An Unintended Consequence Of The Liberal Ethos: Donald Trump


I was quite pleased to come by this entry from Politico this morning. I say “pleased” because, as Liberals now embark on their two to four year navel gazing Expedition, at least some of them understand just how it is that they find themselves having to figure out why they are wandering off in to their own political wilderness and having to stare in to the abyss of relative obscurity rather than putting the final nail in the GOP’s is coffin.

This election was easy for folks that strongly supported their candidate but for many of us out here that were not terribly fond of either one, things were a lot more complicated. This was made exponentially more difficult by the hate and vitriol and histrionics from both sides… to be sure… but the smug and entitled ugliness coming from Liberals was – in my opinion – epic and over the top.

On the one hand you have a person with no political experience that many find – at face value – to be incredibly difficult to take seriously, and on the other you have a person that has spent a lifetime shrewdly climbing the political food chain waiting for her turn to be the most powerful person on Earth.

Article author Rob Hoffman captures that cultural conundrum better than any other that I have come across so far.:

While there is a clear need to rectify the indisputable disadvantages faced by America’s marginalized peoples—from the LGBTQ community, to Muslims, and people of color—Trump’s victory seems to indicate that unmitigated social activism can have unintended consequences.
Conley compares this to “the backlash after the Civil Rights movement in the form of Nixon.”

Nowhere was this tension more apparent than America’s college and university campuses where students’ pursuit of social justice left many people feeling that their free speech was under attack. Expectations for teachers to reshape their lessons around the phenomena of “micro-aggressions” and “triggers” led many faculty members across the country to question their ability to educate students at all, without fear of offending them. Last year, Yale’s Erika Christakis was forced to resign following student backlash to a seemingly innocuous email that attempted to engage students with respectful discourse about cultural appropriation—following which, one student wrote in the Yale Herald “I don’t want to debate. I want to talk about my pain.”
Herein lies the problem with the left’s “by any means necessary” style of social activism: When any challenge to the prevailing liberal doctrine, cast under the wrong light, can forever cast one as a “racist,” those with dissenting opinions are left with only two options: concede, or retaliate.

Trump appealed to the latter by forming the populist right-wing counterpart to the left’s stubborn ethos.

Through this lens, Clinton’s candidacy can be seen as the political counterpart of liberal university students asserting that discussion is now off the table, where anything less than concession is morally suspect.

To many Trump supporters, Clinton—who’s own record is far from spotless—was merely another “PC” liberal griping about “micro-aggressions” and “triggering” language. To many white-working-class Democrats, she had simply failed to address their increasingly pressing concerns.

The article also points out the extent to which the media gave up on journalism and went all-in, using their soap boxes, to help push the Liberal agenda forward. All this has accomplished for the elites on the left is to marginalize themselves in the eyes of non-Liberals and and steel their resolve against everything Liberals stand for.

As the article’s title suggest…Liberals really are a big part of the reason that Trump will be moving into the White House in January.

[This entry originates @Joe for America] [Images courtesy of Bruce Speaks & Politico]


Add a Comment