“Despite his best efforts to ignore or conceal it, the liberalism that he 
labors to restore has a decisively conservative element, because, as Lilla 
rightly recognizes, the enduring ground of citizens’ solidarity in America is a 
shared commitment to a constitutional order that equally protects the 
individual rights of all.”

 

This is a reason why I am, increasingly, ignoring the traditional terms… 
conservative and liberal.  Likewise Republican and Democrat are muddled terms 
that stand for so many disparate issues that they become meaningless as labels.

 

By the way, I don’t know if you saw this Unity Ticket story 
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/25/politics/kasich-hickenlooper-2020-unity-ticket/index.html
 

 

Chris 

 

 

From: BILROJ via Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
[mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2017 10:02 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: [RC] Critique of the identity politics of the Democratic Party

 

 

 

 


A Liberal Calls Out His Party for Its Identity Politics


 

 

By: Peter Berkowitz

Real clear Politics

August 25, 2017


Following a week of relentless criticism from the mainstream media for 
ham-handed and vacillating responses to the neo-Nazi march in Charlottesville, 
President Trump saw his approval rating  
<https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/656915?unlock=GZTW3EZ94OLSYW8J> rise 
slightly. It’s as if elites have one agenda, and a significant part of the 
public another. 

The polling result also suggests that round-the-clock banging on about Trump’s 
flaws and missteps will not be enough to rehabilitate the fortunes of a 
flailing Democratic Party that not only lost the White House last year and 
remained the minority in both houses of Congress but also, since the 2008 
election of Barack Obama, has been routed on the state level, retaining control 
of only 16 governorships and 21 of 98 partisan state legislative chambers. 

There is, though, another approach. 

In 1985, in the aftermath of Ronald Reagan’s crushing defeat of Walter Mondale, 
a small group led by party operative Al From and several Democratic governors 
and senators formed the Democratic Leadership Council. The DLC sought to 
understand why the electorate had thoroughly repudiated their party, which, in 
their minds, was the people’s true representative. 

Undertaking the frequently painful act of looking within, the DLC found the 
party’s message to be out of touch with the legitimate interests of 
middle-class voters. The DLC brain trust—including a slick young Arkansas 
governor who studied at Georgetown, Oxford, and Yale Law School—recalibrated 
their side’s rhetoric and refashioned policies to address, consistent with core 
Democratic convictions and progressive ideals, voters’ sincere concerns about 
dysfunctional big government, the fraying of community, and the elite scorn for 
faith. 

Seven years later, DLC golden boy Bill Clinton was elected president of the 
United States. 

Although Hillary Clinton won the 2016 popular vote, her Electoral College 
loss—the only result that is constitutionally relevant—to Donald Trump 
inflicted a trauma for Democrats comparable to 1984. True, Mondale’s margin of 
defeat was enormous, but he ran against a popular incumbent president and 
gifted politician whose policies were credited with reviving a moribund 
economy. And yes, Clinton fell a mere 70,000-combined votes short in Wisconsin, 
Michigan, and Pennsylvania. But the embarrassing scandal for Democrats was that 
a race between their former secretary of state/former senator/former first lady 
and the major-party candidate with the highest disapproval ratings and the 
least political preparation in American history was even close. 

In contrast to the DLC’s prudent 1985 decision to ask where their party had 
gone astray, today’s Democrats revel in racking up points in the target-rich 
environment provided by Trump’s incessant tweets and belligerent utterances. 
This leaves the left little time for the less thrilling but vital task of 
introspection and self-criticism. 

Mark Lilla, whose antipathy toward Trump is heartfelt and resolute, recognizes 
the danger. Last November, shortly after the election, he  
<https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/sunday/the-end-of-identity-liberalism.html?_r=0>
 called in the New York Times for fellow liberals to face up to their party’s 
portion of responsibility for Trump’s victory, which Lilla traced to the rise 
“identity liberalism.” His contention that “American liberalism has slipped 
into a kind of moral panic about racial, gender and sexual identity that has 
distorted liberalism’s message and prevented it from becoming a unifying force 
capable of governing” provoked outrage on the left.

In “The Once and Future Liberal: After Identity Politics,” Lilla elaborates on 
his thesis, providing a short, elegant polemic exposing the profound harm that 
identity liberalism has caused to the Democratic Party. A professor of 
humanities at Columbia University, and a regular essayist at the New York 
Review of Books, Lilla uses the term “liberal” to denote those who identify 
with the achievements of the New Deal, which summoned Americans to “a 
collective enterprise to guard one another against risk, hardship, and the 
denial of fundamental rights.” The essential contrast in post-World War II 
American politics, for Lilla, is between such liberals, who embodied the 
“Roosevelt Dispensation,” and those who embraced the “Reagan Dispensation” 
with, according to Lilla, its hyper-individualistic citizens living in their 
separate communities and its dedication to free markets, economic growth, and 
the shrinking of government. 

Liberals, he argues, must repudiate the politics of identity because it 
undermines the pursuit of the common good to which American liberalism is 
properly directed. Identity liberalism divides Americans into groups—women, 
African-Americans, Latinos, LGBT Americans, Native Americans, Asian-Americans, 
and on and on. It nourishes a “resentful, disuniting rhetoric of difference” 
that defines membership in terms of distinctive narratives of victimhood, and 
confers status in proportion to the magnitude of the oppression one claims to 
have suffered under the hegemonic sway of white, male structures of power. 
Propelled by America’s colleges and universities—which, Lilla observes, have 
replaced political clubs and shop floors as the incubators of liberal political 
leaders—identity liberalism has abandoned the political mission of bringing 
fellow citizens together in favor of the evangelical one of extracting 
professions of faith and punishing heretics, apostates, and infidels. 

Disappointingly for an author whose purpose is to rouse fellow liberals to 
action, Lilla offers no proposal for reforming our colleges and universities, 
which he blames for indoctrinating students in identity politics dogma. But he 
does sketch the larger political goal: a “more civic-minded liberalism” that 
cultivates a shared appreciation of the rights and responsibilities that all 
America citizens share and which encourages individuals to undertake “the hard 
and unglamorous task of persuading people very different from themselves to 
join a common effort.” 

The reply from the establishment left to Lilla’s brief for less victim politics 
and more retail politics was swift and sure. To mark publication last week of 
“The Once and Future Liberal,” the New York Times published a  
<https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/books/review/mark-lilla-the-once-and-future-liberal.html?mcubz=0>
 review by Yale University History Professor Beverly Gage that dismissed 
Lilla’s critique as “trolling disguised as erudition.” Finding nothing bad to 
say about identity liberalism except to wonder why it hasn’t generated more 
marchers, Gage sent Times readers on their way with a clear conscience to 
continue to exhaust themselves in venting fury against Trump’s daily outrages. 

The serious criticism of Lilla is twofold. First, while holding aloft the idea 
of a common citizenship, he lapses from time to time into an illiberal politics 
of friends and enemies revolving around a fundamental antagonism between right 
and left. Conservatives, in Lilla’s account, are simple-minded, selfish, and 
anti-political; indifferent to the plight of those not like them; and oblivious 
of the claims of culture and nation. To assert that “a vote for Trump was a 
betrayal of citizenship, not an exercise of it” is—in lockstep with the 
purveyors of identity liberalism—to smear nearly half of your fellow citizens 
as traitors. 

Second, Lilla propagates a basic misunderstanding about the liberalism he 
laudably sets out to save. That liberalism is not the antithesis of 
conservatism, or, at least of that conservatism devoted to liberty, limited 
government, and democratic politics. Despite his best efforts to ignore or 
conceal it, the liberalism that he labors to restore has a decisively 
conservative element, because, as Lilla rightly recognizes, the enduring ground 
of citizens’ solidarity in America is a shared commitment to a constitutional 
order that equally protects the individual rights of all. 

Sorting these matters out can provoke a useful soul searching for Democrats. 
And for Republicans who believe that Trump has hijacked their party.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • [RC] Cr... BILROJ via Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
    • RE... Chris Hahn

Reply via email to