinely benefit from a college degree.”

        That is not what I said at all. You need to go back and carefully read what I actually said. What I said was:

        “There are a few working class families who have kids qualified to go to college that don’t go because of cost, but not very many any more.”

        In 1900 many of these kids who were qualified to go to college would not have gone because the families could not afford to send them. They would have found working class jobs and stayed in the working class. Today, most of them go to college and find managerial and professional jobs. They don’t stay in the working class.

        When I said: “By 1970 or 1980 there were far fewer people in the working class who were smart enough to go to college,” what I meant was most of those who were smart enough to go to college, had gone to college and were no longer in the working class as adults.

        In the 1950s-1980s it was easier for working class families to afford to send their kids to college. College costs have gotten completely out of control, which is a problem that needs to be addressed. I see only Democrats talking about this as a problem government should solve. Republicans are just trying to make the problem worse.

      • Yusef
        December 28, 2019 at 12:40 pm

        I’ve read your comments a good deal more carefully than you, I am afraid. You are unconscious of what you express and manifest. You can’t be made conscious, either, simply by pointing to the obvious.

        “By 1970 or 1980 there were far fewer people in the working class who were smart enough to go to college.

        […]

        There are a few working class families who have kids qualified to go to college that don’t go because of cost, but not very many any more.”

        According to you, by 1970 or 1980, the talented genes contained in the working class gene pool had been selected away from the working class, leaving a depleted gene pool of, from the standpoint of intelligence, dregs.

        What’s interesting is the way you confirm this eugenicist interpretation of the first quotation with the second. I suppose it is conceivable one generation’s crop of talented could be drained away, but unless a genetic selection had been at work, succeeding generations would replace the lost talent and be there at the gates of academia waiting for their own opportunity to be “drained away” or “better themselves” or whatever. (It is loathsome, for me, to even attempt to restate your idea.)

        What you see, though, is a speciation event, or nearly so, of the kind H.G. Wells describes. There are the Eloi of those who entered the professional world through their “smarts” and have “smart” children who will continue to populate the professional world. Then there are the Morlocks who were left behind because they weren’t smart enough and will have children who aren’t smart enough, either.

        The Morlocks who have low paying service jobs combined with skyrocketing tuitions isn’t included in your account. Please don’t pretend it is. The factor differentiating them is they aren’t smart enough, in your own words. Saying someone is not smart enough is a good way of saying they are inferior. This is especially true in advanced technological society.

        The racist and fascist implications are clear enough to all of us outside your sad little world of groupthink and doublethink. You simply cannot entertain these ideas and be pro-education or progressive.

      • P Ray
        December 29, 2019 at 8:50 pm

        Hi MikeCA,

        when the quality of teachers everywhere is suspect, as many are innumerate and illiterate you can hardly claim that education is better nowadays.

        And the other reason why you managed to keep your job for so long is that the company was making more money keeping you on than they would have if you were not there. For every dollar you made, they made many many more.

        Plus this:
        If there is one thing that I learned in graduate school, it was that I could teach myself anything I needed to know by reading and studying on my own. I taught myself to be an outstanding programmer.

        Your decades-old experience with pointers counts for very little in the age where memory is cheap and programmes now use plenty of algorithms, and where TEAMS of people have breakthroughs … the age of the single smart guy is actually over.

        By the way, what books have you written?

  5. Jack Sparrow
    December 26, 2019 at 9:13 pm

    There’s 2 kinds of LIEbrals: (1)The Limousine Liberals like Samantha Bee, Mark Ruffalo, Chelsea Handler, Chrissy Teigen, Alyssa Milano, Barack/Michelle Obama types.
    (2)The so-called “progressives”/”squad”: AOC, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Greta Thunberg, Ayana Pressley, Stacey Abrahms.

    (2) wants to become (1) one day, hence you see AOC going on all these late night talk show crap selling herself so she can become a celebrity status. She’s not really there fighting for justice. Her idiot meltdowns on false economics is hilarious given she majored in economics. Wants a $15/hr minimum wage but is in support of open borders and illegal immigration which the Koch brothers also love because it cheapens wages. But “muh social justice”.

  6. December 28, 2019 at 4:30 pm

    “According to you, by 1970 or 1980, the talented genes contained in the working class gene pool had been selected away from the working class, leaving a depleted gene pool of, from the standpoint of intelligence, dregs.

    What’s interesting is the way you confirm this eugenicist interpretation of the first quotation with the second. I suppose it is conceivable one generation’s crop of talented could be drained away, but unless a genetic selection had been at work, succeeding generations would replace the lost talent and be there at the gates of academia waiting for their own opportunity to be “drained away” or “better themselves” or whatever. (It is loathsome, for me, to even attempt to restate your idea.)”

    Or you coulda just said what some unschooled, uncouth idiot said above…

    “you sound like those HBD weirdoes quite frankly.”

    • Yusef
      December 28, 2019 at 6:45 pm

      Yeah.

      I agreed with your other point, too, and that link to The Road to Wigan Pier was valuable.

  1. December 28, 2019 at 1:19 pm
  2. December 30, 2019 at 8:53 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: