David Frum, of George W. Bush speechwriting fame, penned an opinion to the left regarding ways in which they could better help themselves resist the current administration and fight for winnable points in today's America. Now I am no fan of Mr. Frum's point of view, but I am a fan of the fact he's willing to stand up for his point of view, discuss it rationally and intellectually, and to disagree with people even if they are ideologically on his "side". So in that spirit I wrote a comment on Facebook in reply to the above linked article, which I would please encourage you to read first.
Read it? Okay, here's what I have to say on the matter.
The same essential argument was made against the Occupy Wall Street protesters after the 2008 economic collapse and there's a kernel of truth in there to be certain. There's also several great big lies perpetrated or ignored.
The truth is, broad spectrum protest is ineffective at getting any one single issue moved forward... but the lie is that that's what the Jan 21st Women's March was ever about. The march was to show progressives that they are many and not to give up, and to show Trump the same and that they won't be giving up anytime soon.
Another lie is that all simple issues are equal. The Dakota access pipeline being a case in point. Straight forward, clear, highly reasonable concern underlying... but up against big oil money. (Not to mention native vs. white, environment vs. jobs, etc.) This is an imbalance one sees often. It's not that Conservative protesters are more disciplined or effective, it's that they are often on the same side as, some might even say recruited and indoctrinated by, powerful monied interests. Some may even point out many are more pawn than protester... but I'm sure they feel reward for being on the winning team, even if they can't clearly elucidate why.
Another lie here, by omission, is that many of the issues the right embraces are, at their heart, simplistic. Facts often don't back them up either, so when looking to defend the interest, reason and logic aren't usually the best friend of these fights. For example, the issue: Deregulate the banks! Why? Because regulations are hard and all things hard are bad for business. The Facts: Last time we let regulations become lax we nearly destroyed the global economic infrastructure. To which Conservatives pile on tried and effective, though unsupported by anything approaching fact, tropes about killing ingenuity, driving out businesses and how difficult it is for small business owners to comply.
These same arguments and tactics are applied, rinsed and repeated for taxes, environmental regulations, health care, etc. Simple, easy to remember and hold on to, and devoid of any need for fact and actual positive outcome, thus easy to fight for amongst many who just feel overwhelmed by an increasingly complex and global world.
Alternately progressives look to make their fight about facts, measurable improvements and logic based arguments. These things are hard and resonate very poorly with those not intimately familiar with whatever issue is being fought and argued for. Which is, supposedly, what we hire politicians for... in some theories at least. Professional policy makers whose job it is to familiarize themselves with the hard and difficult in order to make the best decision for the many, not the few. But in a hyper-partisan political culture where members of elected offices are more interested in pleasing those who feed them, this hard work isn't what gets politicians reelected anymore, if ever.
The hurdles to putting the country, any democratic country, on a sustainably progressive course are far more significant and institutionally ingrained than Mr. Frum would care to extrapolate upon. He knows very well that his interests are far more protected and comfortable within the current construct of democracy than those of more progressive concerns, so he's more than happy to help progressives with advice on how to beat their heads against walls while he sits and watches.
What will actually work to make change? First there must be a focus on process before really digging into what progress one would like to achieve, but as long as the left is happy to fight battles, the right will stay focussed on winning the war. Voter suppression, gerrymandering districts, deregulation, lobbyists, etc. These are the tools wielded in the background by Republican operatives to place their issues on firmer ground for the battles of the future.
It's not just about how to fight, it's also what to fight for first and progressives have been happily chipping away at false walls for years while Conservatives have been building fortresses throughout the land. It's cynical, pragmatic and hardly democratic, but it's also effective and it is what it is. Wishing it were otherwise gets you nowhere.
