Liberals and Leftists Live in Different Realities
Inside the Democratic Party’s Civil War
Human societies — at least, in the forms we’ve known — require a basic shared understanding of reality to function. Called “mores” in sociology, “shared myths” in the study of nationalism, and “Li” in Confucianism, the idea that people ought to share some concept of what it means to live together permeates social philosophies. Whether they take the form of church on Sundays or even just a respect for science and scientists, shared understandings seem unavoidable if your goal is to organize and participate in a functioning society.
It’s a shame, then, that the Democratic Party has so few left.
Given the deep partisan divides between the American Republican and Democratic parties, on issues ranging from trans rights to the existence of COVID-19, it’s tempting to see the breakdown of American politics solely through the lens of Democrats versus Republicans: Liberals define themselves as a party of largely secular, socially progressive socialites, and Republicans think themselves hardened conservatives with a deep love of God and Country (in that order).
While those divisions are real, and are worthy of concern, they elide a similar — if not even more pronounced — divide within the heart of the Democratic Party itself.
In the last week, Representatives Rashida Tlaib, Ocasio-Cortez, Jamal Bowman, and Ilhan Omar have tweeted out rebukes of both Democratic party policy and strategy.
The replies to these call-out tweets are a battleground on which Liberals and Leftists tear into each other over issues ranging from Israel’s war on Palestine to the much-delayed infrastructure bill. Leftists accuse Liberals of not truly caring about helping people, while Liberals retort that Leftists are either delusionally ignoring the good supposedly being done by the Biden administration, or much worse, sabotaging their own party with meaningless quibbles.
To put my cards on the table here — I am a Leftist.
I think the “Squad” and their Leftist supporters are absolutely correct to question the intentions of Democratic party leaders and to criticize them for their inaction. That said, I do not believe that most self-described Liberals share their leadership’s unwillingness to protect human rights and outright disdain for progressive policy. Polling on the new voting rights legislation, Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and even socialism itself shows that most Democratic voters (and even a good chunk of Republicans) support these “radical left wing” policies.
The question then becomes, if Democrats appear so united on questions of public policy, why so much vitriol?
In the Confucian tradition, “Li” is sometimes defined as “rituals” while being also understood as “proper behavior” depending on the context. The idea behind its teaching is that sharing traditions and values is valuable in and of itself. Without such shared values, it’s easy to see how events like the Warring States Period in China (the period in which Confucianism first arose) might occur.
My contention is that Liberals and Leftist, both mainstays of the modern Democratic Party, have fundamentally different “Li” (or “Mores,” or “myths,” or “common sense,” or “conceptions of reality itself”).
Leftists approach politics with a deep suspicion of power — and yet also a desire to wield it effectively. When someone with power does a bad thing (or refuses to do a good one), the Leftist’s first instinct is to analyze the dynamics at play and conclude why exactly the powerful person chose to do harm. Similarly, when leftists take power, they immediately seek to use it unapologetically to further their agenda.
Liberals, on the other hand, see hardships caused by powerful people and instead search for good intentions, interfering circumstances, or vague principles which might excuse their behavior; and, when they win power, they push their leaders for principled, stable, bipartisan, and decidedly measured applications of that power.
Much the same, while a Leftist sees Biden’s deportations as proof that he does, in fact, support deportation, a Liberal sees the same facts and concludes that Biden is being held back by the courts, by the Republicans, by an upcoming election, or by Liberal principles.
When Biden fails to cancel student debt, Leftists see it as a choice to prioritize the needs of the lending class which funded Biden’s campaign over the needs of working people. Liberals, instead, search either for a justifiable reason for him to have denied aid (white ivy league kids or fiscal responsibility being common examples), or for an outside force which is staying Biden’s hand (in this case, lack of wholly unnecessary legislative support).
Though it’s tempting to try and dig up scientific data or historical case studies which will definitively end such debates, these are not disagreements which can be resolved by a review of the facts. Anyone who has participated in these debates (whether from the side of the Liberal or the Leftist) can attest to the fact that actual data / articles / statistics have no bearing on the outcome. Rather than being examined from a shared point of understanding, truth here is used as a rhetorical piece in the world’s most unproductive game of chess.
(If you won’t take my word for it, a number of studies have reached the same conclusion.)
As a result, I have regretfully concluded that Liberals’ understanding of the world as a place where powerful people are driven by their internal souls is fundamentally different from and incompatible with the Leftist view that power is a tool wielded according to tangible differences in class, race, and gender — and a tool which ought to be wielded against our enemies.
As for the future, there are really only two options: Either one half of this civil war will win out and impart its understanding of reality on the base of Democratic voters, or the war will continue — and let me be the first Leftists to say that I have no confidence in the ability of the Liberal “Li” to combat fascism or meet any of the challenges which are coming.
If I can leave you with any hope, it only comes from the fact that street politics and social movement organizing often supersede electoral infighting, and can even generate the kinds of shared understandings that are necessary.
Perhaps, if we can march together when it matters, understanding can come later.
