Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Van Jones is Trying to Lead Lost Liberals Back to Reality
This is not good for our side, I prefer them to be lost in their misconceptions, but I must give Van Jones credit for trying to move the Left into the acceptance phase. He might be the face of a new regrouped Left. Below he is helping them see the silliness of college safe spaces:
He is helping them overcome the denial that Trump is president and to perceive how serious a foe Trump is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-BnBmw-R2c
Here is an example of the battle in the Left. As an opponent of the Left, I hope Angela Rye’s side wins and continues to convince the Left that Trump is a mean mad fool. That way Trump can continue to destroy them and they won’t know what hit them (just like Republicans and conservative elites in 2016).
If this plays out like it has on the right, the Left will split between those who see reality and adapt and those who believe in “their old reality” and become irrelevant. This is a great example of a red pill / blue pill scenario.
Published in Politics
I’m a little confused on the sandwich part… but I do not believe we are discussing the same subject. Perhaps you are talking about the people. I am talking about the leaders of the Left. Or you are talking about the event, and I am talking about the ideas.
The enemy and evil narrative. The first side that says: “Our goal is simply to fight for freedom and prosperity” will pick up the greatest number from the vast amount of eligible voters who sat out 2016.
OK, if you mean the public presentation. I agree with you. I’m not suggesting we become like them, only that we recognize who they are and integrate it into our strategy… but not our marketing.
James gets the dark side of the Left: http://ricochet.com/414298/the-dark-democrats-and-their-evil-machinations/
Last thing I’ll say here. My parting salvo to several friends and family who wouldn’t stop the onslaught of chicken-littling/deriding the president, to the point of driving me of facebook was — continue to set the bar so low for Trump, not only will he step over it in the first 100 days, you won’t be able to beat him. This was before Obama even left office and way early in the grief and denial process. And they are still in the bargaining stage, obviously. To quote the man I warned them to take more seriously: Sad!
You do remember Kate was one of them when she arrived, right? Some of them are open to discussion. If we dismiss them all as irredeemable then how are we any better than what you’re describing?
These binary portrayals of statements always lead to misunderstandings. In addition, if you read my quote, I was saying they say to themselves “You don’t converse with evil” meaning the right, meaning us. I was not suggesting that was our strategy.
That’s not the impression I’ve been getting over the past few months. “We thing they’re wrong; they think we’re evil,” is a well worn cliche, but how true is it? How many NeverTrumpers were berated for not recognizing how dangerous Hillary Clinton was? How many threads have been posted reminding us that we are at war with the left? You don’t go to war with error; you go to war with evil.
So, yes, I get that you were talking about what they think, but as we often accuse them of doing, I can’t help but catch a strong whiff of projection.
I am limited to 250, see next post.
I think I can make this clear by using ISIS as a metaphor. Yes I know the American Left are our fellow countrymen and that we aren’t in a physical war, but that is why it is a metaphor.
The secular left projects their world view onto ISIS in the following sense. The secularists do not believe in the spiritual – the Left believes religious beliefs are artifacts of physical circumstances. Thus the Left will never understand ISIS’s motivations because they dismiss religion as a primary casual motivation. In their worldview, they cast about for the “real” cause as maybe oppression, colonialism, joblessness, etc. etc. etc. They will NEVER understand ISIS and if they continue to control the response to ISIS, we will lose. So the secularists and Islamic religionists are in an in-virtuous cycle of appeasement leading a perception of Dhimmi submission, to more appeasement further reinforcing the perception of Dhimmi submission…
The Left does not need to act like ISIS, they do not need to believe in Allah, but they need to know they are fighting an evil rigid uncompromising religious/political ideology and not the oppressor/oppressed filter that they see everything through.
We on the Right need not adopt the Left’s approach, but we must understand that the core of the Left is a rigid uncompromising political ideology and not the right/wrong filter that the right sees everything through.
That’s not polite to do. If you press the issue with a Progressive at best you get an eye roll, at worst they openly laugh in your face. I mean, really, Communists?
I’m a firm believer that Leftists/Democrats are evil.
These campus Crybullies are not going to listen to “the voice of reason” no matter who it’s coming from. The warm bath of victimhood is way too comfortable to want to leave. Remember, we have a whole generation that was raised to expect a ParticipationTrophy. Between victimhood and the thrill they get from being able to bully their enemies there is no amount of common sense will make them give that up. Even coming from an avowed Communist like Van Jones.
Credit to him for standing up for free speech on the university campus and for putting down “Coddle U”. The university should be a crucible for ideas and for people.
I think Van and I want a very different sort of product from the university, and I still think there are deep perils with his understanding of education as preparation for social action. Nevertheless, I’d rather face a confident and open Marxist than a meek and mild soft despot by default–its more honest.
To his credit — while he is an ecological sort, he favors a capitalistic approach by making the production of green technologies profitable. In a way, Jack Welch, my idea of the model American businessman and capitalist agrees — however with a tad of cynicism:
“the attack on capitalism that socialism couldn’t bring…mass neurosis” Yet, he has said that every business must embrace green products and green ways of doing business, “whether you believe in global warming or not…because the world wants these products”
We have discussed possible dialogue with the Left versus my focus to defeat the Left. These are not alternate proposals, but separate issues. In other words:
You dialogue with the person, but you defeat the ideas. There is nothing incongruous in that approach. This article shows both:
http://downtrend.com/robertgehl/american-thinker-top-ten-reasons-i-am-no-longer-a-leftist