70 Comments

A question for the author to consider: to what extent does participating in a right-wing protest or supporting a right-wing cause event endanger one's ability to keep their employment compared to attending a left-wing protest event or supporting a left-wing cause? E.g. Brendan Eich

Could the explanation be that the entrenched dominance in popular culture of one viewpoint made it too personally costly to profess another?

Expand full comment

True enough. Right wing protesting died down in 2016 because we were being beaten in the streets with the permission of the authorities. After Trump was elected, we were still being beaten in the streets with the permission of the authorities except now we were being prosecuted for defending ourselves.

Expand full comment

This is not what I saw in Charlottesville. Police there stood by while right wing protestors beat opponents. Nor did I see authorities prosecute any of the armed protestors at the Michigan capitol, though they were obviously breaking laws against carrying firearms on that property. Also, too, authorities beat and gassed BLM protestors all summer last year.

None of this is complicated. Institutions are moving left, and people on the right are losing jobs over their political positions, because the political position of the right has moved closer to a race-based and white supremacist fascism. Most Americans find this distasteful but could not be bothered to act when it remained at the margins of politics, spoken of only in subtle ways (e.g. "welfare queens"). This changed because Trump created the conditions for a more open white supremacist movement - and make no mistake: this is the core of Trumpism.

Expand full comment

It was terrible how the right had 542 riots all over America in 2020, yes? Burning, Looting, Murdering their way into power, stealing the election, shooting a woman in the throat to keep their fraudulent gains?

All because of the Leftists tolerant message of ERASE WHITENESS? No?

You’re actually the first witness to Charlottesville who says the cops let the Right beat the Left.

Its a Leftist town, with a Leftist mayor, and cops who stood by while the Left went nuts.

The projection is hilarious.

Expand full comment

I'm not the first or only witness who watched police stand by while right wing thugs beat protestors: https://www.propublica.org/article/police-stood-by-as-mayhem-mounted-in-charlottesville

They even allowed one white supremacist thug to fire at a counter-protestor without lifting a finger: https://www.propublica.org/article/police-stood-by-as-mayhem-mounted-in-charlottesville

Also, too, it looks a lot like the police actually turned peaceful BLM protests into violent riots last summer: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/29/us-police-brutality-protest

My ancestors fought fascism in Europe. I fought Communism there.

I don't plan to stand by and let either destroy American Democracy.

Expand full comment

No, you're not standing by - you DID destroy American Democracy.

It's gone dear, that's why there's a Green Zone in DC, and because of a brazenly stolen election.

There is no American Democracy: your faction destroyed it.

The Republic has fallen, you are it's usurpers.

Enjoy your gains.

However if we want to compare riot notes...

Lets compare Charlottesville: Score is 1.

Possibly by a panicked driver caught in a mob...

To...

All of 2020...542 riots.

I can certainly post lots of links to that...

Dear you ARE FASCISTS, you just are Woke Fascists.

And you've won, whether you're Stalin or Mussolini remains to be seen.

Enjoy marching under the banner of ERASE WHITENESS, and any whites who resist are 'fascist'.

or for that matter all the BLM murders from 2014 to now...

and riots, looting, burning...BURN LOOT MURDER: BLM.

Tifa being the white Trustifarians out burning down daddy's mall?

Of course - that was the police who did that!

You fought Communism in Europe? Really? Was that in Greece in 1947 then? I think perhaps you mean you stood the watch in Europe during the Cold War? There was no fighting of Communism in Europe outside of Greece in 1947.

Quite a resume you have there....

Expand full comment

"...why one side has for over half a century now drawn more idealistic people who want to dedicate their lives to changing the world..."

Baloney. It's drawn idealistic people who want to change the world through activism and politics, rather than medicine, engineering, biology, etc. Norman Borlaug, presumably an idealist, changed the world more than any community organizer.

Expand full comment

They want power.

Very human, they want Dominion over others.

The only human situation they want to improve is their own.

Expand full comment

Hey idiot.....Soros PAYS THEM. We don't have that. We work and we don't have time to protest.

Expand full comment

Which side do you think still has a culture of being able to live our lives without influence from government? That’s your answer. Conservatives do not want to tell people how to live. Conservative do not want to move into a district and change it. Conservatives do not want regulations used to create a totalitarian rule by a group of unelected bureaucrats. Conservatives want to watch TV and sports without cultural elites telling us how we should think. Plus, the left owns campuses and have now moved into K-12 so it’s easy getting youth emotionally compromised which hampers their critical thinking. It’s not about caring. It’s about the cultures.

I hope people comprehend this leftism only destroys nations. There is no end. Defund the police. Make college free. Get rid of the electoral system. They will all still be activist bc it’s emotionally addicting like a rush from drugs.

Expand full comment

Two things: (1) Zach Goldberg has pointed out that by 2015 a lot of major media institutions were already pretty woke, and that the trend began in 2011. If Trump had lost to Hilary, I wouldn't be surprised if we still saw the institutions bend more or less in the way they did. (2) To what extent are conservatives just bowing out of reading newspapers, watching TV, and watching movies? I'm fairly conservative, and I've pretty much entirely stopped watching movies and TV, save for children's programming, to accommodate my child--I don't really need or want to be lectured to about my (admittedly, numerous) moral failings by people who are meaner and dumber than I am.

Expand full comment

Some parts of this piece are high-quality, but some don't reach the same standard - missing elements or research. This is true for your analysis of institutions more than for politics. I wonder if it's an (unconscious) resistance to grapple with the trends in US conservatism and in the world.

1) Missing / underplayed: Barro and Klein both include (Barro is very explicit about this) the fact that younger people are much more important than older ones, as customers and employees. You also underplay the urban / rural split - people who live in cosmopolitan cities have been ahead on culture and consumer trends for decades, and they now lean strongly liberal. (Amy Walter of Cook Political had a piece making this exact point recently.)

2) Trends: Also, what Republicans now call conservatism has strong elements that push away educated people - e.g., refusing to take the COVID vaccine or denying the need to act on climate. (In other countries, this isn't called conservative.) You mote level of support, but not the the *rate* of change, and so you undercount this element too.

If a business leader sees a strong trend among important consumers, they would be remiss *not* to take action. Plus many have some conservative characteristics - enough that they used to be GOP voters - but believe in science and the environment, so they are cross-pressured. In today's world, many of those cross-pressures are much stronger than their old conservative tendencies. For example, getting the economy and health back on track and dealing with changes in the climate may be stronger than fighting a rise back to the tax rates of a few years ago.

Expand full comment

Do liberals also have an easier time forming a protest? Are conservatives more likely to have distance, density, and families as barriers? Is it easier for liberals to start a protest, they just need to walk or take public transport a short distance?

Expand full comment

It’s easier when you have a trust fund.

Expand full comment

Question: How fungible is "Attended a Trump rally" with "Attended a (conservative) protest", and do we have any way of knowing if 2016 "conservatives" surveyed would have thought so?

Expand full comment

Wow that came out garbled. Let me rephrase: I think "attending a Trump rally" is approximately equivalent to "attended a protest", and wonder if that changes any of the numerical analysis.

I think that this reinforces the idea that Trumpism has killed conservatism and is wearing its skin.

Expand full comment

I suggest looking into the astonishing rate at which these things have increased since 1970: the importance of going to an Ivy League or "affiliated" school (eg Berkeley, Stanford, U Chicago, any Boston university), the earning power of Ivy League grads, the number of nouveau-riche billionaires who are Ivy league grads, and the amount of political and judicial power held by Ivy League grads. Then look at the change in the political demographics of those admitted into the Ivy League.

Expand full comment

As a devout liberal and progressive, I can tell you that there is nothing -- absolutely NOTHING -- that will keep me away from the ballot box in every single election for as long as I live from here on out. If that means I have to stand at my polling station for 24 hours in the middle of a simultaneous blizzard, pandemic, tornado, earthquake, and an ongoing mass shooting, I will do exactly that. There is nothing -- absolutely NOTHING -- that will keep me away from my polling station. I will not speak for anyone else, and I will not speak for any other liberal. I only speak for myself when I say thi, but based on anecdotal evidence and conversations I've had will fellow liberals, there are a LOT of us who feel the exact same way. And the reason we will stand in line to vote Team Blue up and down the ballot in every election for 24 hours as a mass shooting is going on in the middle of a simultaneous blizzard, tornado, pandemic, serial killing spree, and the intentional release of poison gas and/or radiation? His name is Donald Trump. I first became old enough to vote prior to the 2012 general election where I then cast my ballot. I then sat out the 2013 and 2014 elections because I just didn't think it was worth it. The Party I had voted for didn't give me anything they promised, so I became cynical. I voted in thr 2015 general election because I wanted to vote for my state Supreme Court seats due to policy reasons. Then in 2016, Bernie Sanders gave me hope and convinced me to change my Party registration from Independent to Democrat to vote for him in the primary. Mitch McConnell pulled that BULLSHIT with Merrick Garland. Then the Access Hollywood tape came out, and Republicans closed ranks behind this dastardly misogynist. And it was over for me; I was never going to sit on the sidelines ever again. I have voted in EVERY primary, special, general, midterm, off-year, and presidential election since 2015. And from now on, I only care about one thing when I go to the ballot box from now on: Making sure that the Republican Party never in my lifetime gets into power -- or at least, doing everything I can through the power of my vote, my petition signature, my political donation, and my protest to make sure they are as ineffective as possible even when they get into power. And there are plenty of liberals who feel the exact same way as me. Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Barrett woke up a sleeping giant of liberal electoral strength. As Kavanaugh said in his disgrace of a "confirmation hearing", "If you sow the wind, you will reap the whirlwind."

And for all you conservatives who are so happy and proud about taking over over federal courts, remember something: By definition and design, the federal courts are the WEAKEST branch of government. In fact, if either Congress or the President wanted to, they could NEUTER the federal courts tomorrow -- WITHOUT court packing through methods that would be much WORSE for both judicial independence and judicial supremacythan court packing. So if the Federalist Society's ideological goons trying to take us back to the good old days of 1787, there are plenty of ways to deal with and DEFEAT their obstruction, just as Schumer and Biden have already made McConnell and his goons pay for their obstruction. All my life, I've heard that conservatives believe in "judicial restraint" and "judicial deference to the elected branches". Well let's see if they actually mean it. But remember: "Be careful what you wish for because you just might get it."

Expand full comment

Thank you for the peek into your ideological pseudo-real world, ruled by government despots curtaining the basic, human, God-given rights of the individual human beings.

Every time I read such nonsense, I am further convinced that ignorance and the inability to reason are necessary for your existence, since you care not about your own worth, but are willing to the slave of others for your entire life.

Your detachment from truth, reality, facts, history and lacking any perspective om historical events, show you are under-educated and overly emotional in your outlook.

Yet, I see folks like you craving attention by strutting their ignorance and emotional instability to all who happen to stumble across their silly, vapid posts.

Good grief! Have you no self-awareness?

Expand full comment

My, you do represent your ilk.

Expand full comment

I love how triggered you are. LOL WE laugh at you.

Expand full comment

You don’t have to bother.

The votes will be quite solidly Democratic in 2022, and 2024. Those elections are already counted- the Oligarchs you serve won’t chance the voters again.

Interesting ~ a religious fanatic who thinks he’s political.

As for the precious courts they bowed out of even hearings on the election fraud, so you may consider them reliably yours.

The good news for our side is you and your ilk are so crazy you’ll probably keep pushing until there’s Civil War; you aren’t capable of self restraint even when you’ve won. That will favor us, not you, although nothing is certain.

Expand full comment

The right has created an enormous number of parallel institutions that exist only for other right-wingers and have no interest in gaining broad popularity. Consider the explosion of right-wing media outlets, and the degree many Evangelical churches/preachers have become openly, unapologetically Trumpist/Republican. I think conservative apprehension about traditional American institutions began from a valid place, but that disposition has now become a bit of a caricature of itself. Today's conservatives no longer want to merely be included in institutions, they want to be members of institutions that are as aggressively partisan as they themselves are.

Expand full comment

“Perhaps the most fundamental difference between the left and the right is that only the former has even a rough definition. What is called “the right” are simply the various and disparate opponents of the left. These opponents of the left may share no particular principle, much less a common agenda, and they can range from free-market libertarians to advocates of monarchy, theocracy, military dictatorship or innumerable other principles, systems and agendas.” -Thomas Sowell

The right may simply be too diverse ideologically to unite together consistently in the same way as those on the left seem to do.

Expand full comment

While it may be true that liberals care more about politics, Republicans care more about winning and will do what it takes to win. So while liberals worry about right and wrong, Republicans worry about winning and do anything to win. Capitalists on either side will do what it takes to make more profit, thus investing in which ever promises them the best chance to profit, and the freedom from regulatory infringements on their ability to profit. Unfortunately, the average voter is swayed by the rhetoric and chrisma of the candidate and how well the candidates address their own beliefs. Reagan led the way in this, he could deliver his lines in a convincing manner. He convinced a majority that government was their enemy and Trickle Down economics would benefit them personally. Many still believe both.

Expand full comment

That republicans care more about winning and do whatever it takes to win is counterfactual to a delusional degree. Any GOP voter would tell you they do whatever it takes to lose, especially on any issue they ran on. Sure they get elected but most GOP pols are elected by the disasters of Democratic governance. Trump was elected by Hillary, Rudy Giuliani by Dinkins..... nearly every GOP mayor in the last 60 years is elected by Democratic Crime policies.

The good news is elections are a thing of the past!

What we have now is Selections....

no actual voting needed, nor wanted.

Expand full comment

You, Sir, are either a braindead idiot or a troll. Either way I'll have no more of your BS.

Expand full comment

This is who rules us, this is who “votes”, this is “doing anything to win.”.

This is also Prog boasting of how they stole the election.

https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/?amp=true

Expand full comment

"Liberal" is defined by the mainstream media as a narrow set of woke issues, but the bounds are set by what the intelligence community declares to be the truth. The intelligence institutions (CIA, FBI, etc) tolerate liberality along some dimensions, but otherwise dictate that the "liberal" institutions take very reactionary positions with regard to issues of empire.

So, for example, the NY Times is liberal with regard to being on the Democrats side -- the side which has traditionally been more liberal. But that changed in 2016 and the Democrats are now characterizing anyone who disagrees with the intelligence community as Russian tools. This is rooted in foreign affairs (and the budgets for the military and intelligence agencies) but spills over into domestic politics in a big way. Trump was pounded for colluding with the Russians, being soft on N Korea, being inhumane with regard to immigrant, etc. Meanwhile Bernie Sanders was dismissed by the media for being too liberal and possibly a tool of the Russians.

Expand full comment

There is no question that Interests drive our government, and that the Imperial City of DC has Empire over much of the world ~ indeed the recent domestic political struggle reduces to; DC has an Empire but their own people do not kneel.

As for Democratic Reactionary policy- to great extent yes. The Democrats are the Party if Government and have vast interests to defend, tens of millions on the public payroll, trillions of dollars a year at stake. Of course they “react” to a threat from the people and their failed Tribune Trump.

That the Imperial Trillions corrupted the Generals and Intelligence chiefs we know, of course they employed all the power they dared to topple the “usurper “ Trump. M

They are the state, the state is them, they are the nation.

Something I noticed in DC at the Potomac Green Zone; half of them consider the Oath to *them personally * and “thanked us” for protecting them.

The other half walk by not looking at us, or our guns; the fear is palpable. The latter are sensible of what they did.

There is no actual military now BTW, because the Oath is abrogated- by them. There’s some men with guns standing around, waiting to see what happens.

Expand full comment

To get back, more or less to the point, I think Trump has altered the equation through his rhetoric, and magnetic ability to rouse a gathering into mob-like unity based on emotional response to that rhetoric. Actual facts seem not to matter to his supporters, only what Trump says is valid to them. It could be said that Charlottesville led directly to the January 6th sacking of Congress. While those arrested at demonstrations by the left tended to be Students, Professors, and Community Activists, those arrested at demonstrations by the right seem to be Police, Military, and Business people. Other than the whacos on both sides, this demographic should give us pause.

Trump snatched victory from the jaws of defeat in 2016, losing the popular vote by 3 million but getting a win from the electoral college. In 2020 he lost the popular vote by 8 million and lost the electoral college vote too. So he declares himself the honest winner and his supporters believe him in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary and no evidence supporting his claims. A large majority of Republicans elected seem to agree with him also. Let's not be distracted by "Wokeism" or cries of "Socialism", the real threat to our democracy is Trumpism, and according to recent polling world wide a majority of people around the world recognize it too.

Between the Capitalists making money by keeping things stirred up (and attention away from them), politicians who will do and say anything to get elected, professional rabble rousers, and "useful idiots" the average citizen is in a poor position to sort out who to vote for among only two options. The Constitution is not a suicide pact, it was not designed to deal with today's reality. Change only comes from adults taking charge or from the psychotic inmates taking over the asylum. It is now our choice.

Expand full comment

From my perspective it seems pretty obvious that a spike in protests starting in 2016 would be people coming off the sidelines when they recognized an existential threat to democratic institutions and America as they understood it following Trump's election

Expand full comment

Because he colluded with the Russians! Except he didn't and that was invented by CIA and friends. So where was/is the real threat to democratic institutions: A president elected who wasn't on board with all the empire's machinations? or The intelligence community guiding domestic politics by feeding untrue stories to the media?

Expand full comment

“As they understood it”.

True, it was an existential threat to Oligarchic power, from the peasants- and they crushed it.

Congratulations , enjoy your gains.

Expand full comment

I think you’re not taking into account the way different ideologies perceive protesting. On the left, protesting is viewed as almost sacred—standing up against oppression is central to progressive ideology. Meanwhile on the right, law and order is a central value and protesting is often viewed as having the potential for disorder and lawlessness. This impedes interpretation of protest participation as evidence of caring more to some degree.

Expand full comment

That doesn't explain the change in the gap over time.

Expand full comment

That’s a valid point. Even so, it is important to note that we can’t necessarily interpret protesting activity as a measure of how much conservatives and liberals care about politics.

Expand full comment

Not by itself - but clearly being more compelled to act by using our scare amount of time, effort and energy to direct towards politics corresponds to caring

Expand full comment

I’m not saying it’s not related to caring, it clearly is. I am simply raising the possibility that conservatives express how much they care about political outcomes in different ways. Conceivably these alternate ways are not being captured as well in Hanania’s measure of “caring”, which would leads the gap to be overstated.

Expand full comment