Oren, it's too easy to point fingers and it's dismaying to see you do so. Biden is gone, what he did or didn't do no longer counts, and in a post titled "Notes from an Inauguration", the content is anything but. You've done yourself an immense disservice if you'd like to be taken as a serious thinker. I follow you to learn about conservative viewpoints on policy, not your perceptions of Biden's inadequacy. Stay on your topics, and stop bitching about the other side.
Yes, he's gone and we move ahead to better times. But I disagree that BIden's incompetent (or simply mischievous?) behavior makes no difference looking ahead. Rather, his behavior further denigrates the stature of the presidency for his successors. If you fear or dislike Trump, for example, he now has some leeway to behave similarly with impunity. Pardoning the Jan.6 "insurrectionists" ? Not to worry, Biden takes the cake with his last minute preemptive pardons of numerous potential wrong-doers who now look guilty without even having been accused of anything.
Biden failed? He screwed up with DeJoy, TT, and Garland. That’s it. You rich idiots are constantly looking for false equivalencies and who to blame for the return of the fat orange terrorist. Well the media (YOU) are the ones who have a huge chunk of the blame for this disaster. Americans are their own worst enemy, and instead of pointing out our love of anti-intellectualism and demagogues (which is what the cult of celebrity actually is), you’re just going to continue with “it bleeds, more clicks, more eyes, more money”. The raids begin today, but you’re probably busy making up a new headline for your next piece on it.
"The raids begin today." Let us hope so. We've got a few million people who've already been issued deportation orders (that we haven't even attempted to enforce for years) to kick out of the country.
Note: this should be completely noncontroversial. These are people who had their day in immigration court and lost and were told to go home. If you defend the practice of not enforcing these orders you are weakening the rule of law.
Well, at least Oren admits what he thinks, pathetic as it is. Aren’t we all pretty tired of the whataboutism Don’s defenders employ? And aren’t we tired of elites like Oren whining about “the elites”? Elites like Oren know the truth, they know. JD, another elite, was right the first time he spoke about Don. Then he self-gelded. Oren knows JD was right the first time. He employs whataboutism as the tactic to salve his guilty conscience. There is plenty to criticize ole Joepa for, my list is long too. But at least Joepa doesn’t publicly brag about “acing” a dementia test:) Apparently Oren has never actually attended, or listened to, a Don rally to hear the incoherent bleating. Oren, you assign us reading, I’m assigning you the task of actually listening to a full rally speech-then report back on who is more lucid-Don or Joepa. Oren even goes so far as to excuse Don’s insurrection, which is breathtaking. It’s also frightening. History has shown that authoritarian movements depend on “elites” acquiescing, bending the knee to the strongman. Those elites in the end are as, if not more, central to the success of the movements as the actual strongman. I choose to believe JD’s first view of Don. I choose to believe the top level staff Don appointed, (he called them “the best people”) when they warn of his authoritarian ways. Just be honest Oren, tell the truth, like Mike Pence did. Stop hiding behind Joepa. Admit JD is an old fashioned elite phony. It’s much more becoming of an elite.
Defenders of Democracy are really defending not democracy but late-stage-liberalism. They call it "liberal-democracy", but that's an oxymoron. The "democrat" half says law should be based on the will of the people. The "liberal" half says law should be based on universal principles that are inviolate even by the will of the people. These two don't easily coexist in a single package.
When pushed to the wall, a "liberal-democrat" will have to choose which half takes precedence. They will either become a reluctant-democrat ("I support the will of the people even though I disagree with it") or a authoritarian-liberal ("I support this principle even though the people hate it").
This debate was with us from the beginning, going back to Jefferson and Hamilton. But the Hamiltonian / authoritarian-liberal side gained the upper hand after 1970 and has been running roughshod over everything since. Let us hope Donald Trump (and especially J.D. Vance in 2028 -- is it too early still?) will be a turn back to real democracy.
Well said Brian. But why did the “authoritarian-liberal” side gain (and keep) the upper hand? I think it was the arms race in campaign finance that began at the end of the 70s, which disenfranchised voters and empowered wealthy neoliberals who funded campaigns, even as neoliberal policies screwed the rest of us.
I'll be honest, I'm a philosophy and poli-sci teacher, so my bent is toward ideology and less toward things like campaign finance. You may be right -- I have no doubt that campaign finance changes have had detrimental effects -- but I think the "long march through the institutions" of the 1968 radicals better explains it. This group came down hard for liberal-authoritarianism, and they've been running the show ever since.
The best example of this ideology is the harassing of Jack Phillips, the Colorado baker who just wants to make wedding cakes. "You will bake the gay cake or we will destroy you, bigot", is the clarion call of the modern liberal authoritarian. And voters mostly blew that off at the time. However it turned out, "you will accept the penis in your daughter's locker room, or we will destroy you" was a bridge too far.
Thanks for the reply, Brian, and your Substack is interesting in the range of interests. I used to teach German history at the college level. To me, progressive cultural radicalism is a compensation for the inability (blocked by money in politics) to pursue economic fairness. Absent that core Democratic Party mission, CRT and gender nonsense are the only ways for people to feel they are still on the Left. Also, I don’t see how neoliberalism descended from 60s radicalism. I think it was more Tony Coelho, Bill Clinton, and the DLC chasing corporate money by becoming more “pro business.” Please consider subscribing to my recently launched Substack. Dan
Excellent summary of Biden's final days in office, especially the comments on the so-called 28th Amendment to the Constitution. A couple of years ago I got into an exchange with a college classmate---who is a practicing attorney---who insisted that Biden just had to tell the national archivist to put the erstwhile amendment into the constitution, that it was a done deal. I, who have no law degree, told her the reality of that entire ratification process, that it had not in fact been completed by the terms of the enabling legislation. She never responded, no surprise there, so have been amused to see this last-ditch Biden attempt to change the Constitution at his own whim. This incident will certainly go down in the history books as an example of how not to fulfill one's presidential responsibilities.
I feel so many people fail to see Trump for what he is: CANCER. Now, it could be terminal, it could not, but like almost all cancer, it comes from years, if not decades of shitty living, or what could be imperfectly described as “neoliberalism” — which was a wholly bipartisan project.
People seem to forget that the bulk of “Scranton Joe's” career was spent representing the Great State of DELAWARE, one of the world’s top tax havens, mainly writing laws (setting the rules) in favor of CREDIT CARD COMPANIES, some of the most vicious rent-seekers in capitalist history.
This administration was THE WORST in my lifetime. Jimmy Carter was outstanding tbh (appointed Volker, met with Pope to get the pontiff to visit behind the Iron Curtain ensuring the wall came down, etc). Never whined about his opponent but did what America needed.
Biden just lined the pockets of his family, when cognizant for a few moments. Thank God it's, "...morning in America...AGAIN."
"Our republican form of government really does require a commitment from all sides to abide by democratic norms even when the other side is winning, in recognition that the alternative is ultimately worse for everyone"
Respectfully, Oren, it's hard to ask one side to abide by this logic when the other has - in reality *and* appearance - built an ironclad reputation for total disregard for it. I've no horse in a race of two pox-ridden animals this country has been asked to pick between and smile about the choice for the past 50 years, but it feels deeply disingenuous to cite observing "fight rules" as customary and necessary when the country has a convicted felon and a sex offender in the highest office of the land. I'm not saying it's a good idea for gloves to be off on both sides, just that asking for it *now* is a bit of a bad joke. In fact, more than just a bad joke - it's an insult to anyone who wasn't in a coma or catatonic state on January 6 2021. Asking for civility and observance of "rules of engagement" *now* is a silly way to detonate your reputation.
Oren's compulsive anti-democrat vitriol gets the better of him yet again. Others have amply commented on his apparent cognitive deficits in comparing the two parties and their leaders objectively.
The thing is what he sort of says at the end is correct. Both parties are corrupt and in thrall to the financial elite. Here I must point out that it is critical to maintain clarity and accuracy here. The Financial Elite and other vague "elite" are not equivalent. Calling college educated people elite is not correct. Elite as exceptional in a particular domain of effort is the general meaning. That could be sports, academic expertise, or custom furniture making expertise. It can mean those at the head of bureaucracies as well. Popular social media talkers, left and right, can be considered elites.
"You can’t pursue unfettered free trade, financial deregulation, and a college-for-all education system and then get upset when you lose elections to opponents who don’t uphold your “norms.” And as we’ve seen in the past four years, elites have their own set of progressive social issues for which they are equally happy to disregard the same norms they’re otherwise preening about." This quote shows Oren is unhinged. Unfettered Free Trade and financial deregulation are the Republican conservative raison d'etre. Adding "college for all" to make it a Democrat issue is completely disingenuous. Republicans forced that agenda with Reagan's "success" if you want to call it that. I don't. The reality is true though that Democrats functionally acquiesced. The question is why? That's where Oren gets back to what matters but still misses what matters.
"But when everyone understands this, and political agendas that address people’s actual priorities and preferences become table stakes on all sides, well then just getting those basics right is no longer the easy differentiator. Then, and only then, will practicing a more aspirational and healthy politics once more become important. At least, that’s the corner we should all aim to turn." When everyone understands this, sure, and how is that going to happen? Is Trump aiming to make that happen? Are Republicans? No and No. Are Democrats as they evaluate their setbacks? No. Because both parties are owned and run by the Financial Elite. Stupid conflict keeps them in power. What will arise as democrats regroup is literally anything except what matters which is the material wellbeing of the working class. That is not a "democrat" problem as such. It is The MO of the Financial Elite. It is also not a Republican issue except in so far as the hegemony and control by the financial elite is the Republican brand, apparently vividly reborn.
Most of the issues of conflict have worker well-being adjacency. Like immigration. They can resonate with workers and policy conflicts can divide voters. That is the actual goal of politicians who work for the FE. Addressing immigration along with industrial policy along with foreign policy along with finance policy etc etc with an overarching goal of worker prosperity and stability would be fantastic and effective. But no party has that as its guiding principle. Those issues are and will be contested separately in order to divide voters. Oren is naive to imagine otherwise. What he should be vitriolic about is the corruption by wealth of our political system. I'm fine with calling that out wherever it happens.
While I'll not attempt to respond to the claim that Democrats have proved poor defenders of democracy, it requires willful blindness to ignore Trump's autocratic tendencies. In January 2021, Trump attempted to remain in power by bullying the vice president and Republicans in Congress to send certified electoral votes back to Republican controlled legislatures to "recount" the votes and certify him the winner. For decades, presidents have accreted more and more power by issuing executive orders. Yesterday he issued a flood of executive orders, many with little legal basis, which addressed many matters that would be better dealt with by Congress. Based on their euphoric response to Trump's inaugural address, few Republican members of Congress are likely to stand up to his power grab for fear of being primaried. Without such opposition, election to the presidency in the future will be tantamount to a grant of unlimited power.
I’m sorry to leave a second comment, but Oren ‘s guilt-riddled whataboutism screed demands it. We watched the insurrection on tv. We listened to Don’s staff, and myriad fellow republicans tell the truth of Don’s month’s long plot. We hear Don literally to this day lie about the 2020 election, undermining the bedrock of our constitutional republic-a belief in the peaceful transfer of power. Even after all that, Oren says the following, proving that even a seemingly smart elite can become a cult member: “None of this is good, in the short term. Our republican form of government really does require a commitment from all sides to abide by democratic norms even when the other side is winning, in recognition that the alternative is ultimately worse for everyone.” Sorry Oren, there is more at stake than debates over tariff policy among pinheaded elite economists. Country over party.
I did an analysis with my civics students the week over the election. One of the most interesting exit poll results was this one:
"73% of voters said that the American democracy was under threat in this election. However, of the 75% that said democracy was threatened, more than half of them voted for Donald Trump."
When we talked about this in class, we concluded that Americans were voting completely on other issues (the Democratic campaign of Trump=fascism utterly failed to resonate.) However, a close second was that, after watching what was done to Trump over the preceding year, those voters who were concerned about the stability of American democracy concluded that a Harris administration was a greater threat than Trump.
You may think they're wrong about that. And maybe they are. But it's hard to look at the last 4 years (or the last 8) as a paragon of "all sides to abide by democratic norms". If anything, this period (of both administrations) has shown us just how thin those norms really are.
My students are mostly liberals, but many of them had real concerns about the use of the legal system for such transparently political purposes. In my small sample, Joe Biden and the Democratic managed to lose the teenage audience, traditionally the most liberal and progressive demographic.
Brian your students views are not surprising. Polls also show roughly 75% of Republicans actually think the 2020 election was stolen in spite of the obvious truth. They also show that more R’s than D’s think that democracy is under threat. This is because they have been lied to repeatedly, and far too many Republican elites don’t have the spine to speak up. Instead, they cave for personal and political purposes. JD is a classic example, unfortunately he’s only one of many. Rubio, Stefanik and several other of Don’s new appointees at one time told the truth about him. Go back and read their words. It’s public record. Words matter. Integrity matters. Character counts. If people you trust lie to you, it has an effect. Shame on them. As to prosecuting Don, it wouldn’t have happened if he hadn’t committed crimes. Perhaps you’re right. Perhaps the video from the capital was fake. Perhaps it was a clever false flag operation and we just haven’t figured out how to finger the real culprits. Perhaps the few R’s with a spine who served in Don’s first term were all lying in their sworn testimony about the events leading up to January 6th. Perhaps the local R officials around the country who braved death threats and threw away their political careers to tell the truth about Don’s lies were actually lying themselves. Perhaps. But, if Don was really innocent he should have welcomed the trial. He should have welcomed the chance to have his chief of staff, VP, et al set the record straight, to clear his name. To expose Joepa’s “transparently political” prosecutions, no? Instead, we won’t have the benefit of that testimony. January 6th cannot and should not be memory holed by Don’s cult. It was real, all honest, thinking people know it was real. It was the worst act ever committed by a US president. Perhaps the worst act ever by a Senate Majority Leader was Mitch McConnell standing on the Senate floor telling the truth about what happened and who was responsible, then failing to vote for conviction. Shame on him. I don’t care what polls show, and who wins the political battle over defining what happened on January 6th and the days leading up to it. I know the truth, and I’m gonna repeat it, even if I’m the only one left willing to do so. Good luck America.
Polls in 2021 indicated that Americans were extremely angry with Trump about January 6th and blamed him for it. But that has shifted over time. You would probably say that's because Trump and Republican elites have been lying about it, but I think you should consider the possibility that voters have re-evaluated their view based on additional information, particularly the release of nearly all the CCTV from inside the Capitol.
While there certainly were violent people who stormed the building, the CCTV footage shows lots of families and grandmas being allowed into the building, cops nearly chaperoning many protestors around the interior. People saw protestors NOT ransacking the building, NOT tearing down statues, NOT vandalizing the walls. The "mostly peaceful" narrative of the Summer of Floyd protests failed because so much video showed burning buildings and violent mobs breaking windows. The "January 6th was an insurrection" narrative worked until video showed the mass of protestors inside the building who really were completely nonviolent. (Note: I'm not talking about people hitting cops outside, the narrative held when that was the only footage people saw.) Video evidence of reality cuts through narratives very well (which is why deepfakes are such a problem.)
Going forward, I think the Left needs to drop this. (Note, I also think the right needs to drop the idea of trying to prosecute Biden for his corruption -- this is a bad idea.) The voters had every chance to consider Jan 6th. It was pounded into their heads relentlessly by the media for the last 4 years. They evaluated Biden, Harris, and Trump in light of those events and the subsequent ones. And they made a choice. You may think it was the wrong choice, and perhaps time will vindicate you in that view. But that vindication will not come not from relitigating Jan 6th or Trump's past behavior, but if he fails to deliver on his campaign rhetoric.
Look forward. I don't know if Trump can really "Make America Great Again" (I have serious doubt actually), but would it really be so terrible if he did?
Stated cogently and perfectly. Making all events---even the assault on law enforcement officers occurring during an attempt to subvert an election---subservient to "When you're a Jet you're a Jet all the way" can only degrade our politics, culture, and society. Vigorous debate is completely in order on tariffs, trade, and immigration, not on pardoning rioters who crushed police officers against a door frame.
While I find your taking the Biden administration to task for some of its more obvious obsurdities fair game I find your inability to take your own tribe to task for its obvious obsurdities appalling. For the record, the Biden administration had its successes particularly in antitrust and labor. Was it enough? Of course not, but was more than the previous four administrtions combined (Both parties). David Brooks made a comment the other day that he at one point thought some of the more mature GOP members that he had assessed to have a moral compass wouldn't stand for some of the more outrageous acts of Trump, such as inciting a riot/insurrection/civil disturbance. While I have a lot of reservations about Biden's pardons I find the pardoning of people that assaulted police officers with weapons they brought to fray beyond the pale. Trump is behaving on day one the way he has always acted, everything is a transaction as your observation reagrding TikToc indicates. You are sounding optimistic but I fear your aspirations are misplaced. Please, please, please stay on task, your main message and goals are too important.
I agree Lina Jahn should have remained at FTC. The butt kissing TECH CEOs are lining up in subservience to The Don for that one reason, but all of them armrest too big imo.
Thanks to Oren for the Defenders of Democracy label - I couldn’t agree more.
That said, I’d go one step further. The voters didn’t abandon democratic norms. Elites did. Campaign cash stole our voice in government, and this betrayal of our shared democratic ideals may offend voters just as much as the mismanagement of our country’s affairs.
Oren, it's too easy to point fingers and it's dismaying to see you do so. Biden is gone, what he did or didn't do no longer counts, and in a post titled "Notes from an Inauguration", the content is anything but. You've done yourself an immense disservice if you'd like to be taken as a serious thinker. I follow you to learn about conservative viewpoints on policy, not your perceptions of Biden's inadequacy. Stay on your topics, and stop bitching about the other side.
Yes, he's gone and we move ahead to better times. But I disagree that BIden's incompetent (or simply mischievous?) behavior makes no difference looking ahead. Rather, his behavior further denigrates the stature of the presidency for his successors. If you fear or dislike Trump, for example, he now has some leeway to behave similarly with impunity. Pardoning the Jan.6 "insurrectionists" ? Not to worry, Biden takes the cake with his last minute preemptive pardons of numerous potential wrong-doers who now look guilty without even having been accused of anything.
Absolute horseshit this article. Person should be embarrassed that they wrote it.
So in your opinion, was it ok for trump to pardon 1500 of the people who attacked the capitol on Jan 6 2021?
"The Canadian Girlfriend presidency."
LoL snap, Oren does not miss.
The ERA declaration reminded me of a Muslim divorce except that you have to repeat 3 times.
Biden failed? He screwed up with DeJoy, TT, and Garland. That’s it. You rich idiots are constantly looking for false equivalencies and who to blame for the return of the fat orange terrorist. Well the media (YOU) are the ones who have a huge chunk of the blame for this disaster. Americans are their own worst enemy, and instead of pointing out our love of anti-intellectualism and demagogues (which is what the cult of celebrity actually is), you’re just going to continue with “it bleeds, more clicks, more eyes, more money”. The raids begin today, but you’re probably busy making up a new headline for your next piece on it.
"The raids begin today." Let us hope so. We've got a few million people who've already been issued deportation orders (that we haven't even attempted to enforce for years) to kick out of the country.
Note: this should be completely noncontroversial. These are people who had their day in immigration court and lost and were told to go home. If you defend the practice of not enforcing these orders you are weakening the rule of law.
Spot on.
Well, at least Oren admits what he thinks, pathetic as it is. Aren’t we all pretty tired of the whataboutism Don’s defenders employ? And aren’t we tired of elites like Oren whining about “the elites”? Elites like Oren know the truth, they know. JD, another elite, was right the first time he spoke about Don. Then he self-gelded. Oren knows JD was right the first time. He employs whataboutism as the tactic to salve his guilty conscience. There is plenty to criticize ole Joepa for, my list is long too. But at least Joepa doesn’t publicly brag about “acing” a dementia test:) Apparently Oren has never actually attended, or listened to, a Don rally to hear the incoherent bleating. Oren, you assign us reading, I’m assigning you the task of actually listening to a full rally speech-then report back on who is more lucid-Don or Joepa. Oren even goes so far as to excuse Don’s insurrection, which is breathtaking. It’s also frightening. History has shown that authoritarian movements depend on “elites” acquiescing, bending the knee to the strongman. Those elites in the end are as, if not more, central to the success of the movements as the actual strongman. I choose to believe JD’s first view of Don. I choose to believe the top level staff Don appointed, (he called them “the best people”) when they warn of his authoritarian ways. Just be honest Oren, tell the truth, like Mike Pence did. Stop hiding behind Joepa. Admit JD is an old fashioned elite phony. It’s much more becoming of an elite.
Defenders of Democracy are really defending not democracy but late-stage-liberalism. They call it "liberal-democracy", but that's an oxymoron. The "democrat" half says law should be based on the will of the people. The "liberal" half says law should be based on universal principles that are inviolate even by the will of the people. These two don't easily coexist in a single package.
When pushed to the wall, a "liberal-democrat" will have to choose which half takes precedence. They will either become a reluctant-democrat ("I support the will of the people even though I disagree with it") or a authoritarian-liberal ("I support this principle even though the people hate it").
This debate was with us from the beginning, going back to Jefferson and Hamilton. But the Hamiltonian / authoritarian-liberal side gained the upper hand after 1970 and has been running roughshod over everything since. Let us hope Donald Trump (and especially J.D. Vance in 2028 -- is it too early still?) will be a turn back to real democracy.
Well said Brian. But why did the “authoritarian-liberal” side gain (and keep) the upper hand? I think it was the arms race in campaign finance that began at the end of the 70s, which disenfranchised voters and empowered wealthy neoliberals who funded campaigns, even as neoliberal policies screwed the rest of us.
I'll be honest, I'm a philosophy and poli-sci teacher, so my bent is toward ideology and less toward things like campaign finance. You may be right -- I have no doubt that campaign finance changes have had detrimental effects -- but I think the "long march through the institutions" of the 1968 radicals better explains it. This group came down hard for liberal-authoritarianism, and they've been running the show ever since.
The best example of this ideology is the harassing of Jack Phillips, the Colorado baker who just wants to make wedding cakes. "You will bake the gay cake or we will destroy you, bigot", is the clarion call of the modern liberal authoritarian. And voters mostly blew that off at the time. However it turned out, "you will accept the penis in your daughter's locker room, or we will destroy you" was a bridge too far.
Thanks for the reply, Brian, and your Substack is interesting in the range of interests. I used to teach German history at the college level. To me, progressive cultural radicalism is a compensation for the inability (blocked by money in politics) to pursue economic fairness. Absent that core Democratic Party mission, CRT and gender nonsense are the only ways for people to feel they are still on the Left. Also, I don’t see how neoliberalism descended from 60s radicalism. I think it was more Tony Coelho, Bill Clinton, and the DLC chasing corporate money by becoming more “pro business.” Please consider subscribing to my recently launched Substack. Dan
Excellent summary of Biden's final days in office, especially the comments on the so-called 28th Amendment to the Constitution. A couple of years ago I got into an exchange with a college classmate---who is a practicing attorney---who insisted that Biden just had to tell the national archivist to put the erstwhile amendment into the constitution, that it was a done deal. I, who have no law degree, told her the reality of that entire ratification process, that it had not in fact been completed by the terms of the enabling legislation. She never responded, no surprise there, so have been amused to see this last-ditch Biden attempt to change the Constitution at his own whim. This incident will certainly go down in the history books as an example of how not to fulfill one's presidential responsibilities.
It’s only illegal when the other side does it :-)
I feel so many people fail to see Trump for what he is: CANCER. Now, it could be terminal, it could not, but like almost all cancer, it comes from years, if not decades of shitty living, or what could be imperfectly described as “neoliberalism” — which was a wholly bipartisan project.
People seem to forget that the bulk of “Scranton Joe's” career was spent representing the Great State of DELAWARE, one of the world’s top tax havens, mainly writing laws (setting the rules) in favor of CREDIT CARD COMPANIES, some of the most vicious rent-seekers in capitalist history.
This administration was THE WORST in my lifetime. Jimmy Carter was outstanding tbh (appointed Volker, met with Pope to get the pontiff to visit behind the Iron Curtain ensuring the wall came down, etc). Never whined about his opponent but did what America needed.
Biden just lined the pockets of his family, when cognizant for a few moments. Thank God it's, "...morning in America...AGAIN."
"Our republican form of government really does require a commitment from all sides to abide by democratic norms even when the other side is winning, in recognition that the alternative is ultimately worse for everyone"
Respectfully, Oren, it's hard to ask one side to abide by this logic when the other has - in reality *and* appearance - built an ironclad reputation for total disregard for it. I've no horse in a race of two pox-ridden animals this country has been asked to pick between and smile about the choice for the past 50 years, but it feels deeply disingenuous to cite observing "fight rules" as customary and necessary when the country has a convicted felon and a sex offender in the highest office of the land. I'm not saying it's a good idea for gloves to be off on both sides, just that asking for it *now* is a bit of a bad joke. In fact, more than just a bad joke - it's an insult to anyone who wasn't in a coma or catatonic state on January 6 2021. Asking for civility and observance of "rules of engagement" *now* is a silly way to detonate your reputation.
Oren's compulsive anti-democrat vitriol gets the better of him yet again. Others have amply commented on his apparent cognitive deficits in comparing the two parties and their leaders objectively.
The thing is what he sort of says at the end is correct. Both parties are corrupt and in thrall to the financial elite. Here I must point out that it is critical to maintain clarity and accuracy here. The Financial Elite and other vague "elite" are not equivalent. Calling college educated people elite is not correct. Elite as exceptional in a particular domain of effort is the general meaning. That could be sports, academic expertise, or custom furniture making expertise. It can mean those at the head of bureaucracies as well. Popular social media talkers, left and right, can be considered elites.
"You can’t pursue unfettered free trade, financial deregulation, and a college-for-all education system and then get upset when you lose elections to opponents who don’t uphold your “norms.” And as we’ve seen in the past four years, elites have their own set of progressive social issues for which they are equally happy to disregard the same norms they’re otherwise preening about." This quote shows Oren is unhinged. Unfettered Free Trade and financial deregulation are the Republican conservative raison d'etre. Adding "college for all" to make it a Democrat issue is completely disingenuous. Republicans forced that agenda with Reagan's "success" if you want to call it that. I don't. The reality is true though that Democrats functionally acquiesced. The question is why? That's where Oren gets back to what matters but still misses what matters.
"But when everyone understands this, and political agendas that address people’s actual priorities and preferences become table stakes on all sides, well then just getting those basics right is no longer the easy differentiator. Then, and only then, will practicing a more aspirational and healthy politics once more become important. At least, that’s the corner we should all aim to turn." When everyone understands this, sure, and how is that going to happen? Is Trump aiming to make that happen? Are Republicans? No and No. Are Democrats as they evaluate their setbacks? No. Because both parties are owned and run by the Financial Elite. Stupid conflict keeps them in power. What will arise as democrats regroup is literally anything except what matters which is the material wellbeing of the working class. That is not a "democrat" problem as such. It is The MO of the Financial Elite. It is also not a Republican issue except in so far as the hegemony and control by the financial elite is the Republican brand, apparently vividly reborn.
Most of the issues of conflict have worker well-being adjacency. Like immigration. They can resonate with workers and policy conflicts can divide voters. That is the actual goal of politicians who work for the FE. Addressing immigration along with industrial policy along with foreign policy along with finance policy etc etc with an overarching goal of worker prosperity and stability would be fantastic and effective. But no party has that as its guiding principle. Those issues are and will be contested separately in order to divide voters. Oren is naive to imagine otherwise. What he should be vitriolic about is the corruption by wealth of our political system. I'm fine with calling that out wherever it happens.
While I'll not attempt to respond to the claim that Democrats have proved poor defenders of democracy, it requires willful blindness to ignore Trump's autocratic tendencies. In January 2021, Trump attempted to remain in power by bullying the vice president and Republicans in Congress to send certified electoral votes back to Republican controlled legislatures to "recount" the votes and certify him the winner. For decades, presidents have accreted more and more power by issuing executive orders. Yesterday he issued a flood of executive orders, many with little legal basis, which addressed many matters that would be better dealt with by Congress. Based on their euphoric response to Trump's inaugural address, few Republican members of Congress are likely to stand up to his power grab for fear of being primaried. Without such opposition, election to the presidency in the future will be tantamount to a grant of unlimited power.
I’m sorry to leave a second comment, but Oren ‘s guilt-riddled whataboutism screed demands it. We watched the insurrection on tv. We listened to Don’s staff, and myriad fellow republicans tell the truth of Don’s month’s long plot. We hear Don literally to this day lie about the 2020 election, undermining the bedrock of our constitutional republic-a belief in the peaceful transfer of power. Even after all that, Oren says the following, proving that even a seemingly smart elite can become a cult member: “None of this is good, in the short term. Our republican form of government really does require a commitment from all sides to abide by democratic norms even when the other side is winning, in recognition that the alternative is ultimately worse for everyone.” Sorry Oren, there is more at stake than debates over tariff policy among pinheaded elite economists. Country over party.
I did an analysis with my civics students the week over the election. One of the most interesting exit poll results was this one:
"73% of voters said that the American democracy was under threat in this election. However, of the 75% that said democracy was threatened, more than half of them voted for Donald Trump."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-elections/exit-polls
When we talked about this in class, we concluded that Americans were voting completely on other issues (the Democratic campaign of Trump=fascism utterly failed to resonate.) However, a close second was that, after watching what was done to Trump over the preceding year, those voters who were concerned about the stability of American democracy concluded that a Harris administration was a greater threat than Trump.
You may think they're wrong about that. And maybe they are. But it's hard to look at the last 4 years (or the last 8) as a paragon of "all sides to abide by democratic norms". If anything, this period (of both administrations) has shown us just how thin those norms really are.
My students are mostly liberals, but many of them had real concerns about the use of the legal system for such transparently political purposes. In my small sample, Joe Biden and the Democratic managed to lose the teenage audience, traditionally the most liberal and progressive demographic.
Brian your students views are not surprising. Polls also show roughly 75% of Republicans actually think the 2020 election was stolen in spite of the obvious truth. They also show that more R’s than D’s think that democracy is under threat. This is because they have been lied to repeatedly, and far too many Republican elites don’t have the spine to speak up. Instead, they cave for personal and political purposes. JD is a classic example, unfortunately he’s only one of many. Rubio, Stefanik and several other of Don’s new appointees at one time told the truth about him. Go back and read their words. It’s public record. Words matter. Integrity matters. Character counts. If people you trust lie to you, it has an effect. Shame on them. As to prosecuting Don, it wouldn’t have happened if he hadn’t committed crimes. Perhaps you’re right. Perhaps the video from the capital was fake. Perhaps it was a clever false flag operation and we just haven’t figured out how to finger the real culprits. Perhaps the few R’s with a spine who served in Don’s first term were all lying in their sworn testimony about the events leading up to January 6th. Perhaps the local R officials around the country who braved death threats and threw away their political careers to tell the truth about Don’s lies were actually lying themselves. Perhaps. But, if Don was really innocent he should have welcomed the trial. He should have welcomed the chance to have his chief of staff, VP, et al set the record straight, to clear his name. To expose Joepa’s “transparently political” prosecutions, no? Instead, we won’t have the benefit of that testimony. January 6th cannot and should not be memory holed by Don’s cult. It was real, all honest, thinking people know it was real. It was the worst act ever committed by a US president. Perhaps the worst act ever by a Senate Majority Leader was Mitch McConnell standing on the Senate floor telling the truth about what happened and who was responsible, then failing to vote for conviction. Shame on him. I don’t care what polls show, and who wins the political battle over defining what happened on January 6th and the days leading up to it. I know the truth, and I’m gonna repeat it, even if I’m the only one left willing to do so. Good luck America.
Polls in 2021 indicated that Americans were extremely angry with Trump about January 6th and blamed him for it. But that has shifted over time. You would probably say that's because Trump and Republican elites have been lying about it, but I think you should consider the possibility that voters have re-evaluated their view based on additional information, particularly the release of nearly all the CCTV from inside the Capitol.
While there certainly were violent people who stormed the building, the CCTV footage shows lots of families and grandmas being allowed into the building, cops nearly chaperoning many protestors around the interior. People saw protestors NOT ransacking the building, NOT tearing down statues, NOT vandalizing the walls. The "mostly peaceful" narrative of the Summer of Floyd protests failed because so much video showed burning buildings and violent mobs breaking windows. The "January 6th was an insurrection" narrative worked until video showed the mass of protestors inside the building who really were completely nonviolent. (Note: I'm not talking about people hitting cops outside, the narrative held when that was the only footage people saw.) Video evidence of reality cuts through narratives very well (which is why deepfakes are such a problem.)
Going forward, I think the Left needs to drop this. (Note, I also think the right needs to drop the idea of trying to prosecute Biden for his corruption -- this is a bad idea.) The voters had every chance to consider Jan 6th. It was pounded into their heads relentlessly by the media for the last 4 years. They evaluated Biden, Harris, and Trump in light of those events and the subsequent ones. And they made a choice. You may think it was the wrong choice, and perhaps time will vindicate you in that view. But that vindication will not come not from relitigating Jan 6th or Trump's past behavior, but if he fails to deliver on his campaign rhetoric.
Look forward. I don't know if Trump can really "Make America Great Again" (I have serious doubt actually), but would it really be so terrible if he did?
Stated cogently and perfectly. Making all events---even the assault on law enforcement officers occurring during an attempt to subvert an election---subservient to "When you're a Jet you're a Jet all the way" can only degrade our politics, culture, and society. Vigorous debate is completely in order on tariffs, trade, and immigration, not on pardoning rioters who crushed police officers against a door frame.
While I find your taking the Biden administration to task for some of its more obvious obsurdities fair game I find your inability to take your own tribe to task for its obvious obsurdities appalling. For the record, the Biden administration had its successes particularly in antitrust and labor. Was it enough? Of course not, but was more than the previous four administrtions combined (Both parties). David Brooks made a comment the other day that he at one point thought some of the more mature GOP members that he had assessed to have a moral compass wouldn't stand for some of the more outrageous acts of Trump, such as inciting a riot/insurrection/civil disturbance. While I have a lot of reservations about Biden's pardons I find the pardoning of people that assaulted police officers with weapons they brought to fray beyond the pale. Trump is behaving on day one the way he has always acted, everything is a transaction as your observation reagrding TikToc indicates. You are sounding optimistic but I fear your aspirations are misplaced. Please, please, please stay on task, your main message and goals are too important.
I agree Lina Jahn should have remained at FTC. The butt kissing TECH CEOs are lining up in subservience to The Don for that one reason, but all of them armrest too big imo.
Thanks to Oren for the Defenders of Democracy label - I couldn’t agree more.
That said, I’d go one step further. The voters didn’t abandon democratic norms. Elites did. Campaign cash stole our voice in government, and this betrayal of our shared democratic ideals may offend voters just as much as the mismanagement of our country’s affairs.
www.savedemocracyinamerica.org