The Liberal Backbone, Chapter 2: Why Nothing Makes Sense

It’s hard to stand for something if you’re not even sure what that something is. And many liberals have become unsure what liberalism is.

For a long time, few of us had to think much about it. Liberalism was just default political reality.

It was like water is for the young fish in David Foster Wallace’s famous parable: They can’t see the water, because it’s everywhere.

Let’s remember that the word “liberalism” doesn’t only refer to beliefs on the left. It’s also the name of the philosophy of freedom on which the United States and every other liberal democracy were founded. When Thomas Jefferson wrote “We hold these truths to be self-evident…” he was referring to the principles of this kind of liberalism.

But now we liberals are being forced to think about our default reality, because it’s being disrupted by two radical challenges from outside: one from the MAGA right and another from what’s commonly called the woke left — although the word “woke” needs some clarifying, which I’ll get to a little later.

The trouble is, it can be hard for liberals even to see these challenges for what they are. They don’t fit within our default reality.

More at substack.com/@spencercritchley.

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
Welcome to Dastardly Cleverness in theService of Good, I'm Spencer Critchley.

(00:04):
Last time I introduced my new project,a book called The Liberal Backbone,
about what liberals actually stand for
and how they can stand up for ita whole lot more effectively.
I plan to release this book chapterby chapter in the form of podcast episodes
and posts at dastardlycleverness.comand at Substack.

(00:25):
I set up an account at Substackjust recently,
and I hope you'll follow methere at substack.com/@Spencer Critchley.
That's “at” as in an “at” sign.
And I'm inviting everyone who hearsor reads a chapter
to send me any comments, suggestionsor corrections they may have.
A few people have already done thatand it's already been very helpful.

(00:47):
You can find ChapterOne on any podcast app,
at dastardlycleverness.comand at Substack.
Here's Chapter Two...
Why Nothing Makes Sense.
As I noted in the previouschapter, liberals
can be proudof being open to multiple opinions.
But sometimes openness can look likeemptiness,

(01:08):
as if you stand for nothing at all.
It's hard to stand for something if you'renot even sure what that something is.
And many liberals have become unsurewhat liberalism is.
For a long time,few of us had to think much about it.
Liberalism was just defaultpolitical reality.
It was like water is for the young fish

(01:29):
in David Foster Wallace's famous parable.
They can't see the waterbecause it's everywhere.
For those who haven't heard that story,I'll read it at the end of this chapter.
Let's remember that the word “liberalism”doesn't
only refer to beliefs on the left.
It's also the name of the philosophyof freedom
on which the United States and every otherliberal democracy were founded.

(01:53):
When Thomas
Jefferson wrote, “Wehold these truths to be self-evident...”
he was referring to the principlesof this kind of liberalism.
Everyone who believes in those principlesis a liberal in this larger sense.
The people we've traditionally calledconservatives, like, say,
a John McCain or a MittRomney, are conservative liberals.

(02:14):
And yes, the mainstream media is liberal,in this sense.
The free press is an essentialinstitution of liberalism, which is why
it's protected by the First Amendmentto the US Constitution.
Most of uslearn the principles of liberalism
in history, class —individual freedom, equality and the rest
— and we've seldom had to think about themsince.

(02:35):
After all, they're self-evident, right?
They're the water we swim in.
But now we liberals are being forcedto think about our default reality,
because it's being disruptedby two radical challenges from outside:
one from the MAGA rightand another from what's commonly called
the woke left — although the word “woke”needs some clarifying,

(02:57):
which I'll get to a little later.
The troubleis, it can be hard for liberals
even to see these challengesfor what they are.
They don't fit within our default reality.
In particular,they don't fit within the conceptual model
we used to think about politics.
That model has only one dimension:

(03:17):
a single line from left to right.
It's commonly assumed,including by most political journalists,
that the MAGA right and woke left
are parts of the right and leftwe've always known.
So we assume MAGA is part of the far,conservative right,
and the woke left is part of the far,progressive left.
If you're not MAGA or woke, you must besomewhere in the moderate middle.

(03:40):
But those assumptions are wrong.
That single linecan only represent the range of opinions
based on a shared set of principles,the principles of liberalism in this case.
Until recently, that didn't matter much,because
liberalism encompassed all the opinionsthat were likely to matter.
Sure, we knew there

(04:01):
were such thingsas fascism, communism, or anarchism.
But history told us that anarchism peakedbefore World War
1, fascism was defeated in WorldWar 2, and communism
finally finishedcollapsing at the end of the 1980s.
But now we have MAGA and the woke
left, both of which matter very much.

(04:21):
And neither can be found anywhere on theright or the left of liberalism.
That's because both oppose liberalism.
And there is no single lineon which you can imagine both a liberal
and anti-liberal right,and a liberal and anti-liberal left.
This is one reasonwhy so many liberal minds are stymied

(04:41):
by both MAGA and wokeness.
For example,conservatives are supposed to favor
individual freedomand small, limited government, right?
But Donald Trump wins by promisingto be an authoritarian strongman.
Meanwhile, liberals of the left (andright)
are supposed to be strongproponents of free speech.
But the woke left believes freespeech can be a form of oppression.

(05:06):
Neither makes any sense, if you're
trying to make sense of itwithin the one line model of politics.
But if you can free your mind from thatmodel — take a leap out of the water —
it becomes possible to glimpsewhat's happening.
I wrote in detail about the MAGAright in my book
Patriots of Two Nationsand I'll expand on that topic in this one.

(05:28):
But I want to start with the woke left, to
which I gave little attentionin that book.
When I was writingPatriots of Two Nations in 2020,
I didn't appreciatejust how much ground the woke left
had been gainingand would continue to gain.
But if I were to write that book today,I might call it Patriots of Three Nations.
There's talklately that we've reached “peak woke.”

(05:51):
But that doesn't mean thatthe influence of wokeness is receding.
It means that for much of the left,a woke worldview
has become their default reality.
It's hard for many on the leftto acknowledge that fact, for fear
of appearing to validate right wing
fear-mongering about “woke tyrants”taking over America.
But we don't have to accept a bad-faithframing to see

(06:13):
and think aboutwhat actually is happening.
There is a wide divide betweenthe liberal left and the woke left.
Across it, members of the two factionsstare in mutual incomprehension.
The Democratic Partyand its candidates try to straddle
that divide, even as it yawns ever wider.
It's a doomed effort.

(06:35):
As Kamala Harris could tell us.
For her presidential
campaign, as reportersnoted and her opponents emphasized,
Harris changed her positionson several key issues.
She was described as shifting from theprogressive left to the moderate middle,
but it was more of an attemptto stand on both sides of a chasm.

(06:56):
Take the issue of defunding the police,for example.
There are liberal positions on reformingpolice, including progressive positions,
and Harris has longbeen a pioneer in pursuing
liberal — and effective —reforms of law enforcement.
But the idea of defunding the police,taken literally,
is rooted in the body of thoughtthat informs the woke left.

(07:18):
That body of thought sees all policeforces as instruments of oppression,
which can't be reformed,but must be abolished.
It sees liberalismmore or less the same way.
You can't straddle that divide.
And for a candidate,the biggest problem with trying isn't
so much choosing a side,although that's an important choice.

(07:40):
Instead, it looks like you can't choose,
a bad way for a leader to look.
I say this as someone with great respectfor Kamala Harris.
I just think that what she
and many other Democratic candidateshave been trying to do is impossible.
They're trying to lead a coalitionof people who are both
for and against liberalism.

(08:00):
Republicans have already struggledwith that contradiction.
In their case,it was resolved by the anti-liberals
taking over the party.
Now here's David Foster Wallace’sparable of the fish.
It's from a graduation speechhe gave at Kenyon
College in 2005 called This Is Water.

(08:21):
There are these two young fishswimming along
and they happen to meet an older fishswimming the other way,
who nods at them and says,“Morning, boys, how's the water?”
And the two young fish swim on for a bit,and then eventually
one of them looks over at the otherand goes, “What the hell is water?”