Great piece, Greg. I first came to know of you through Glenn Loury's podcast with John McWhorter, and became a fan immediately. This last paragraph struck me:
" Until the Democrats recalibrate their messaging and policies to reach people like my two drivers, and until they gain some insight into Trump’s appeal among the demographic groups that chose him over Harris, they are guaranteed to remain in the wilderness of discontent and election failure."
Only the Democrats can't recalibrate their messaging and policies. If they do, but don't go all the way, they'll lose some of their progressive base, if not all of it, and they'll lose elections as a result. If they start to adopt more common sense policies, they'll be accused of abandoning their commitment to "social and racial justice", and their own side will eat them alive. I'm afraid they're doubling down on their rhetoric, which can be seen daily in the failing venues of cable news outlets like CNN and MSNBC, and online newspapers like NYT and WaPo- both before and after the election. They're simply not interested in exploring what they did wrong, or what Trump's appeal is.
No one on any of these networks are talking about the rust belt, other than to call them all bigoted troglodytes, and the fact that a lot of people there had their pensions wiped out by the 2008 collapse. Correctly or incorrectly, many of the rust belt denizens blame Obama for that, and like it or not, all they remember is Obama and Geithner and Paulson as the face of corporate bailouts. This was completely missed by almost everyone other than Trump. This, in my opinion, is why he was able to eek out a win in 2016, though he was clearly less popular than Clinton. This election should have sent everyone reeling, because the polls were wrong, the analysis was wrong, and everyone was put on their heels. But they're now repeating these errors en masse.
In addition, middle class families now scorn the upper class, starting with private high schools and the Ivy League. The media and the Democrats (now largely part of the same apparatus, in my opinion) completely avoided the fact that Asians were being systematically denied a seat at the intellectual table simply because they score too high on tests. People like myself and others see this as utter hypocrisy, and we don't forget.
Then there's the absolute shredding of social norms almost overnight and the gestapo-like enforcement of these very new social norms. I believe this to be the major issue here. People began seeing the justice system as a lopsided way to enforce cultural changes via not only legislation and regulation, but also through cancellation, public shaming and encouraging young people to ostracize anyone that doesn't agree with them on socio-political issues.
If one were to ask me pre 2020 "What are the odds that two men from different states and backgrounds at a place of business that only employs 25 people would have children that ostracized these men and their families because of gender ideology?" I would have first asked "what is gender ideology?" and then I would have said that is highly unlikely. Yet that has happened to both myself and a coworker, and roughly around the same time. Our stories aren't unique.
To us, this puts a nail in the coffin of any hope of either of us voting Democrat ever again. There are scores and scores of us. There are support groups where people like us, both men and women, mourn the loss of their children to this ideology. I haven't talked to my daughter since her 20th birthday earlier this year. She left in the middle of the day, moved her things out and hasn't spoken to anyone in her family since. The only inkling I got as to why this might have happened is an SMS text notification because she was on my health insurance that her prescription of testosterone was ready to pick up at the pharmacy. The support groups that exist, and I know they exist because I've thought about joining them, stay clandestine for fear of social and legal reprisal. This cultural power is being wielded less now, but in the throes of socio-political upheaval starting in the spring of 2020, it was used as a cudgel to try to metaphorically beat people into submission.
This too does not escape peoples' memories, and is in fact permanently seared into mine. The woke language games and the penance for not playing along has become more than the collective consciousness of this country can bear. I think that this alone would be enough to win an election in opposition of these cultural changes, but there was oh so much more than that.
Besides white people in general being demonized as the root of all that's evil; corporate corruption, racism, nepotism, favoritism, unearned privilege, islamophobia, transphobia, homophobia, etc. it was also broken down in a more granular way. Straight white men, to be specific, became the popular whipping boys (pun intended) of the left. It's no mistake or mere coincidence that the biggest shift in demographic voting patterns for Trump were young white Gen Z men, and other straight men that are black and hispanic and Asian. Obama's chiding of "men of color" and insinuating in various ways that if they didn't vote for Kamala Harris, they were sexist at the very least, didn't help either. His political influence is a thing of the past I believe.
The FBI tracked and followed female parents that spoke out at school board meetings because they oppose biological boys sharing bathrooms and private changing spaces with their biologically female daughters. So, just consider that for a moment. Not only were their concerns not taken seriously or addressed by school boards, but they were sometimes added to watch lists because of their political and social opinions.
I myself, along with dozens of other people I know were stopped at intersections and had demands leveled that I hold up a raised fist in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement by threat of violence. I would have said this was impossible before 2020 and things like this only happen in Central Africa, Eastern Europe and South America (I have seen this in a couple of those locations with my own eyes). Put plainly- it freaked me the fuck out.
The SANCTIONED GOVERNMENT CENSORSHIP VIA BACK DOOR CHANNELS IN SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS of anyone with conservative ideals, whether they be "nobody" citizens or 200+ year old newspapers like the New York Post is another reason why people voted for any option other than Democrat in this last election, and a big reason why I think they'll continue to.
Formerly loyal Democrat familiars saw their social safety nets in cities decimated by the reallocation of funding to support migrants that are in the country illegally. This is the only portion of any of this that I see seriously discussed outside of any independent venue such as this one, or on Fox News. Instead what we see in the dying, decaying airwaves of left-dominated media is "well now we know for sure that over half of the country is racist and sexist". That's it. That's the sum total of in-depth analysis of the political shellacking that was witnessed on November 5, 2024.
This is what leads me to believe that Democrats won't win an election for a while. With more and more people tuning into alternative media, with the insanity of the last 4 years becoming realized in greater detail, and with Democrats doubling down on the very talking points and ideology that pushed people like me away, I don't see how they recover from this before the next national election. It's possible, I guess, but not very likely.
Jake: I hope that you and your daughter will reconcile soon. As you may be aware, Elon Musk's political move to the right was in part caused by the impact of gender ideology on one of his children.
Hi Greg, thanks for your response. It's rare that I get a response from the author of a piece that I'm commenting on, so I'm grateful to know that you're reading these. Yeah, I heard that as well and I've seen him comment on it, though vaguely. The more I started sharing my story with people I know, whether through work or socially, the more I began to understand that my story isn't unique at all. The fact that an ideology delivered mostly through social media algorithms can have this wide of an impact on the very fundamentals of family structure and communication is quite disturbing to me, so I'm glad that someone is attempting to thwart that trend in some way.
However, knowing human nature the way I do, I'm dubious of any real effect that trying to legislate it away will have. I'm not optimistic that trying to brute force steer people into snapping out of whatever propaganda trance they're in will work with any lasting efficacy. Instead I think it will take some time as the culture veers away from that ideology, and the young folks affected by it will have to choose to reconcile or not.
Excellent analysis, and I am so sorry to hear that your daughter cut off contact. I only recently realized how cult-like a lot of the norms are on the left, and I hope that she comes to a similar realization soon so you can be a family again - and the same for your coworker. It is awful how political rhetoric and ideologies have torn apart families. Hoping for everyone to remember compassion, understanding, and shared humanity.
Thank you Margaret. I text her once a month since February and tell her that she’s loved and missed and that I hope she’s doing well. That’s all I can do.
I don't think the boys were railroaded. Multiple people had called the police about a group of boys robbing and striking and intimidating park goers that night (which included the boys, by their own admissions, I think). They were in the park harassing people that night and they each confessed and implicated the others. I (really) have no idea if they were involved or not but you can see why a jury might think that. Trisha's body was so badly beaten that investigators assumed there had to have been more than one perp. Like 5 bones were broken, her skull was fractured, an eyeball crushed... and she had no memory. It's been some time since I watched the documentary When They See us but from what I understand it was a highly dishonest and incomplete portrayal of the investigation and the trial. The city settled with the boys for millions of dollars-which the victim and investigators all STRONGLY objected to. In my uninformed opinion that decision had more to do with political considerations... but perhaps it was the just move. I really don't know enough to make a claim there.
I think it’s fascinating that the fact that the defendants confessed is completely removed from the narrative. Blue states and cities use settlements to pay off their constituencies and shape narratives. The writer loses credibility when he states unequivocally that the Central Park 5 were innocent. Just happened to view this video today from Larry Elder where he interviews a police officer who was on the scene at the time of the crime and arrested two of the perpetrators. https://youtu.be/hwRQztpF6qU?feature=shared
Yeah. I’ve encountered these kinds of facts as well. This is exactly why they’re so worried about ‘misinformation’. People can now freely research events and share their findings. Disaster 😂
Many confessions turn out to be false, but they’re (of course) compelling for juries. I don’t believe they did this just because they confessed (minors and stupid people often give false confessions, and these boys could have been both). I don’t see their conviction as a ‘railroading’ though and I firmly believe NY paid them to honor a radical spirit of equity and anti-‘law and order’ sentiment which swept through elites years ago, and for which they’re still paying a well-earned electoral penalty. They were lawfully convicted at the time, even if it was later overturned.
One thing I hope the Democrats take away from this is that strategic essentialism doesn't work. People don't vote in a specific way because they are xyz.
Also that running the governor who presided over the epicentre of the George Floyd riots and where the destruction of a once thriving city is still clearly visible may not have been the wisest of choices.
Also that if you keep telling people to deny the evidence of their own eyes, and lambasting them for not believing, don't be surprise if they quietly stop believing you about other pronouncements.
Also smearing your opponents and their supporters with ad hominem and other slurs can backfire and make them more determined to vote.
Finally, it is about the economy, and the havoc that deindustrialization, lack of successor industries and other economic concerns such as the cost of groceries which really motivates people.
And therefore they will probably keep getting the same result. Everything looks like a nail if you only have a hammer sort of thing.
It is easier to blame the 'ghost in the machine' then it is to take a long and hard look at policies and see that there is this huge disconnect between what the ordinary person wants and what certain 'deep thinkers' have decided they need (eg defund the police or forcing women to undress in front of biological men in order to keep their jobs because the powers that be didn't realise that nurses, care workers etc need to get changed at work often in communal changing room and wanted to be 'inclusive')
They seem to be a little slow to recognize the shift that was realized nationwide on Nov. 5th. Good. I hope they ride this failure straight into the ground and oblivion.
Great article, thank you. Personally, I think Harris DID lose due to intersectionality: Intersectionality of her lackluster performance as a VP, her unclear agenda, questionable integrity, and her lack of charisma. Nothing to do with her race, sex, or husband.
Pretty good article. Not perfect. If Donald Trump cannot possibly care for "working people", then to be consistent one should also state that Oprah, Lebron, and Mark Cuban do not either. The Central Park Five were part of about 30-35 Black and Hispanic young men who were attacking people in the northern part of Central Park on 4/19/1989. They were not ID'd by Trish Meilli because she was knocked into a coma by the brutal attack. The five (actually six, but that is not particularly relevant) WERE positively ID'd by OTHERS who were attacked in Central Park that evening - that is a part of the story that few people today are aware of. And lots of other details that obviously are avoided by those promoting a certain narrative. Mattias Reyes left his DNA inside Meilli, and that is why the five were exonerated on the rape charges. But not the brutal assault and battery. I wholeheartedly agree that Trump's insistence that Obama was born outside the USA was stupid, but he did the same thing with non-Blacks such as Ted Cruz (go back over the 2015-2016 GOP primaries). Cruz was born in Canada and Trump said that disqualified him (although it is not in reality that simple). Stupid? Yes. Racist? No. He even alleged Ted Cruz's father was somehow part of the JFK assassination or coverup. Bizarre and typical Trump, but let's not jump to "racist", "sexist", or other ad hominem unless the facts clearly justify it.
You included many good points. The unfairness, to me, of labeling Trump "racist" over the CP5 includes realizing 1) this took place practically right outside of his home. 2) the death penalty had just been banned in New York. 3) I have little doubt he'd have done the same ad had all of the young men been white. In fact, most (if not all) of the things used to accuse him of racism wouldn't have been any different if the people he speaks about were white. It's not like Biden, and other Dems in leadership, who make it specifically about skin color ("...ain't black." "...black and brown people don't know how to get online." (both Biden) and "...black kids in the Bronx don't know the word 'computer.' (Hochul).
A little known fact (although there are factchecks on it) is that the "birther" controversy began with Hillary's supporters. If that's "racist," then her supporters were racist. Many also don't realize that people like Mitt Romney, John McCain, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz (none of whom are black, obviously) all needed to show their birth certificates to be sure they could run for president, because of the different circumstances of their births.
Agree with your points - I always encourage people to take five minutes and pull up the actual ad (better thought of as a public message) DT took out on 5/1/1989 in the N.Y. Daily News and a couple other newspapers - it was objectively NOT anti-minority and stated that all NYers - Asian, Black, Brown, and White - were suffering under violent lawlessness; it must be understood that NY crime was MUCH worse than it is even now. The historical context must be taken into account.
"has not adequately addressed some parents’ concerns and perceptions that trans women may have an unfair advantage in women’s sports."
Transwomen are male, and therefore their advantage in sports is huge, it's obvious to everybody, and it's message-proof. I 100% support bathrooms, locker rooms, shelters, and sports leagues that allow transwomen to be with women. But female-only spaces exist for a reason and the wealthy Democrats (who will never use these spaces)want to eliminate them.
We can be kind to transpeople, but they have a responsibility themselves. And please notice that all of these problems only go in one direction. There is no epidemic of women identifying as men assaulting men in prison or winning in men's sports. We can be kind to those with gender dysphoria while still acknowledging biological reality.
I think it's deeper than Trump - the point the author makes here about the condescension of urban elites toward everyone else in life is what is driving, I think, the current re-ordering of our two main political camps. I don't see the Democrats being able to effectively advocate for both their chose core of urban white professionals and middle- and working-class folks of all backgrounds. The elites see their interests as contrary to those of other demographics. My guess is the Democrats are going to continue to shrink in voter rolls and influence for a few more years, at least.
Even if Democrats or Republicans get their messaging right, that is not what people seek. People want change not lip service. Too many of us can look back and see empty promises.
When considering the race/gender issue consider a hypothetical 2024 match-up between Nikki Haley and Joe Biden. It's not that far-fetched. Think about it. An old white guy competing against a woman of color. How many of the people who are screaming that Harris lost because of some combo of racism/sexism of the voting public would have themselves voted for the woman of color over the white, male Democratic nominee? My guess is very few. So I guess that makes those people racist/sexist, by their definition.
The trans ideology movement is systematically attempting to undo all of the rights women have fought for in order to be safe and equal in public life. This is the reason I could not vote for Harris, while at the same time I could never vote for Trump.
Trans activists are trying to get rid of the distinction between biological sexes. This is removing women's safety and dignity in public bathrooms, locker ooms, spas, prisons, rape crisis shelters, domestic violence shelters, stc. They are also stealing opportunities from girls and women on sporting teams.
From now on I will vote for candidates who fight to protect women's rights and welfare, not just regarding abortion. This leaves very few candidates and no party. GOP is full of hard right Christians who want to control women's bodies and the Democrats are under control of woke progressives who think men who claim to be women should have more rights than women.
Great article. Only one concerning point, regarding George Floyd's "murder." You may still be able to see what really happened by watching the Fall of Minneapolis. I think it is still on you tube.
"trans women may have an unfair advantage in women’s sports." MAY?!!! Trans women are MEN. They always have an unfair advantage against women. Not to mention men in women's prisons/shelters/locker rooms/etc. Women and men who care about female safety are OVER THIS SHIT.
I appreciate your writing this, but your reference to "my two drivers" is just the same tone deafness that you regret from your previous interactions - a "limo liberal" whose unashamedly acknowledges his awareness of the other comes from those he hires. For someone who claims jazz as their professional medium and aspires to be heir to Albert Murray, I think you need you need to listen a whole lot more before asking for a solo.
While it was heartfelt, my snarky comment above is unconstructive. Yes, I agree, you should have done more listening, but frankly, that feels obvious and easy to say now that our tribe lost. My question to you is- Why did you refuse to listen? That is a genuine question.
Actually, my original line in the concluding paragraph was ". . . the two men who drove me to insights about Trump's appeal," but as it's my byline, I'll take responsibility.
Neither car was a limo, nor am I a liberal Democrat, so my response to your snarky attempt to smear me with that brush is meh. I'm an independent and self-decared radical moderate.
So when you say "our side lost" you assume that I'm a Democrat.
But to your more serious question of why I didn't listen, I heard both gentleman. I could fully understand why the Latino man was satisfied with Trump's answer. Regarding the second gent, I disagreed with him. But in retrospect, I wish I would have queried him more.
Similar to Sam Harris, I'm critical of the far left and also believe that Trump's character flaws and behavior on Jan. 6th and subsequent denial of the election result of 2020 should have been disqualifying. But as I wrote in the first lines of my piece: the people have spoken.
I also agree with Rep. Ritchie Torres, who says the far left was a gift to Trump. If Democrats, both the party and those identifying as such, won't forthrightly challenge the far left, they'll keep losing. At this point, the jury is out on whether they will or not.
I appreciate the response and fully accept your points concerning the unfounded assumptions I made. My apologies.
I read your piece at a moment of deep frustration with my Democratic peers and neighbors who since 2016 have refused to engage the Trump phenomena with the same curiousity, opene-ness, and honesty they (Dems) claim to do with other issues and constituencies.
As a fairly standard tribal Democrat who grew up in progressive schools (amongst "limo liberals") who read the NYTimes and New Yorker, I was devastated the night Trump won and I awoke the next day thinking, "wow, I was so wrong (and so smugly wrong) about who was going to win - maybe I am not as smart and informed as I think I am.". That day I set about listening and exploring where else I may be wrong. And for that act of humility, I was set upon by my peers who treated my dispatches from Trumpland as though I were threatening the worldview of a cult. Not only was it extremely disheartening on a personal level, but I could also see that their behavior was largely fueling the very phenomena they professed to hate. I remain frustrated and yet curious as to why so many otherwise thoughtful people would behave so blindly.
So again, my apologies. I read your piece without the context of who you are and inserted instead my own context and responded unhelpfully. Try as I might, I still fall into intellectual ruts that lead me astray.
Btw, I too am now an independent and voted for neither Kamala nor Trump.
You're welcome, Andrew. I believe that (deep) listening and (democratic) conversation are essential to our republic, so when you consciously do that via "dispatches from Trumpland," you are embodying democratic citizenship to a much greater extent than those tribal Democrats who refuse to listen and engage, not to mention analyze the error of their ways. One thing that I deplore from progressives (as with others who engage in politics as if it were a religion) is blinding self-righteousness. Thank you for being self-reflective enough to see the light of possibility in our fellow citizens, even if they vote differently than you do.
Great piece, Greg. I first came to know of you through Glenn Loury's podcast with John McWhorter, and became a fan immediately. This last paragraph struck me:
" Until the Democrats recalibrate their messaging and policies to reach people like my two drivers, and until they gain some insight into Trump’s appeal among the demographic groups that chose him over Harris, they are guaranteed to remain in the wilderness of discontent and election failure."
Only the Democrats can't recalibrate their messaging and policies. If they do, but don't go all the way, they'll lose some of their progressive base, if not all of it, and they'll lose elections as a result. If they start to adopt more common sense policies, they'll be accused of abandoning their commitment to "social and racial justice", and their own side will eat them alive. I'm afraid they're doubling down on their rhetoric, which can be seen daily in the failing venues of cable news outlets like CNN and MSNBC, and online newspapers like NYT and WaPo- both before and after the election. They're simply not interested in exploring what they did wrong, or what Trump's appeal is.
No one on any of these networks are talking about the rust belt, other than to call them all bigoted troglodytes, and the fact that a lot of people there had their pensions wiped out by the 2008 collapse. Correctly or incorrectly, many of the rust belt denizens blame Obama for that, and like it or not, all they remember is Obama and Geithner and Paulson as the face of corporate bailouts. This was completely missed by almost everyone other than Trump. This, in my opinion, is why he was able to eek out a win in 2016, though he was clearly less popular than Clinton. This election should have sent everyone reeling, because the polls were wrong, the analysis was wrong, and everyone was put on their heels. But they're now repeating these errors en masse.
In addition, middle class families now scorn the upper class, starting with private high schools and the Ivy League. The media and the Democrats (now largely part of the same apparatus, in my opinion) completely avoided the fact that Asians were being systematically denied a seat at the intellectual table simply because they score too high on tests. People like myself and others see this as utter hypocrisy, and we don't forget.
Then there's the absolute shredding of social norms almost overnight and the gestapo-like enforcement of these very new social norms. I believe this to be the major issue here. People began seeing the justice system as a lopsided way to enforce cultural changes via not only legislation and regulation, but also through cancellation, public shaming and encouraging young people to ostracize anyone that doesn't agree with them on socio-political issues.
If one were to ask me pre 2020 "What are the odds that two men from different states and backgrounds at a place of business that only employs 25 people would have children that ostracized these men and their families because of gender ideology?" I would have first asked "what is gender ideology?" and then I would have said that is highly unlikely. Yet that has happened to both myself and a coworker, and roughly around the same time. Our stories aren't unique.
To us, this puts a nail in the coffin of any hope of either of us voting Democrat ever again. There are scores and scores of us. There are support groups where people like us, both men and women, mourn the loss of their children to this ideology. I haven't talked to my daughter since her 20th birthday earlier this year. She left in the middle of the day, moved her things out and hasn't spoken to anyone in her family since. The only inkling I got as to why this might have happened is an SMS text notification because she was on my health insurance that her prescription of testosterone was ready to pick up at the pharmacy. The support groups that exist, and I know they exist because I've thought about joining them, stay clandestine for fear of social and legal reprisal. This cultural power is being wielded less now, but in the throes of socio-political upheaval starting in the spring of 2020, it was used as a cudgel to try to metaphorically beat people into submission.
This too does not escape peoples' memories, and is in fact permanently seared into mine. The woke language games and the penance for not playing along has become more than the collective consciousness of this country can bear. I think that this alone would be enough to win an election in opposition of these cultural changes, but there was oh so much more than that.
Besides white people in general being demonized as the root of all that's evil; corporate corruption, racism, nepotism, favoritism, unearned privilege, islamophobia, transphobia, homophobia, etc. it was also broken down in a more granular way. Straight white men, to be specific, became the popular whipping boys (pun intended) of the left. It's no mistake or mere coincidence that the biggest shift in demographic voting patterns for Trump were young white Gen Z men, and other straight men that are black and hispanic and Asian. Obama's chiding of "men of color" and insinuating in various ways that if they didn't vote for Kamala Harris, they were sexist at the very least, didn't help either. His political influence is a thing of the past I believe.
The FBI tracked and followed female parents that spoke out at school board meetings because they oppose biological boys sharing bathrooms and private changing spaces with their biologically female daughters. So, just consider that for a moment. Not only were their concerns not taken seriously or addressed by school boards, but they were sometimes added to watch lists because of their political and social opinions.
I myself, along with dozens of other people I know were stopped at intersections and had demands leveled that I hold up a raised fist in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement by threat of violence. I would have said this was impossible before 2020 and things like this only happen in Central Africa, Eastern Europe and South America (I have seen this in a couple of those locations with my own eyes). Put plainly- it freaked me the fuck out.
The SANCTIONED GOVERNMENT CENSORSHIP VIA BACK DOOR CHANNELS IN SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS of anyone with conservative ideals, whether they be "nobody" citizens or 200+ year old newspapers like the New York Post is another reason why people voted for any option other than Democrat in this last election, and a big reason why I think they'll continue to.
Formerly loyal Democrat familiars saw their social safety nets in cities decimated by the reallocation of funding to support migrants that are in the country illegally. This is the only portion of any of this that I see seriously discussed outside of any independent venue such as this one, or on Fox News. Instead what we see in the dying, decaying airwaves of left-dominated media is "well now we know for sure that over half of the country is racist and sexist". That's it. That's the sum total of in-depth analysis of the political shellacking that was witnessed on November 5, 2024.
This is what leads me to believe that Democrats won't win an election for a while. With more and more people tuning into alternative media, with the insanity of the last 4 years becoming realized in greater detail, and with Democrats doubling down on the very talking points and ideology that pushed people like me away, I don't see how they recover from this before the next national election. It's possible, I guess, but not very likely.
Jake: I hope that you and your daughter will reconcile soon. As you may be aware, Elon Musk's political move to the right was in part caused by the impact of gender ideology on one of his children.
Hi Greg, thanks for your response. It's rare that I get a response from the author of a piece that I'm commenting on, so I'm grateful to know that you're reading these. Yeah, I heard that as well and I've seen him comment on it, though vaguely. The more I started sharing my story with people I know, whether through work or socially, the more I began to understand that my story isn't unique at all. The fact that an ideology delivered mostly through social media algorithms can have this wide of an impact on the very fundamentals of family structure and communication is quite disturbing to me, so I'm glad that someone is attempting to thwart that trend in some way.
However, knowing human nature the way I do, I'm dubious of any real effect that trying to legislate it away will have. I'm not optimistic that trying to brute force steer people into snapping out of whatever propaganda trance they're in will work with any lasting efficacy. Instead I think it will take some time as the culture veers away from that ideology, and the young folks affected by it will have to choose to reconcile or not.
Excellent analysis, and I am so sorry to hear that your daughter cut off contact. I only recently realized how cult-like a lot of the norms are on the left, and I hope that she comes to a similar realization soon so you can be a family again - and the same for your coworker. It is awful how political rhetoric and ideologies have torn apart families. Hoping for everyone to remember compassion, understanding, and shared humanity.
Thank you Margaret. I text her once a month since February and tell her that she’s loved and missed and that I hope she’s doing well. That’s all I can do.
Bravo! And my deepest sympathies for your family tragedy.
Thank you Richard.
I don't think the boys were railroaded. Multiple people had called the police about a group of boys robbing and striking and intimidating park goers that night (which included the boys, by their own admissions, I think). They were in the park harassing people that night and they each confessed and implicated the others. I (really) have no idea if they were involved or not but you can see why a jury might think that. Trisha's body was so badly beaten that investigators assumed there had to have been more than one perp. Like 5 bones were broken, her skull was fractured, an eyeball crushed... and she had no memory. It's been some time since I watched the documentary When They See us but from what I understand it was a highly dishonest and incomplete portrayal of the investigation and the trial. The city settled with the boys for millions of dollars-which the victim and investigators all STRONGLY objected to. In my uninformed opinion that decision had more to do with political considerations... but perhaps it was the just move. I really don't know enough to make a claim there.
I think it’s fascinating that the fact that the defendants confessed is completely removed from the narrative. Blue states and cities use settlements to pay off their constituencies and shape narratives. The writer loses credibility when he states unequivocally that the Central Park 5 were innocent. Just happened to view this video today from Larry Elder where he interviews a police officer who was on the scene at the time of the crime and arrested two of the perpetrators. https://youtu.be/hwRQztpF6qU?feature=shared
Yeah. I’ve encountered these kinds of facts as well. This is exactly why they’re so worried about ‘misinformation’. People can now freely research events and share their findings. Disaster 😂
Many confessions turn out to be false, but they’re (of course) compelling for juries. I don’t believe they did this just because they confessed (minors and stupid people often give false confessions, and these boys could have been both). I don’t see their conviction as a ‘railroading’ though and I firmly believe NY paid them to honor a radical spirit of equity and anti-‘law and order’ sentiment which swept through elites years ago, and for which they’re still paying a well-earned electoral penalty. They were lawfully convicted at the time, even if it was later overturned.
I could be wrong. That’s my understanding.
One thing I hope the Democrats take away from this is that strategic essentialism doesn't work. People don't vote in a specific way because they are xyz.
Also that running the governor who presided over the epicentre of the George Floyd riots and where the destruction of a once thriving city is still clearly visible may not have been the wisest of choices.
Also that if you keep telling people to deny the evidence of their own eyes, and lambasting them for not believing, don't be surprise if they quietly stop believing you about other pronouncements.
Also smearing your opponents and their supporters with ad hominem and other slurs can backfire and make them more determined to vote.
Finally, it is about the economy, and the havoc that deindustrialization, lack of successor industries and other economic concerns such as the cost of groceries which really motivates people.
I think their takeaway, sadly, is that it does work, and the only reason it may not, is because of racism, fascism, etc etc etc.
And therefore they will probably keep getting the same result. Everything looks like a nail if you only have a hammer sort of thing.
It is easier to blame the 'ghost in the machine' then it is to take a long and hard look at policies and see that there is this huge disconnect between what the ordinary person wants and what certain 'deep thinkers' have decided they need (eg defund the police or forcing women to undress in front of biological men in order to keep their jobs because the powers that be didn't realise that nurses, care workers etc need to get changed at work often in communal changing room and wanted to be 'inclusive')
They seem to be a little slow to recognize the shift that was realized nationwide on Nov. 5th. Good. I hope they ride this failure straight into the ground and oblivion.
Great article, thank you. Personally, I think Harris DID lose due to intersectionality: Intersectionality of her lackluster performance as a VP, her unclear agenda, questionable integrity, and her lack of charisma. Nothing to do with her race, sex, or husband.
Pretty good article. Not perfect. If Donald Trump cannot possibly care for "working people", then to be consistent one should also state that Oprah, Lebron, and Mark Cuban do not either. The Central Park Five were part of about 30-35 Black and Hispanic young men who were attacking people in the northern part of Central Park on 4/19/1989. They were not ID'd by Trish Meilli because she was knocked into a coma by the brutal attack. The five (actually six, but that is not particularly relevant) WERE positively ID'd by OTHERS who were attacked in Central Park that evening - that is a part of the story that few people today are aware of. And lots of other details that obviously are avoided by those promoting a certain narrative. Mattias Reyes left his DNA inside Meilli, and that is why the five were exonerated on the rape charges. But not the brutal assault and battery. I wholeheartedly agree that Trump's insistence that Obama was born outside the USA was stupid, but he did the same thing with non-Blacks such as Ted Cruz (go back over the 2015-2016 GOP primaries). Cruz was born in Canada and Trump said that disqualified him (although it is not in reality that simple). Stupid? Yes. Racist? No. He even alleged Ted Cruz's father was somehow part of the JFK assassination or coverup. Bizarre and typical Trump, but let's not jump to "racist", "sexist", or other ad hominem unless the facts clearly justify it.
You included many good points. The unfairness, to me, of labeling Trump "racist" over the CP5 includes realizing 1) this took place practically right outside of his home. 2) the death penalty had just been banned in New York. 3) I have little doubt he'd have done the same ad had all of the young men been white. In fact, most (if not all) of the things used to accuse him of racism wouldn't have been any different if the people he speaks about were white. It's not like Biden, and other Dems in leadership, who make it specifically about skin color ("...ain't black." "...black and brown people don't know how to get online." (both Biden) and "...black kids in the Bronx don't know the word 'computer.' (Hochul).
A little known fact (although there are factchecks on it) is that the "birther" controversy began with Hillary's supporters. If that's "racist," then her supporters were racist. Many also don't realize that people like Mitt Romney, John McCain, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz (none of whom are black, obviously) all needed to show their birth certificates to be sure they could run for president, because of the different circumstances of their births.
Agree with your points - I always encourage people to take five minutes and pull up the actual ad (better thought of as a public message) DT took out on 5/1/1989 in the N.Y. Daily News and a couple other newspapers - it was objectively NOT anti-minority and stated that all NYers - Asian, Black, Brown, and White - were suffering under violent lawlessness; it must be understood that NY crime was MUCH worse than it is even now. The historical context must be taken into account.
"has not adequately addressed some parents’ concerns and perceptions that trans women may have an unfair advantage in women’s sports."
Transwomen are male, and therefore their advantage in sports is huge, it's obvious to everybody, and it's message-proof. I 100% support bathrooms, locker rooms, shelters, and sports leagues that allow transwomen to be with women. But female-only spaces exist for a reason and the wealthy Democrats (who will never use these spaces)want to eliminate them.
We can be kind to transpeople, but they have a responsibility themselves. And please notice that all of these problems only go in one direction. There is no epidemic of women identifying as men assaulting men in prison or winning in men's sports. We can be kind to those with gender dysphoria while still acknowledging biological reality.
I think it's deeper than Trump - the point the author makes here about the condescension of urban elites toward everyone else in life is what is driving, I think, the current re-ordering of our two main political camps. I don't see the Democrats being able to effectively advocate for both their chose core of urban white professionals and middle- and working-class folks of all backgrounds. The elites see their interests as contrary to those of other demographics. My guess is the Democrats are going to continue to shrink in voter rolls and influence for a few more years, at least.
Even if Democrats or Republicans get their messaging right, that is not what people seek. People want change not lip service. Too many of us can look back and see empty promises.
When considering the race/gender issue consider a hypothetical 2024 match-up between Nikki Haley and Joe Biden. It's not that far-fetched. Think about it. An old white guy competing against a woman of color. How many of the people who are screaming that Harris lost because of some combo of racism/sexism of the voting public would have themselves voted for the woman of color over the white, male Democratic nominee? My guess is very few. So I guess that makes those people racist/sexist, by their definition.
The trans ideology movement is systematically attempting to undo all of the rights women have fought for in order to be safe and equal in public life. This is the reason I could not vote for Harris, while at the same time I could never vote for Trump.
Trans activists are trying to get rid of the distinction between biological sexes. This is removing women's safety and dignity in public bathrooms, locker ooms, spas, prisons, rape crisis shelters, domestic violence shelters, stc. They are also stealing opportunities from girls and women on sporting teams.
From now on I will vote for candidates who fight to protect women's rights and welfare, not just regarding abortion. This leaves very few candidates and no party. GOP is full of hard right Christians who want to control women's bodies and the Democrats are under control of woke progressives who think men who claim to be women should have more rights than women.
Great article. Only one concerning point, regarding George Floyd's "murder." You may still be able to see what really happened by watching the Fall of Minneapolis. I think it is still on you tube.
"trans women may have an unfair advantage in women’s sports." MAY?!!! Trans women are MEN. They always have an unfair advantage against women. Not to mention men in women's prisons/shelters/locker rooms/etc. Women and men who care about female safety are OVER THIS SHIT.
Correction: Obama was the President of the Harvard Law Review, and not its Editor.
I appreciate your writing this, but your reference to "my two drivers" is just the same tone deafness that you regret from your previous interactions - a "limo liberal" whose unashamedly acknowledges his awareness of the other comes from those he hires. For someone who claims jazz as their professional medium and aspires to be heir to Albert Murray, I think you need you need to listen a whole lot more before asking for a solo.
While it was heartfelt, my snarky comment above is unconstructive. Yes, I agree, you should have done more listening, but frankly, that feels obvious and easy to say now that our tribe lost. My question to you is- Why did you refuse to listen? That is a genuine question.
Actually, my original line in the concluding paragraph was ". . . the two men who drove me to insights about Trump's appeal," but as it's my byline, I'll take responsibility.
Neither car was a limo, nor am I a liberal Democrat, so my response to your snarky attempt to smear me with that brush is meh. I'm an independent and self-decared radical moderate.
So when you say "our side lost" you assume that I'm a Democrat.
But to your more serious question of why I didn't listen, I heard both gentleman. I could fully understand why the Latino man was satisfied with Trump's answer. Regarding the second gent, I disagreed with him. But in retrospect, I wish I would have queried him more.
Similar to Sam Harris, I'm critical of the far left and also believe that Trump's character flaws and behavior on Jan. 6th and subsequent denial of the election result of 2020 should have been disqualifying. But as I wrote in the first lines of my piece: the people have spoken.
I also agree with Rep. Ritchie Torres, who says the far left was a gift to Trump. If Democrats, both the party and those identifying as such, won't forthrightly challenge the far left, they'll keep losing. At this point, the jury is out on whether they will or not.
Good Morning,
I appreciate the response and fully accept your points concerning the unfounded assumptions I made. My apologies.
I read your piece at a moment of deep frustration with my Democratic peers and neighbors who since 2016 have refused to engage the Trump phenomena with the same curiousity, opene-ness, and honesty they (Dems) claim to do with other issues and constituencies.
As a fairly standard tribal Democrat who grew up in progressive schools (amongst "limo liberals") who read the NYTimes and New Yorker, I was devastated the night Trump won and I awoke the next day thinking, "wow, I was so wrong (and so smugly wrong) about who was going to win - maybe I am not as smart and informed as I think I am.". That day I set about listening and exploring where else I may be wrong. And for that act of humility, I was set upon by my peers who treated my dispatches from Trumpland as though I were threatening the worldview of a cult. Not only was it extremely disheartening on a personal level, but I could also see that their behavior was largely fueling the very phenomena they professed to hate. I remain frustrated and yet curious as to why so many otherwise thoughtful people would behave so blindly.
So again, my apologies. I read your piece without the context of who you are and inserted instead my own context and responded unhelpfully. Try as I might, I still fall into intellectual ruts that lead me astray.
Btw, I too am now an independent and voted for neither Kamala nor Trump.
Thank you for engaging,
Andrew
You're welcome, Andrew. I believe that (deep) listening and (democratic) conversation are essential to our republic, so when you consciously do that via "dispatches from Trumpland," you are embodying democratic citizenship to a much greater extent than those tribal Democrats who refuse to listen and engage, not to mention analyze the error of their ways. One thing that I deplore from progressives (as with others who engage in politics as if it were a religion) is blinding self-righteousness. Thank you for being self-reflective enough to see the light of possibility in our fellow citizens, even if they vote differently than you do.