21 August 2025

Politically homeless

I've been at least Democratic-leaning for a long time now.  At the latest, soon after the 2008 election, the "Tea Party" antics and the emergence of Sarah Palin as a major figure made it obvious that the right wing was going off the rails and becoming dangerously unserious.  (Remember when we thought Sarah Palin was as bad as it could get?  Remember when we thought Dan Quayle was as bad as it could get?)  From there things got worse.  McCain was an honorable man who would have been a good and decent president.  Romney, a deeply weird plutocrat, at least pretended to be an honorable man.  Trump never even bothered to pretend.  There are plenty of issues I have with the Democrats and the left generally, which I've been open about on the blog, but once the Republicans had fully prostrated themselves before Trump and his open contempt for democratic institutions and fundamental rights, they ceased to be a viable alternative.  Maddeningly, we had only one party that anyone who cared about those institutions and rights could even consider voting for.

I'm afraid we're now losing even that.  I feel politically homeless.

I discussed the issues posed by the gerrymandering crisis in this post last week (please read that post thoroughly before commenting on this one), and this article goes into more depth.  Democrats in the Texas legislature, and some others, have gone all-out to fight back against Republican efforts to further gerrymander the state.  But the party establishment as a whole has chosen the opposite course -- to unite with the Republicans in further undermining democracy and attacking meaningful voting rights by similarly super-gerrymandering states where Democrats control state governments.  Their attitude is now just like that of the Trumpazoids -- "what we intend to do is so important that we're entitled to rig and manipulate the system to make sure we can get in power in order to do it".  State laws that give redistricting authority to independent commissions are now an annoying obstacle to be swept aside so they can do what they condemn the Republicans for doing.

At one stroke they have blown away the whole narrative that they are fighting to save democracy and basic rights from the Republicans.  Can we trust that there is any essential democratic norm they would not violate, any fundamental freedom they would not try to take away, on the grounds that the Republicans are also attacking those things and "only sissies play by the rules when the other side doesn't"?  I can't.

The two parties are no longer two opposing sides in any meaningful sense.  There is one side, the two parties attacking democracy in the name of seizing power to enact their all-justifying agenda -- and the other side, the citizenry, now tasked with defending their rights and freedoms against the bipartisan onslaught.  In that fight, at least, I have no trouble choosing sides.

The citizenry will get a chance to fight back in a little over two months.  California needs to hold a referendum to (allegedly just temporarily) set aside the independent commission and allow the legislature to proceed with gerrymandering.  If the voters reject this, it will stop the plan in its tracks and, I have a slim hope, bring the Democratic party establishment to its senses.  Former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who fought for the independent commission law during his term in office, wants to lead the fight to save it now.  Read that link.  He gets it.  He understands that the essence of democracy is in its processes and institutions and the rights of voters, not in getting the election outcome you want.  If you care about democracy, this is the fight to watch.

I've had growing reservations about the political left for years now.  There is its embrace of trans ideology, which has done great harm both here and in Europe, as I've documented in hundreds upon hundreds of links in the link round-ups (I also put together this summary).  There is the coddling of the rabid Israel-bashers of "the Squad", and Democratic leaders starting to parrot jihadist talking points about Israel, much as Republicans parrot Russian ones about Ukraine.  There's the rise of sometimes-violent anti-Semitism on the far left in our campuses and streets since the October 7 attack -- and the fact that the left-activist blogosphere, except for a few Jewish blogs on Tumblr, utterly refuses to condemn or even acknowledge this.  There's the identity politics and the insistence on finding some racial angle to every issue, the elitist sneering at ordinary voters' legitimate concerns about immigration and cultural change and crime, the habit of dismissing any dissent or any raising of inconvenient issues with a barrage of insults ending in -ist and -phobe.  It was not quite as malignant as the Republicans' science denialism and Christian supremacism and Trump-worship and attacks on reproductive freedom and relentless tax cuts for the billionaire parasite class (not that the Democrats have ever seriously challenged the parasites' power and privileges either), but it was enough to push me steadily toward the "plague on both your houses" camp.  With this gerrymandering scheme, they've finally done it -- they've driven me out of the tent.

I don't expect the activist fringe to be persuadable on this issue.  I've learned from experience (and this applies to the activist fringe of the right as well) that they are so mentally locked by ideology that they've mostly lost the ability to assimilate or evaluate ideas or arguments that clash with their existing belief system.  But I also know that the less-politicized majority, who have opinions but aren't so ideological that it forms part of their identity, are different.  They can often absorb and consider ideas and information they haven't heard before, and even can change their views if they find them persuasive.  I have always worked hard to be open to the same.  Over the years I've completely changed my opinions on several issues, including the trans issue, the Israel-Islamist conflict, and same-sex marriage, as I learned more about them.  This is always difficult and unpleasant.  But it's necessary for intellectual integrity.

So now I find myself fully aligned with -- and aligned only with -- the "exhausted majority".  We need to tune out these fringe groups at the extremes yelling "fascist" and "Marxist" at each other over our heads (they make most of the noise, but we far outnumber them), and focus on bringing the politicians of at least one and hopefully both parties to heel, making them servants of the people's agenda rather than them making our votes mere utensils to serve theirs.  It will not be an easy fight -- not even easy to understand, for many.  But this is the reality that confronts us.

10 Comments:

Blogger Anvilcloud said...

Gerrymandering is undemocratic and deplorable. As true as it is, many seem angrier at the Dems for simply trying to balance the scales. How does it enhance democracy for one side to allow the other to tip scales and do nothing?

21 August, 2025 07:20  
Blogger Infidel753 said...

I'm tired of pointing out over and over that this is not an accurate description what's happening. Gerrymandering two states instead of one is not "balancing the scales". It's increasing the attack on voting rights. The two parties are no on opposite sides any more. They're united against the rights of the people.

21 August, 2025 07:44  
Blogger Liam Ryan said...

What a great post.

I would just share a few thoughts that occurred to me as I was reading your post.

1) I think it's actually preferable to be politically "homeless" so to speak. I think a lot of our political inclinations are purely tribal. The loss of a political ideology can be (and certainly in my case in the past) a difficult adjustment at first - but it's quite liberating. I have lost count of the number of times that I would speak to someone about a given subject, only to receive an evasive reply when I ask for reasons or an explanation out of interest. I think we out-source most of our opinions. I think so much of public opinion is just the headlines of the popular newspapers of choice. So, being "homeless" means you get to make your policies.

2) Another major & serious problem in our politic discourse is that people question your "loyalties" whenever you take an unorthodox or dissenting position. So, for example, if you seem to agree with a particular policy or statement on a given subject by Trump then you must be MAGA and you must "like him". You must secretly admire his lying and everything else. There is no room for subtlety here in this brainrot. So, for example, you quoted Arnold S. and I can just picture the progressive liberal's scowling face. Politics is almost like a purity test. One cannot agree with a policy on x without implicitly then endorsing everyhting under the sun by a given President/party. This is a mental trap and it has degenerated both sides in which people are scared to really talk honestly.

21 August, 2025 09:49  
Blogger Rade said...

I agree with your essay, and I feel pretty much as you do - just a lot more in the hopeless column.

There are no protests, no politicians, no think tanks, no shining stars, no donations, no nothing that will bring our democracy around, but on the matter of gerrymandering... I don't know how much it will make a difference beyond a given primary season? The primary season is when politicians in their districts secure a spot on the general election ballot. Yeah! They may get 5 more slots... that does not mean the the opposing party can't put five candidates up for that next election. The general election is open to all. Regardless of party or precinct. It is up to the VOTING PUBLIC to want to show up; to not be intimidated and to vote.

I just fear that there will be shenanigans from the GOP the likes we have not seen before when it comes time to vote and then count any ballots.

21 August, 2025 11:08  
Blogger Bohemian said...

I've been Politically Homeless for as long as I've been a Registered Voter, always a Moderate Independent, never getting a viable Candidate for our Voice or our Vote, it's maddening, since Independents now make up the majority of Voters by a Landslide. I've cribbed that Image of Arnold, I think I Need that T-Shirt. *winks*

21 August, 2025 21:33  
Blogger Infidel753 said...

Liam: Some very good observations there. A lot of it does seem to be tribal. The ideologically committed seem to form social circles of only those who share the same opinions. With the increasing expectation of absolute conformity, questioning even one item of Correct Thought can lead to people treating you like you've done something weird and disturbing. Disagree with too much of it and you can lose your whole social circle.

I've always thought for myself and called things as I saw them, and it's always just seemed obvious that both sets of positions are largely arbitrary and incoherent. The right wing is fervently Christian, traditionally nationalist, and pushes tax cuts for the wealthy -- but there's no logical reason why those things go together. One "side" is pro-choice on abortion but anti-choice on guns, while the other one is the other way around. It seems basically random. I have no problem with agreeing with a party or politician on one issue while disagreeing with them on another. I don't know why some people seem unable to imagine that being possible.

Rade: I think a lot of Americans, likely even the majority, feel this way in general, even if not about gerrymandering specifically. That issue is the last straw for me personally, but there are plenty of other straws. Both parties are basically captured by rich donors. Both have some policies which are offensive to mainstream voters which they refuse to budge from. Most politicians can't seem to stop sounding like badly-programmed robots when they talk (part of Trump's appeal is that he talks more or less like a regular person, even if an unusually stupid and rude one). It's no wonder approval levels for both are at rock bottom. But there's no real alternative. This is why millions of people voted for Obama both times and then voted for Trump as well. It wasn't about ideology. Each time, they were just voting for whichever guy they thought was most likely to shake things up and disrupt the system.

Bohemian: Yes, I think this is exactly the feeling of the majority. Everyone feels stuck voting against whichever candidate seems worse. Nobody except the ideological fringe really votes enthusiastically for someone. Most of us are just wishing for an outsider who will brush aside all the ideological nonsense and just enact the policies most of the public wants without worrying about which of them are left or right. Unfortunately a lot of people thought Trump was that guy. He realized that mass frustration meant an opportunity for an iconoclastic con man, and boy, was he ever right about that.

22 August, 2025 05:38  
Blogger nick said...

Like you, I feel politically homeless here in the UK. Lots of people had great hopes that the incoming Labour government would pursue a thoroughly radical agenda and transform people's lives, especially those who are barely making ends meet. The reality is that many people are actually worse off than before and the Labour government just seems like the continuation of the Tories. So where do I go now if I'm disillusioned with Labour?

22 August, 2025 05:55  
Anonymous Tildeb said...

My politics have always been firmly rooted in classical liberalism. I favour policies that support this and against policies that are not regardless of which political party may present them. In this vein, I have never had the comfort of being represented by any specific party so homelessness in the political sphere for me is just business as usual. But I have noticed a couple (okay, 3 here) of interesting trends/patterns:

1) since the early 80s, the feminization of our culture and institutions has had a significant anti-liberal effect in policies,
2) institutional capture has warped or rendered obsolete common respect for the role reality and evidence from it plays and has been replaced by various narrative ideologies labelled as political 'sides', and
3) Islam has used both very successfully to become embedded into the west and is now able to "America has been harboring networks built to advance “a grand Jihad to eliminate and destroy Western civilization from within and sabotage its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers” (An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the {Muslim} Brotherhood in North America)
by Mohamed Akram 1991).

I see the current political scene affected and heavily influenced by how these play out

22 August, 2025 14:41  
Blogger Infidel753 said...

Nick: I get a strong sense of that from what I read about the UK now. Without knowing, I suspect the problem is that Labour, like the US Democrats, is too captured by rich donors to pursue a true economic-populist agenda.

Where to go now, I don't know. All over Europe the major parties' unresponsiveness to voter concerns is pushing voters toward what the media (mostly dishonestly) call "far-right" parties -- anti-immigration, anti-Islam, and culturally nationalist. In the UK that would mean Reform, but I'd be hesitant. Farage deserves immense credit for re-establishing the UK's independence from the EU, but aside from that he strikes me as a bit nutty.

Here in the US there's no viable third party and the system wouldn't really allow one to emerge. The only hope now is for true economic populists to take over one of the two big parties. Many people thought that's what Trumpism was, within the Republican party -- but again, Trump was just a con man taking advantage of the situation.

23 August, 2025 00:49  
Blogger Infidel753 said...

Tildeb: It's always most honest to be consistent and not shift with wherever some political party is going.

For me, one of the bedrock principles is personal freedom, and real personal freedom for everyone is only possible with socialism. People who are struggling to survive economically don't have meaningful freedom. Unregulated capitalism always ends up with a situation like what we have in the US now, with a handful of the very worst people gaming the system to concentrate ever more of the wealth in their hands and leaving vast numbers of people with almost nothing. Active redistribution is necessary to prevent that and make sure the whole population has the basic standard of living necessary for real freedom of action.

"Feminization of our culture and institutions" could mean a lot of things, but the increasing social and political influence of women has had mostly positive effects. Steven Pinker discusses some of the details in this book.

Disrespect for reality and the role of evidence has reached truly Orwellian proportions, complete with Newspeak ("undocumented immigrant", "pregnant people", etc) and demands that everyone agree to what everyone knows are lies (such as that men can become women). Luckily, our society is so decentralized that not all institutions are captured. And we can still resist be refusing to use the mandated fake language or pay lip service to the official lies.

The Muslims need to be very careful. Almost nobody actually likes them or wants them here, and the public's patience isn't inexhaustible.

23 August, 2025 01:04  

Post a Comment

Please be on-topic and read the comments policy. Spam, trolls, and fight-pickers will be deleted. If you don't have a Blogspot account and aren't sure how to comment, please see here. Fair warning: anything supporting transgender ideology, or negative toward Brexit, or in favor of a military draft or compulsory national service, will be deleted. I am not obligated to provide a platform for views I find morally abhorrent.

No comments advocating violence against any specific identifiable individual, even jokingly.

Please be considerate -- no political or politics-tinged comments on non-political posts, and no performative cynicism (or cynicism in general).

<< Home