Thread by @julianzelizer

Democrats don’t need to choose between the #metoo and BlackLivesMatter movements and the “mainstream” of the party. /1

This framework is inaccurate for many, many reasons. /2

I respectfully disagree with @DouthatNYT's piece on @JoeBiden, which argues that Biden stand his ground against the “left-wing ideas about structural racism” that have overshadowed the “constituency for a Bill Clinton form of moderation.” /3

There is a long history of turning point moments when parties embrace what were once “radical” ideas and emerge stronger for doing so. These are moments when most party leaders accept (often through immense pressure) that certain issues can’t be deemed to be extreme anymore. /4

This was the story of civil rights, when the fight against legally sanctioned racial segregation had still been considered by many politicians as extreme until 1964. The same was true with voting rights for all citizens until 1965 (unfortunately, this debate has re-opened). /5

"Radical" ideas became normative with the gay rights movement. @KevinMKruse and I traced the evolution of this cause from being on the margins in the 1970s to an idea that commanded bipartisan support. Indeed, Biden was ahead of the administration on the same-sex marriage. /6

To be sure, the revolution is not complete. But it has come a long way. This is evident with same-sex marriage, hate crime laws, cultural representations of sexuality, and much more. This new poll about presidential candidates is striking. /7
nbcnews.com/card/most-amer…

Obviously, there are always instances of excess, but the most basic social issues being discussed right now don’t fall into that category. /8

So Democrats are at a crossroads. But the decision is whether the party as a whole will devote its muscle to fighting deeply rooted forms of discrimination. Or, will some continue to make these questions "wedge issues" for debate? /end

@threadreaderapp unroll