Home > Critical Thinking, Current Affairs, Dystopia, Musings, Philosophy sans Sophistry, Reason, Secular Religions, Skepticism > Why Allegedly ‘Progressive’ Political Parties Keep Losing Elections: 3

Why Allegedly ‘Progressive’ Political Parties Keep Losing Elections: 3

In the previous post of this series, I wrote about why “woke” performative agendas which are so popular among the incestuous classes in charge of LIEbral and “progressive” parties throughout the west have driven the working class vote away from them, and towards right-wing parties. It does not help that these parties, once in power, either continue the right-wing policies of previous administrations or try to “compromise” with them. To make matters worse, leadership of LIEbral and “progressive” parties desperately want bourgeois social respectability and therefore lack the spine or balls to stand up for their beliefs. I also wrote that all their talk about “environment” and “climate change” also ends up alienating working-class voters. Here is why..

Some of you might remember that I had posted a (still to be completed) series about why belief in anthropogenic climate change was a form of secular apocalypticism. The very short version is as follows: belief in man-made climate change is a secular version of Catholicism and like every other religion is about controlling other people to benefit and enrich a few. So why is belief in this secular religion so toxic for the future of LIEbral and “progressive” political parties? More than a few of you must have heard about the Yellow vests movement in France, which is over a year old and has transformed into an anti-neoliberal movement. Do you know what started it? Well.. the neoliberal leaders of France decided to raise taxes on gasoline and diesel to make up for losses from corporate handouts and fulfill “environmental” mandates written by un-elected bureaucrats.

Turns out, that this was the last straw for people living in rural and other non-urban areas of France who had already suffered a multi-decade hollowing of their local economy through “free trade” and other neoliberal scams. This combination of neglect and exploitation of non-urban working class in France is the reason why parties such as the National Front (now National Rally) have a growing electoral presence in that country. Curiously, this is the same dynamic which has bolstered popular support for parties such as AfD in Germany, Freedom Party in Austria, Law and Justice Part in Poland etc. Meanwhile the increasingly impoverished and increasingly non-white urban working class in west European countries face this same problem by turning to ethnic and religious identitarianism in addition to occasional mass car-burnings and other acts of arson.

While corporate “media” in USA does not cover “inconvenient” news from outside USA, a few of you might have heard about recent protests by farmers in Germany, Netherlands, France, Ireland etc. While the list of grievances driving each of these protests is slightly different, the common thread running through these protests is being subject to new capricious laws and regulations written by faceless bureaucrats who have never worked with their hands for a single day in their life. So why are these protests becoming more frequent and larger? Shouldn’t the mechanisms of democracy reduce such conflicts over time? So why isn’t it happening? I am guessing you know the answer, don’t you. Now tell me, why would you expect people who live in rural and non-urban areas whose livelihoods are threatened by “environmental” and other regulations to vote for the very parties pushing for them. Would you vote for somebody bent on destroying your livelihood?

Many LIEbrals try to convince themselves that Trump’s rants against LED light-bulbs, low-flow toilets, windmill farms, EPA regulations for automobiles etc don’t have traction among voters. Anybody who has talked with people without blue-tick marks on Twitter or part of the incestuous circle of establishment LIEbrals will tell you that LEB light-bulbs are far less cost-effectiveness than they promise, low-flow toilets are functionally worse than their predecessors and wind-mill farms are not a reliable source of electricity. They will also tell you that the surge of crossovers in american automobile market has to do with how they are classified by unelected bureaucrats. Or have a look at the level of knowledge about firearms displayed by politicians exposing “anti-gun” policies. Why would you vote for people who are trying to immiserate you, talk down to you and generally make your life harder and worse? Did I mention that they have shown themselves to be not knowledgeable about the topics on which they make decisions.

Do these LIEbrals and “progressive” idiots understand the consequences of people working in coal mining and oil and gas extraction-processing not having a job or livelihood? Why should they trust these incestuous losers who look and talk down to then help them transition to “better” jobs? How has that worked for all those people who lost their livelihoods after their factory was moved to Mexico and China? Hasn’t the impoverishment of flyover states in the past 2-3 decades taught LIEbrals nothing? Haven’t they figured out that the electoral success of the republican party (and right-wing parties in other western countries) in such areas has far more to with the voters feeling abandoned by all those supposedly center-left parties? Do these LIEbral dumbfucks comprehend how much they are hated by people not living the few islands of relative prosperity? Are they even capable? You know that is a rhetorical question.. right?

In the next part of this series, I will go into more detail about how the various tactics used to sell bullshit scams such as “man-made climate change” and other parts of the secular religion known as environmentalism has ended up creating far more skeptics and non-believers than would otherwise be the case. Then again, the credentialed incestuous bunch of losers known as LIEbrals and “progressives” have never shown much ability to empathize with people who do not believe in their bullshit cults. Of course, they increasingly cannot win national elections either..

What do you think? Comments?

  1. December 28, 2019 at 4:16 pm

    Trying to reason with someone like MikeCA is just as futile as trying to reason with a feminist in their “I bathe In Male Tears” shirt whilst they demand that “feminism helps men too ™!”

    Here’s the best example I can come up with that I think most here will understand. I would rather interview for a job with a fat slob racist Trump loving white guy than for some “woke” Berniebro “tech” company. Why, you may ask. I already know there ain’t a chance in hell that the Trumpypoops fuck is giving me a chance and on the odd chance I do get the job it’s because no one else was foolish enough to take it. With the “tech” company they jerk me around with questionnaires and other bullshit that has NOTHING to do with my ability TO DO THE FUCKING JOB. It’s like some kind of reverse McCarthyism where they see how loyal I am to my own subservience and not questioning their polyticks. (Hiya, MikeCA, do I need that writing instructor to help with my “word salads” or one of AD’s precious prostitutes to help me with my “anger issues” and inability to think clearly because of an unbusted nut???)

    The “tech” company will tell me I’m just not a good KKKultural fit ™ all whilst hiring some Jack Donovan loving white guy who says we need to vote Democrat because otherwise he will be made fun off for skipping work to go drinking at the bathhouse. And if that was too much wordsalad for MikeCA, let me spell it out….

    The Trumpypoops guy is overt racism whereas the Democratic/woke bullshit is covert racism. The second is far more poisonous. With the first, at least I know my “failing in life” are not all my fault and a corrupt society has set me up to fail. With the second, I am just as likely to fail (if not more so) but they try to tell me it is not because the system is fucked but because I am not “woke” enough and didn’t check my male privilege ™ or whatever bullshit a fucking bigot like Amanda Marcotte is screaming about these days….

  2. MikeCA
    December 29, 2019 at 2:55 pm

    This whole series is just such obvious right-wing (Russian) propaganda. Yes the Labour party in the UK suffered an historic defeat in the last election. This largely happened because the working class in the UK, the natural base of the Labour party, supported Brexit and the Labour party leaders did not. To help woo Labour party voters, Boris Johnson promised to increase funding for the NHS, not a normal Tory position.

    Watching too many reruns of ‘The West Wing’?

    In the US, the white working class has been voting Republican since the 1980s and Republican’s are still trying to take health care benefits away from poor working people. In 2018 Democrats took back the House largely because of Republican attacks on health care.

    The truth is that Trump is tearing the Republican party apart. The Republican party today is little more than an authoritarian personality cult. Even Trump’s strongest supporters, the white Evangelicals, are being torn apart. White Evangelicals unquestioning support for Trump is turning off young people. White Evangelicals are on average 10+ years older than the white population of the US, because young people just don’t care about issues like gay marriage and they see the damage Trump is doing to the environment. Many young people born into Evangelical families are leaving the church. Many Evangelical leaders know that continued blind loyalty to a totally corrupt and immoral leader like Trump will ultimately destroy the church. We are just starting to see the first cracks in Trump’s White Evangelical support.

    Let me remind you that states such as West Virginia were solidly democratic right into the 1990s. Establishment democrats abandoned the working class, not the other way around.

      • MikeCA
        December 30, 2019 at 6:54 pm

        To avoid embarrassing yourself in the future, I would not write blog posts when stoned out of your mind.

        I didn’t say any of the things that you projected into what I wrote. Those ideas come from your mind.

      • December 30, 2019 at 7:21 pm

        “In fact MikeCA’s comments suggest
        HBD/eugenics themes”

        Pt 2:

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

        So Mikey, is intelligence nature or nurture? Or both? Or neither? Yes, you said “smart” a measure of intelligence or what those HBD weirdoes obsess over IQ.

        A response by a man much smarter than myself who has spent too many dollars on writing instructors, but not so mny as our illustrious host advocatus diaboli has spent on “sex ed”:

        “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.”

      • December 30, 2019 at 7:23 pm

        “In fact MikeCA’s comments suggest
        HBD/eugenics themes alongside the “I got mine”/”Pull yourself up by the bootstraps” themes right wingers love to insult low status men with. ”
        Pt. 1

        “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.”


        “I got mine…”

        The correct reply for him is “OK, Boomer”..

      • P Ray
        December 31, 2019 at 4:35 am

        Only really privileged people can write down how “I got all that privilege” and then later say “but I had to compete for it”
        and then say
        “I never said what I said”.

        I can safely say that many Universities now have an incestuous relationship with their Ph.D and Master’s students, because what I observed in New Zealand is the Ph.D and Master’s students contribute to the university rankings as their output is a kind of score, and the more Ph.D and Master’s students working on papers, the higher the score of that University.

        But while I was there they were absolutely terrible tutors, I skipped all their tutorials AND learnt off of a whole bunch of ebooks.

        They also occupy paid positions where their qualifications are not really put to use, e.g. Residential Assistant and Career Counsellors.

        It’s a scam of both sinecure and “who you know” vs. what you know. And of course, for me, was an early introduction to the blackpill.

      • December 31, 2019 at 7:42 am

        Advocatus Diaboli: “The correct reply for him is “OK, Boomer”..

        OK, Kumar.

      • December 31, 2019 at 7:45 am

        Advocatus Diaboli: “The correct reply for him is “OK, Boomer”..

        OK, Kumar.

      • Yusef
        December 31, 2019 at 1:05 pm

        Look at the MartketWatch graph of percentage increases/cost of university education over time. I had to look twice because the percent increases for public universities turns out to be greater than for private.

        Note the divergence begins during the disastrous W years, but is unchecked during the O years and in fact widens dramatically during O’s eight years in office.

        Meanwhile, there’s the minimum wage crawling along with no percentage increases from 1990 to 2016 when the graph ends. It doesn’t matter whether there’s a D or an R in the oval office. (Get that Mikey?)

        Also, the rising cost of higher education didn’t begin with W. It goes back to the 1990s. Rising costs of “higher” education were also unaffected by an R or D in office. (Get that Mikey?)

      • Yusef
        December 31, 2019 at 1:15 pm


        It was the early career salary which was flat or underwater. The minimum wage has had periods of percentage increase. Interestingly, one period of increase commenced during the second W administration.

        The graph ends in 2017, not 2016.

      • MikeCA
        January 22, 2020 at 9:41 am

        I call bullshit.

        stonerwithabooner and Yusef are both bullshitting.

        “If you’re misrepresenting or selectively quoting, you aren’t lying, but you certainly don’t care about the truth, either. You are bullshitting.”


        Sorry to take so long in replying to this. I ended up on a jury for several weeks in some silly civil case. I spent a lot of time reading stonerwithabooner’s old blog posts. I suspect he is another Russian disinformation blogger, but he has done a better job of hiding it than AD.

        Stonerwithabooner seems to recommend that “low status men” do just enough to get by. He mocks men who work hard to try to get ahead. I’m not sure what he means by “low status men”. I always thought of myself as a low status. My grandfathers on both sides worked in the factories. My father worked in the factory for around 12 years while going to college at night. I worked in the factory for 2 summers while going to college.

      • P Ray
        January 22, 2020 at 6:39 pm

        To MikeCA:
        You sound a lot like Old Economy Steve:

    • MikeCA
      December 30, 2019 at 12:02 pm

      “Watching too many reruns of ‘The West Wing’?”

      I’ve actually never watched it.

      “Let me remind you that states such as West Virginia were solidly democratic right into the 1990s. Establishment democrats abandoned the working class, not the other way around.”

      Yes, West Virginia with Democratic Senator Robert Ku Klux Klan Byrd. Robert Byrd, who had been a KKK organizer in his 20s, stayed in the Democratic party till his death. The shift of West Virginia to a mostly Republican state is all part of the party realignment after the civil rights and voting rights acts of the mid 1960s.

      Today Joe Manchin is a Democratic Senator from West Virginia and he is probably the most conservative Democrat in the US Senate.

      Let me remind you that California was a mostly Republican state, with politicians like Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, but all that changed after the 1990s. Arnold Schwarzenegger was a Republican governor after the 90s, but he was not really a Republican and never would have been able to win the Republican primary. When Kamala Harris won the US Senate seat recently, Republicans could not even find a candidate that could make it past the primary.

  3. Yusef
    December 29, 2019 at 4:19 pm

    “This largely happened because the working class in the UK, the natural base of the Labour party, supported Brexit and the Labour party leaders did not.”

    Isn’t it a problem when the natural base of a party supports something its (supposed) party representatives do not?

    Isn’t the very best the natural base can do be to not re-elect those (supposed) representatives? What else would they do? (Short of stringing them up by the neck and hanging them as traitors.)

    Isn’t seeing what’s actually going on and comprehending why useful?

    Wouldn’t the very best the party representatives could do, failing to convince their base they had better ideas, (i.e. lead), yield to their base, (follow), or go back to their private lives outside active politics (get out of the way)? Duc, sequere, aut de via decede. What you expect is nonsense, twit: obstruct, thwart and betray and still expect to popularly lead.

    • MikeCA
      December 30, 2019 at 12:59 pm

      This is the same kind of political re-alignment that happened in the US after the civil rights acts. Democrats dominated the Southern states after the civil war until the 1970s. This was because Abraham Lincoln had been a Republicans, so the segregationist Southerners became Democrats. After the civil rights acts in the mid 60s, Republicans noted how segregationist Democrat George Wallace was able to appeal to Midwestern white working class voters with opposition to school busing. Conservative Republicans adopted rhetoric like George Wallace had used to change the South from solidly Democratic to solidly Republican and the make inroads with the white working class.

      Are you suggesting that Democrats in the 1970s should have supported segregation and opposed the civil rights acts because that is what the Southern Democrats favoured?

      • Yusef
        December 31, 2019 at 12:41 am

        “Are you suggesting that Democrats in the 1970s should have supported segregation and opposed the civil rights acts because that is what the Southern Democrats favoured?”

        The short and simple answer to your question is: NO.

        The longer and (hopefully) better answer has to wait. What are you talking about?

        Lyndon Johnson was a southern democrat, and it was during his administration(s) the civil rights acts were passed.

        Lyndon Johnson won by a landslide in 1964. Check it out.

        He lost a few southern states… Is that what you mean? Losing those few states meant he didn’t really have support for his civil rights bills?

        Please explain.

  4. HuskerWolverine88
    December 29, 2019 at 5:07 pm

    My own opinion on the matter of climate change is a little bit more nuanced. I actually think the scientific evidence for man made climate change is overwhelming. It just requires a little bit of research to see that this is in fact the case. Where LIEbrals have gone wrong is four fold? First, they haven’t adequately explained how man made climate change effects the individual? Why should a factory worker in the rust belt give a shit that the temperature of the planet is rising when he can’t put food on the table for his family? Secondly, they’ve politicized the data to place the blame on the individual consumer rather than the corporate overlords who contribute the most to the problem. They do this by virtue signaling through insane “solutions” such as individuals driving a Prius, individual recycling, and veganism. Thirdly, their solution of regulation seems to effect only the consumer and not the corporations and further exacerbates the problem of job loss in states like WV whose economy relies on coal. It’s why I don’t think any solution without a jobs training program for these individuals will suffice. Bernie is on the right track with the Green New Deal but even that might not address the job loss of transitioning us off of fossil fuels. Anything moving forward though has to retrain individuals for the green technological sector. Hamstringing American workers through regulation so China can lead in green technology is not a viable nor sustainable solution. I honestly believe that rust belt workers don’t give a shit what sector they’re working in as long as they have a job. If that’s green technology then so be it. The point is to retrain these workers rather than forcing them out of their non-green jobs to “save the planet.” Which brings me to problem four which is LIEbrals use of language. “Save the Planet” is as preposterous as it sounds. Man made climate change will do nothing of significance to the planet it can and will however effect our species. George Carlin once had a famous skit on this. He basically says that the planet will be just fine it’s the humans that will be fucked.

    • jim
      December 31, 2019 at 7:51 pm

      Capital of India had the coldest temps today since 1903. And also their air quality was so bad that the smog froze causing numerous wrecks because driver’s couldn’t see ahead. Their air quality levels were bad enough to be 10 times over what the “experts” claim is bad. Toxic really.

      Problem with the left is what they propose doesn’t any address any climate change. It doesn’t dare hold the countries that pollute the most to any standards. But it does satisfy their need to punish white America.

      • P Ray
        December 31, 2019 at 9:38 pm

        From what I’m reading though, right now Australia’s air quality is the worst in the world.
        Air Quality Index of Sydney is 434.

        Maybe things changed in 24 hours? So I guess all we need to do is wait a day and the weather will be all right …

        Also the “environmentalism” of white countries is actually …
        “Right now we have the consumer goods, so let’s tell people elsewhere they can’t have them … but we need to ensure they like it and don’t get angry.
        So we call it environmentalism, and then say, you see, right now we have learned we need to save the planet. We can’t give up our stuff, but you guys, who are not white, why don’t you stop trying to reach our level of consumption.
        We can’t change our habits, but you better change yours.”

        Doesn’t sound racist or self-serving at all … no siree …

      • P Ray
        December 31, 2019 at 9:39 pm

        Whoops Canberra, not Sydney.
        Sometimes type too fast.

      • P Ray
        December 31, 2019 at 10:06 pm

        Good news for smokers though:
        I read it so that breathing the air in Sydney right now is equivalent to smoking 37 cigarettes simultaneously. And since the air quality is constant, you will be smoking these 37 simultaneous cigarettes continously.
        Probably not the best for a long and healthy life.

        But if you enjoy smoking, you can do it for life …

      • Yusef
        January 1, 2020 at 8:25 am

        I agree with P Ray about the hypocrisy, but Jim has a strong point if we’re giving any thought to the actual effectiveness of the measures being proposed. I don’t know why anyone would support something that can’t work.

        What we’d need would be international cooperation, but we’re never going to have that. Some of this — maybe most– is due to what the US, behind frilly rhetoric, actually does in the world.

        Nobody talks about it any more, but the US never ratified the Kyoto Accords. This would have been a necessary first step towards international cooperation. Incidentally, India and Australia did. Australia even has binding targets which will be kicking in “eventually.”

        About HuskerWolves’ original comment: if you think the LieBrals are serious, why weren’t they more committed to ratification? Why have they allowed this to be forgotten. There was a democratic President sitting in office in 1998, and Mr. Al “Global Warming Activist” Gore presided over the senate. Then we had eight years of Obama, including a period of time when the dems controlled house and senate.

        Mr. Al “Global Warming Activist” Gore, would make a so-so documentary and garner a Nobel Prize for it, but he didn’t raise much fuss in ’98, and rarely mentioned the issue while on the prez. campaign trail in 2000. You trust these people to actually get anything done? You may think we have some fresh faces with fresh ideas, and I ask you to think again.

    • plus d'un cafard
      January 17, 2020 at 9:39 am

      There might be evidence of global warming, and it might be man-made. But the scientists pushing this are lying, conspiring crooks (as can be found from the contents of the first climategate emails) and have a very unscientific, near-religious conception of their work (second climategate mails).

  5. January 5, 2020 at 4:10 pm

    … and the base of all of this truth was well known the year Nixon was elected to his first term.


    Thanks for the highlights of that history anyway.

    You see, people choose to “believe” what they “believe”. What does the word “believe” really mean? Does it mean the same as “pretend”? If someone does not know the real truth, they are “free” to “believe” it is whatever they OR SOMEONE ELSE wants them to. This is why, for example, a considerable number of persons today “believe” that the universe formed them the “wrong” gender and they can go to a doctor and have it changed.

    The basic truths about Nixon were well known at the time he was first elected because the truth was self evident and blatant at the time. But people do not like the truth because it is always inconvenient at least in some respects to everyone and in all respects to at least someone. The truth remains inconvenient to some all of the time and inconvenient to all some of the time. The truth has a mind of its own but never a mind to lie.

    Anyway, the reason so much bullshit pervades, evolves and propagates is because most people would rather “believe” than KNOW (or admit the truth of not knowing). Bullshit is always temporarily good for the ego and easily made fashionable until enough people are damaged severely enough by it.

  6. January 22, 2020 at 12:43 pm

    “Stonerwithabooner (sic) seems to recommend that “low status men” do just enough to get by.”

    Yes, I have discussed “opting out” and essentially living off of part-time and seasonal work to have the time to pursue hobbies. I specifically go on a different tangent than AD as I would recommend putting extra money away as Fuck You money whereas he goes out and buys pu$$y like a consumer with ca$h burning a hole in his pocket.

    “He mocks men who work hard to try to get ahead.”

    I have specifically called out “libertarian tough guy” MGTOW’s who cry how much they lose in taxes and how hard they work at “cahreers.” They actually sound strikingly similar to neo-liberal feminists. But that “cahreer” can be taken away at any time. 2008 anyone?

    “I worked in the factory for 2 summers while going to college.”

    It has already been discussed why this isn’t an option anymore. You are tone deaf to not acknowledge this when speaking to others who have faced this. Hence my comments about your “I got mine” attitude.

    “I suspect he is another Russian disinformation blogger, but he has done a better job of hiding it than AD.”

    One of my bestest friends was a siberian husky. Damn, she must’ve recruited me and I didn’t even know it, haha…


  1. July 12, 2020 at 3:45 pm

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: