The Liberal Narrative Is Broken

[madurobob]

According to Amitai Etzioni at The Atlantic, the liberal narrative is broken and populism is the only way out. Whatever that means.

As far as I can tell this "liberal narrative" is:

Telling the American people that the government is not the devil that the GOP makes it out to be

Really? That is the liberal narrative? Huh. I didn't realize it was so simple. I expected something... more.

Also, the Occupy movement fared poorly because

First, because it had no clear narrative and was mainly an expression of a very diffuse sentiment; second, because it mixed populist with liberal messages; third, because it was unclear who the bad guys are

But don't worry - there is a solution: blame special interests! Everyone can get behind that, right?

I wonder which interests are the special ones... ?

Anyway, is Etzioni's piece really one big strawman I should just ignore? Or, is there a liberal narrative and is it broken? I guess I can get behind the idea that there is a liberal zeitgeist, if not really a narrative, but I don't see it as broken. Well, no more broken than anything else to do with US Politics.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Maybe he only means liberals suffer from a narrativium deficiency.

Funny, I usually hear "narrative" used pejoratively when applied to politics (as if to suggest that the parsing of something is somehow fictional), but here he's decrying the lack of a narrative.

 

[madurobob]

Leave it to the JREF to immediately reference Pratchett.

I'm pretty sure the author is a card-carrying liberal. I'm just not sure we have the same card.

 

[RandFan]

Well duh. Why do you think Romney is now in the White House and the Republicans picked up seats in both houses of congress... oh, wait.

The article seems fatuous to me but granting the premise for just a moment, with the current GOP narrative does it matter much?

 

[madurobob]

with the current GOP narrative does it matter much?

Well, yeah, that was my first reaction: "broken compared to what?"

But, even if your opponent is the Washington Generals, its still a good idea to try to improve; to learn from your mistakes. I get that. But, to go to all the trouble of laying out why you think the narrative is broken only to say we need to control special interests is like having the lane cleared for a monster dunk - and missing the dunk off the rim.

*Everyone* complains about special interests, because its an easy way to rally people without actually saying anything. Politicians have been railing against "special interests" for a lot longer than I've been alive. I lump it together with being a "Washington Outsider" as required campaign positions for every politician stumping for a job in DC.

 

[RandFan]

Well, yeah, that was my first reaction: "broken compared to what?"

But, even if your opponent is the Washington Generals, its still a good idea to try to improve; to learn from your mistakes. I get that. But, to go to all the trouble of laying out why you think the narrative is broken only to say we need to control special interests is like having the lane cleared for a monster dunk - and missing the dunk off the rim.

*Everyone* complains about special interests, because its an easy way to rally people without actually saying anything. Politicians have been railing against "special interests" for a lot longer than I've been alive. I lump it together with being a "Washington Outsider" as required campaign positions for every politician stumping for a job in DC.

Loved the analogy of the Washington Generals.

Fair points.

 

[dudalb]

That is a confusing article.

I think the writer is coming from the viewpoint..which I agree..the the Liberals/Progressives definently have a problem selling their viewpoint to blue collar and working class Americans..In fact IMHO that has been the Liberals downfall for several years...but the article is so confusingly written that I have am not positive that is the writers viewpoint.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Well, yeah, that was my first reaction: "broken compared to what?"

But, even if your opponent is the Washington Generals, its still a good idea to try to improve; to learn from your mistakes. I get that. But, to go to all the trouble of laying out why you think the narrative is broken only to say we need to control special interests is like having the lane cleared for a monster dunk - and missing the dunk off the rim.

*Everyone* complains about special interests, because its an easy way to rally people without actually saying anything. Politicians have been railing against "special interests" for a lot longer than I've been alive. I lump it together with being a "Washington Outsider" as required campaign positions for every politician stumping for a job in DC.

I second RandFan on the props for the basketball imagery.

Mighty fine writing there!

 

[Muldur]

That is a confusing article.

I think the writer is coming from the viewpoint..which I agree..the the Liberals/Progressives definently have a problem selling their viewpoint to blue collar and working class Americans..In fact IMHO that has been the Liberals downfall for several years...

And that's the confusing part, because the "liberal" message is all about the working class/blue collar American: social and economic justice, good jobs at good wages, supports for the family, the sick, etc.

I know plenty of people who will rant and rave for hours on end about the "evil government/liberals" when they have and do make use of Medicaid, Food Stamps, etc.

They routinely vote the "R" party line even though (for example) our Tea Party Republican County Commissioner blocked every effort to increase funding for our Sherrif's department, despite the fact that the jail was (and is) overcrowded, the Correctons Officers are understaffed for the inmate population, and their gear is falling apart at the seams because it is so worn out.

Yet mention one word about voting Democrats and it's "I'll NEVER vote for those thieving lying liberal tyrants!", etc...

Cognitive dissonance appears to be well-rooted in the American psyche...

 

[dudalb]

And that's the confusing part, because the "liberal" message is all about the working class/blue collar American: social and economic justice, good jobs at good wages, supports for the family, the sick, etc.

I know plenty of people who will rant and rave for hours on end about the "evil government/liberals" when they have and do make use of Medicaid, Food Stamps, etc.

They routinely vote the "R" party line even though (for example) our Tea Party Republican County Commissioner blocked every effort to increase funding for our Sherrif's department, despite the fact that the jail was (and is) overcrowded, the Correctons Officers are understaffed for the inmate population, and their gear is falling apart at the seams because it is so worn out.

Yet mention one word about voting Democrats and it's "I'll NEVER vote for those thieving lying liberal tyrants!", etc...

Cognitive dissonance appears to be well-rooted in the American psyche...

Thanks for proving my point.Rather then looking at their approch, more importantly, their attitude toward Blue Collars voters, a lot of liberals just write them off as being dumb and ignorant. Stuff like this is God's GIft to Conservatives.

 

[Muldur]

You haven't "proven" anything.

How is cognitive dissonance on the part of rank and file blue collar Republicans the fault of "liberals"? How have they "failed"? They point out all the time that the working class and poor are self-evidently better off thanks to the government programs they have fought for for decades. Yet those very same people refuse to vote for the people who will make their lives better.