Great conversation thank you! For those who have access, there was a brilliant piece by John Ganz in the FT on around 7 June - about the politics of despair and the origins of Trump (I think an extract from his book). Definitely worth reading that alongside this discussion.
Definitely a new book for my buy-list, Sam. Your conversation with John Ganz has provided an excellent teaser. Most assuredly, I agree with your last thoughts "Let’s hope they can find someone who can identify the path through that". Don't we all! We on this side of the Atlantic are in the same boat. We need new leaders who will effectively attack the structural problems rather than just tinkering around the edges and passing the buck for the next generation.
I read your commentary with interest. Growing up in a blue-collar family and being part of the professional class for nearly 1/2 century as an attorney, I believe I have some perspective. First, your adjectives about Trump--and his "fellow travelers", the "hard right" are interesting: Fascist, sinister, mafiosi, authoritarian, angry, hateful, psychotic, horrendous, gangster, "a certain violence" are supported by no facts. If you are going to use such rhetoric, it would be more persuasive if you supported it with examples. Or, better yet, let us decide what kind of a character Donald Trump is by providing us with facts. Sadly, this is common practice for progressives. Because progressives are part of the professional and managerial bubble, you get lazy intellectually. Since I said you have no facts, I must provide facts if I am to hold myself to the standard I set for you. I am a dissident here in Blue New England, and all of my professional colleagues are progressives--at least the ones who communicate publicly. I have been shouted down at a Bar Association meeting for asking the speaker about the illegal FISA warrant against Carter Page--just asking the question--and called all kinds of vile names when I suggested five years ago that the a resolution on the First Amendment be presented to the full membership of the Bar--and since then, have been slandered by some of those lawyers during litigation--apparently still angry. And, recently, I wrote a commentary about a resolution signed by 300 Vermont lawyers similarly sloppy to this commentary claiming Donald Trump is violating the rule of law, and providing examples that were neither violations of the rule of law or were outright fabrications. I ended by suggesting, as I have repeatedly for years, that we discuss our differences. Despite being an emeritus member of the Vermont Bar, I was not contacted by any the 300 attorneys. Not one. So, the Left, as demonstrated by this commentary, feels no need to support their claims about Trump, and feels no need to debate with anyone who might disagree with them. It is a sad state of affairs. Finally, the commentary continues the par for the course slander of the Right as racist. Just the opposite is true. The Democratic party was founded by White Supremacists who waged a war killing 750,000 Americans--when the population of the United States was 1/10 of what it is today, in order to preserve slavery. Instead of atoning for its horrific actions--killing hundreds of thousands of its fellow countrymen to keep Black Americans enslaved--it took extraordinary steps to preserve the trappings of slavery, through a system of American Apartheid that lasted for more than a century, with violence and lynchings enforcing the system. My cousin's husband was stationed Democratically controlled Mississippi in 1967--not 1867-- when she went to the local laundromat--and was confused by the sign: "White's Only" --she was from Massachusetts and wondered why she couldn't launder her colored clothes. Germany and Japan atoned for their racism, but the Democratic party never has even apologized--only attempts to smear the rest of America by calling the rest of us racists. And the Democratic party's virulent racism is still alive and well. Black children in Democratically controlled cities are still as far behind White kids in achievement as they were 1/2 century ago--according the NAEP scores between 23 and 26 points behind in reading--, despite some of the highest per capita funding in the nation. Why? because Democrats think Black Americans are lesser human beings, so they don't bother to challenge these kids, don't protect these kids from bullies while the kids are in school. And of course, progressives don't want to protect Black neighborhoods from criminals or rioters--as evidenced by the riots of 2020, and the LA riots this weekend. Their hatred of Trump trumps any motive to protect Black Americans. Democrats are against school choice so these poor kids can get out of these horrible schools, because teachers unions are more important to the party than teaching these little kids. I keep thinking about that little 8-year-old Black girl or Black boy who has to navigate the horrible city streets to get to school, and then is faced with chaos and bullying, and indifferent or incompetent teachers who think that child will not amount to anything. And the once solid Democratic south, which was an economic backwater when Democrats ran it, is now more integrated that northern cities, and is an economic powerhouse, since Republicans have made it competitive. It would be great if we could discuss policies with progressives and cut out the name calling.
Excellent. Thank you. I would highlight one statement that resonates with my own thoughts
“ l would like people to stop viewing things from a reactive and tactical point of view, saying we need to moderate it on this issue, or we need to drop this issue and pick up this issue. And we'll fix the bleeding with this group of voters. I want people to take seriously that something structural is changing and have a new conception of what it means to practice politics, which is not just plugging the leaks, but building a new ship. “
This needs to be examined in the round. It’s a political revolution masked by Trump’s approach. I differ on one point. I think Vance is its spiritual leader in power and is the one to watch.
Great conversation thank you! For those who have access, there was a brilliant piece by John Ganz in the FT on around 7 June - about the politics of despair and the origins of Trump (I think an extract from his book). Definitely worth reading that alongside this discussion.
Definitely a new book for my buy-list, Sam. Your conversation with John Ganz has provided an excellent teaser. Most assuredly, I agree with your last thoughts "Let’s hope they can find someone who can identify the path through that". Don't we all! We on this side of the Atlantic are in the same boat. We need new leaders who will effectively attack the structural problems rather than just tinkering around the edges and passing the buck for the next generation.
I read your commentary with interest. Growing up in a blue-collar family and being part of the professional class for nearly 1/2 century as an attorney, I believe I have some perspective. First, your adjectives about Trump--and his "fellow travelers", the "hard right" are interesting: Fascist, sinister, mafiosi, authoritarian, angry, hateful, psychotic, horrendous, gangster, "a certain violence" are supported by no facts. If you are going to use such rhetoric, it would be more persuasive if you supported it with examples. Or, better yet, let us decide what kind of a character Donald Trump is by providing us with facts. Sadly, this is common practice for progressives. Because progressives are part of the professional and managerial bubble, you get lazy intellectually. Since I said you have no facts, I must provide facts if I am to hold myself to the standard I set for you. I am a dissident here in Blue New England, and all of my professional colleagues are progressives--at least the ones who communicate publicly. I have been shouted down at a Bar Association meeting for asking the speaker about the illegal FISA warrant against Carter Page--just asking the question--and called all kinds of vile names when I suggested five years ago that the a resolution on the First Amendment be presented to the full membership of the Bar--and since then, have been slandered by some of those lawyers during litigation--apparently still angry. And, recently, I wrote a commentary about a resolution signed by 300 Vermont lawyers similarly sloppy to this commentary claiming Donald Trump is violating the rule of law, and providing examples that were neither violations of the rule of law or were outright fabrications. I ended by suggesting, as I have repeatedly for years, that we discuss our differences. Despite being an emeritus member of the Vermont Bar, I was not contacted by any the 300 attorneys. Not one. So, the Left, as demonstrated by this commentary, feels no need to support their claims about Trump, and feels no need to debate with anyone who might disagree with them. It is a sad state of affairs. Finally, the commentary continues the par for the course slander of the Right as racist. Just the opposite is true. The Democratic party was founded by White Supremacists who waged a war killing 750,000 Americans--when the population of the United States was 1/10 of what it is today, in order to preserve slavery. Instead of atoning for its horrific actions--killing hundreds of thousands of its fellow countrymen to keep Black Americans enslaved--it took extraordinary steps to preserve the trappings of slavery, through a system of American Apartheid that lasted for more than a century, with violence and lynchings enforcing the system. My cousin's husband was stationed Democratically controlled Mississippi in 1967--not 1867-- when she went to the local laundromat--and was confused by the sign: "White's Only" --she was from Massachusetts and wondered why she couldn't launder her colored clothes. Germany and Japan atoned for their racism, but the Democratic party never has even apologized--only attempts to smear the rest of America by calling the rest of us racists. And the Democratic party's virulent racism is still alive and well. Black children in Democratically controlled cities are still as far behind White kids in achievement as they were 1/2 century ago--according the NAEP scores between 23 and 26 points behind in reading--, despite some of the highest per capita funding in the nation. Why? because Democrats think Black Americans are lesser human beings, so they don't bother to challenge these kids, don't protect these kids from bullies while the kids are in school. And of course, progressives don't want to protect Black neighborhoods from criminals or rioters--as evidenced by the riots of 2020, and the LA riots this weekend. Their hatred of Trump trumps any motive to protect Black Americans. Democrats are against school choice so these poor kids can get out of these horrible schools, because teachers unions are more important to the party than teaching these little kids. I keep thinking about that little 8-year-old Black girl or Black boy who has to navigate the horrible city streets to get to school, and then is faced with chaos and bullying, and indifferent or incompetent teachers who think that child will not amount to anything. And the once solid Democratic south, which was an economic backwater when Democrats ran it, is now more integrated that northern cities, and is an economic powerhouse, since Republicans have made it competitive. It would be great if we could discuss policies with progressives and cut out the name calling.
Excellent. Thank you. I would highlight one statement that resonates with my own thoughts
“ l would like people to stop viewing things from a reactive and tactical point of view, saying we need to moderate it on this issue, or we need to drop this issue and pick up this issue. And we'll fix the bleeding with this group of voters. I want people to take seriously that something structural is changing and have a new conception of what it means to practice politics, which is not just plugging the leaks, but building a new ship. “
This needs to be examined in the round. It’s a political revolution masked by Trump’s approach. I differ on one point. I think Vance is its spiritual leader in power and is the one to watch.