This is what Dems are largely missing right now. Biden needs to adopt more natsec framing for his agenda. Other Dems, and supporters in the media, need to echo that framing.
And the thing some progressives do when they CONTRAST Biden's agenda with defense spending?
No, you're not going to get people to see the war on poverty or even climate change as the "moral equivalent of war". People have been trying this for decades and it never works.
Natsec is natsec, and has a unique ability to motivate the American political system.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
For all the discussion about wokeness and lefty activists, and despite the huge size of the Floyd protests, I think the Right has been a greater source of unrest over the last decade.
Most of the deadly violence of this era (synagogue shootings, El Paso, Boogaloo killings) have been from rightists; leftists have killed only a few people, and mostly just protested and complained online. Rightists also regularly threaten to overthrow the government.
Many see this unrest as fundamentally reactionary. But I see it as partly a reaction to the sudden collapse of traditional conservatism -- the abrupt decline of Christianity, the failure of laissez-faire economic policies, and the debacle of Iraq.
America's problem isn't individualism, it's failed conformism. America is just a bunch of factions trying to hector, bully, criticize, and compel each other into conforming, but none of the factions has the power to overcome the others.
Don't mistake cultural warlordism for individualism. We do not have any ethos of "live and let live" or "just be yourself" in this country.
Every wonder why Americans have such poor fashion sense? It's because any time we try to wear clothes that are distinctive, slightly different, or in any way individualistic, we get instantly ridiculed by at least one of the factions.
How many times have I read this story of "intellectual from other country goes to America, decides all its problems are due to individualism, and goes back to home country to advocate totalitarianism"?
This is always just the same old shit. People can't handle freedom, individualism leads to social dissolution, we need government to dominate everything in order to unify society, America is weak and dissolute and destined to fall, blah blah blah blah blah
Yes, why don't you try totalitarianism again. Maybe this time your government will be the one to crack the secret code of how to dominate people's personal lives in order to make them nice little happy fulfilled robots all seeking harmoniously after the same objectives.
I think I'm in the small fringe of people who's Shorpilled but not a popularist. I agree with @davidshor that PMC navel-gazing has taken over the Dems' discourse on cultural issues, but I'd prefer to solve that through bold Rooseveltian resolve than Clintonian poll-following.
Or in plain language, yes "Latinx" is silly and "defund the police" is a non-starter, but the solution isn't just to throw more money at the health care industry even if it polls well.
We need Democratic leaders who powerfully articulate a bold Rooseveltian vision for the future of this country, including things like green energy investment that aren't at the top of the issue polls right now.
The truth is that neither climate economists nor leftist activists is a barrier to solving climate change; they are both simply much less helpful than they could be.
The barrier is the fossil fuel industry and its political and lobbying clout.
The fossil fuel industry was, is, and will continue to be the force preventing action on climate change. Its political hold on the GOP and key Democrats is vastly disproportionate to its economic importance, and countering that political power is key to taking action.