Podcast Summary
Belief among some on the right that progressives have won the culture war: Some on the right believe progressives have won the culture war and are intent on eradicating their enemies, shaping their views, rhetoric, and tactics.
According to Patrick Denis, a professor of political science at the University of Notre Dame, there exists a deeply held belief among some on the right that progressives have won the culture war and are intent on eradicating their enemies. This perspective, while potentially misaligned with reality, shapes the views, rhetoric, and tactics of the populist right. Denis, who was previously known for his critique of liberalism in his book "Why Liberalism Failed," has since embraced a more confrontational stance, encouraging conservatives to use the power of the state to crush their opponents and view this moment as a civilizational struggle. Despite his fervent rhetoric and criticism towards those he sees as destroying the country, it remains unclear what specific actions he advocates for. The conversation aims to help both parties better understand each other's perspectives.
Shifts in societal norms and legal frameworks regarding human sexuality: Progressives have made gains in sexuality issues, but face ongoing struggles. Conservatives have seen losses in various areas, leading to a realignment in politics over progressive understandings in institutions
According to the discussion, there has been a significant shift in societal norms and legal frameworks regarding issues related to human sexuality over the past few decades. Progressives have made substantial gains in this area, leading to a dominant, liberalized understanding of these issues. However, the political landscape is not solely about sexuality, and there are other areas where progressives feel they have not achieved their goals, leading to disappointment and a sense of continuous struggle. Conservatives, on the other hand, have seen significant losses across various issues, including business regulation, universal insurance, and taxation. The conversation between the speaker and the interviewer suggests that these perceived losses have contributed to a realignment in politics, with battles now being fought over how far progressive understandings should extend into institutions that hold traditional views.
Neoliberal economic policies harm working classes: Neoliberal policies negatively impacted working classes, causing social and economic issues, leading to a pushback against socially conservative elements and an internal battle within the Republican Party. Human beings need social connections and economic support to flourish, and addressing societal problems requires a collective effort.
The economic policies championed by conservatives, often referred to as neoliberals or economic libertarians, have negatively impacted the working and lower classes in the United States, leading to a rise in social and economic issues. This has sparked a pushback against socially conservative elements and an internal battle within the Republican Party between the progressive and economically libertarian wings. The speaker argues that both the Left and Right have failed to address the objective truth that human beings require certain conditions, such as social connections and economic support, to flourish. While there may be disagreements on how to address these issues, it is important to recognize that the causes of societal problems, such as deaths of despair, are rooted in the human condition and require a collective effort to address. It's essential to remember that, despite disagreements, both sides generally acknowledge the importance of these fundamental needs.
Reconceptualizing the Family's Role in Politics: Progressives are discussing policies and intellectual developments to support families and redefine their role within the political order, moving beyond the traditional notion of parents as primary guardians.
There is a growing perception among some progressives that the family structure is inherently unequal and unjust. However, it's important to note that not all progressives hold this view, and many policies have been proposed to support families. The speaker acknowledges that there are valid critiques of the family as a site of suffering and abuse, but argues that progressivism does not have an abstract anti-family agenda. Instead, there have been ongoing discussions about policies that make it easier for families to function, such as child tax credits and universal pre-K. However, there are also intellectual developments in law theory that aim to redefine the role of parents and the relationship between families and the state, potentially shifting the focus away from parents as primary guardians of their children. While these developments may not yet have led to outright laws, they reflect a broader trend of reconceptualizing the family's role within the context of the political order.
Shifts in Values: Individual Choice vs. Traditional Family Structure: The liberal belief in self-sovereignty and individual freedom is leading to changes in family and sexuality policies, challenging the traditional family structure, and potentially impacting individuals, particularly children of divorced families.
The ongoing transformations in family and sexuality, as discussed, are leading to a shift in values prioritizing individual choice over the traditional family structure. This change is evident in policies such as same-sex marriage recognition and no-fault divorce laws. The liberal belief in self-sovereignty and individual freedom clashes with the reality of human life's beginning without individual choice. The trend continues with emerging technologies, like contraception, abortion, and potential human life creation methods, which further challenge the traditional family structure. This trajectory reflects the liberal vision of human beings as self-creators, with the family being the last institution to be altered according to this belief. However, it's essential to consider the implications of these changes on individuals, particularly children of divorced families, and the potential consequences of enforcing or discouraging divorce. The question of whether unhappy people should stay in an unhappy marriage can be reframed, and the underlying assumptions may challenge the liberal presuppositions.
Making Marriage More Difficult to Exit for Children's Sake: Economic and psychological challenges faced by children from divorced households highlight the importance of making marriage more difficult to exit to encourage loyalty and voice, ensuring children's wellbeing.
Marriage, as a crucial relationship for the propagation and raising of the next generation, should be made more difficult to exit in order to encourage loyalty and voice. This is based on the idea that children from divorced households often face economic and psychological challenges, and that marriage is a challenging relationship that requires external support. Economist Albert Hirschman's theory of "Exit, Loyalty, and Voice" suggests that there are two responses to unhappiness: exiting a situation or working through it with voice. The default for marriage should be one that makes the easier route of exit more difficult, for the sake of the children. This could be achieved through measures such as mandatory marriage counseling and subsidizing it, making divorce more difficult to obtain, especially in cases with children involved. These policies would give voice and the opportunity to work through issues a chance before resorting to divorce.
Celebrating Long-Term Marriages and Multi-Generational Relationships: Embrace the challenges of parenting and long-term marriages, as they lead to happiness and the creation of multi-generational relationships, ultimately enriching society.
Our conversation highlighted the importance of celebrating and honoring long-term marriages and multi-generational relationships in society. Dionne expressed that the greatest stress and unhappiness often occur during the parenting years, but that the other side, where happiness blooms in a new way, is worth striving for. He emphasized that a civilization that values and celebrates long marriages, where parents become grandparents and even great-grandparents, would be one in which more people would realize the goal is to reach the other side despite the trials and difficulties. Dionne also reflected on his previous work criticizing liberalism for creating a society of too much choice, too little tradition, and too weak institutions, leaving many people behind. He acknowledged that his tone can seem contradictory, but in their conversation, he showed a desire to find common ground and build coalitions.
Failure of Establishment to Address Economic and Social Issues: Despite acknowledgement of struggling communities' issues, both left and right have not provided effective solutions, and divisive rhetoric hinders productive dialogue. Policies prioritizing working people's needs should be revisited.
Both the left and right establishment, or the managerial elite, have failed to effectively address the economic and social issues in struggling communities in the Midwest and elsewhere. President Obama acknowledged the failure of these communities, but his administration did not provide significant solutions. Similarly, some on the right have condemned these communities and their residents for their supposed backwardness. The speaker argues that this divisive rhetoric narrows the space for alliances and productive dialogue. Instead, he suggests focusing on policies that could have been supported by both parties in the past, such as those that once formed the heart of the Democratic Party. The speaker, a former man of the left, feels that the Democratic Party of today is unrecognizable to him and calls for a return to policies that prioritize the needs of ordinary working people.
A new fusion of politics: Economy for the people, anti-monopolistic stance, social policies, and multipolar foreign policy: The political landscape is shifting towards a new fusion of politics that prioritizes an economy that benefits ordinary people, encourages domestic production, adopts an anti-monopolistic stance, and emphasizes social policies and a multipolar foreign policy.
The political landscape has shifted, and what was once considered the fusion of the right, or conservatism, is evolving to resemble elements of the old Democratic Party. This new fusion seeks to promote an economy that benefits ordinary people, encourages domestic production, and adopts an anti-monopolistic stance. It also prioritizes social policies that support families through direct payments and a foreign policy that recognizes a multipolar world. While there are disagreements on specific issues like immigration, there are similarities between this vision and current Democratic policies, particularly in areas like antitrust, child support, and foreign policy. The election of Donald Trump and the changing electorate have led to this shift, and it represents a new way of thinking about politics and governance that puts the needs of the working class at the forefront.
Recognizing Coalitional Potential on Economic Issues within the Democratic Party: The Democratic Party's future may shift towards economic populism, with agreement on issues like supporting families and onshoring manufacturing, despite differences on social issues.
Despite perceived liberal hostility towards traditional family values and social issues, there is significant coalitional potential on economic issues between different factions within the Democratic Party. Joe Biden, representing the older Democratic Party, may be the last gasp of this era, but the future of the party seems to be moving in a more economically populist direction, as seen in the policies of figures like Bernie Sanders. The consensus on economic issues, such as supporting families and onshoring manufacturing, is not limited to Biden or the current Democratic establishment. It's important to recognize that there is room for agreement on economic matters, even if there are differences on social issues. The future of the Democratic Party may not be defined solely by Biden or the old Democratic Party, but rather by a more expansive, economically populist vision.
Understanding the Role of Cultural Institutions in Shaping Political Allegiances: Both the right and left need to focus on strengthening cultural institutions and finding common ground to address economic and cultural challenges faced by the working class, rather than condemning traditional values or institutions.
The political divide in America today goes beyond the traditional left-right spectrum, and it's essential to understand the role of cultural institutions and traditions in shaping people's political allegiances. The right, often rooted in communities with long histories and traditions, feels culturally out of step with the Democratic Party and the progressive movement. The left, on the other hand, can be perceived as suspicious or even condemning of traditional institutions like family, church, and local communities. Both sides have contributed to the weakening of institutions that support people in the lower income brackets. To move forward, it's crucial to focus on strengthening these institutions and finding common ground to address the economic and cultural challenges faced by the working class. This will require a shift in rhetoric and a willingness to engage in a more constructive dialogue that transcends the current false choices presented by the political class.
The Weakening of Community Institutions and the Elite Divide: The freedom to choose where to live and work has led to a detached elite class, causing harm to those not in it. We need to rethink individual choices to strengthen communities and reduce the elite divide.
The increasing freedom to make choices about where to live, work, and form families has led to the weakening of community institutions and the creation of an elite class that is detached from the people they are meant to represent. This elite class, which has benefited from these changes, has inadvertently caused harm to those who are not part of it. The question then becomes, how do we change the default and create a world where talent is not just concentrated in a few cities, but is distributed in a way that strengthens communities and reduces the divide between the elite and the rest? The solution may not be to take away freedoms, but rather to rethink the presumptions that drive individual choices and consider how we can encourage individuals to contribute to their communities in meaningful ways.
Creating a new elite to bridge the divide: To address societal divide, develop a new elite committed to building a society that supports ordinary citizens, but ensuring they remain immune to power corruption is a challenge. Institutions like universities could encourage students to become community leaders and advocate for equitable policies.
Addressing the growing divide between the ruling class and the rest of society requires a multifaceted approach. While there are concerns about regional inequality and the role of technology, it's essential to recognize that policies and societal values have also contributed to this issue. The solution, according to the speaker, lies in the development of a new elite that is dedicated to building a society that supports the flourishing of ordinary citizens, rather than just protecting their own power and status. However, it's important to acknowledge that elites have historically perpetuated their power and succumbed to corruption. Therefore, creating a new elite that remains immune to these pitfalls is a significant challenge. The speaker suggests that institutions like universities could play a role by encouraging students to become leaders in their local communities and advocating for policies that distribute college graduates more evenly across regions. Ultimately, the goal is to create a society where all members have equal opportunities to thrive.
Reconsidering the Role and Composition of the Elite: To create a balanced society, we need to encourage the mixing of classes and values through education, but both the elite and populace must first address their own shortcomings and work towards a more inclusive and educational environment.
In order to create a healthy and functional society, we need to reconsider the role and composition of our elite class. The current elite is poorly formed and perpetuates harmful systems, while the populace can benefit from refinement and elevation through education. A solution proposed is the concept of a mixed constitution, which encourages the mixing of classes and values to create a balanced society. However, the current state of both the elite and the populace makes this ideal difficult to achieve. The elite is often disconnected and disdainful, while the populace has become anti-intellectual and dismissive of higher education. To improve society as a whole, we must examine our own complicity in these issues and work towards creating a more inclusive and educational environment where people from all backgrounds can interact, learn from each other, and elevate the disposition and tastes of the entire society.
The divide between elites and populace: Bridging the gap between elites and populace requires mutual efforts, with elites governing effectively for the common good and populace pushing for change from within.
The breakdown of a common culture in society can lead to a deep divide between the populace and the elites, potentially resulting in a politics of fear and instability. However, there is hope for improvement if both sides work towards making each other better. The elites can be forced to govern on behalf of everyday people's concerns, while the populace can push for change from within the elites. The speaker believes that a combination of these two forces could lead to positive outcomes, such as elites governing more effectively and elites themselves rebelling against the corruptions within their own institutions. Ultimately, the key is for both sides to recognize the need for change and work towards creating a society where the common good is prioritized.
Culture and policy working together: Effective societal change requires a balance of cultural foundation and practical policy solutions, with open discussions and understanding of opposing viewpoints and budgets.
Both culture and policy are essential in addressing societal issues. While culture sets the foundation, policy provides the practical solutions and holds people accountable. The speaker acknowledges the importance of culture but emphasizes the need for rigorous policy discussions to effectively tackle complex problems, such as the opioid crisis. The speaker also encourages engaging with opposing viewpoints and understanding the budgets and proposed solutions behind them to accurately assess their value and impact. Ultimately, both culture and policy must work together for meaningful progress.
Discussing the need for political corrections and recommended books: Patrick Deneen discusses the need for significant adjustments in both major political parties, recommends Michael Lynn's 'The New Class War', Tom Holland's 'Dominion', and Wendell Berry's 'The Art of Loading Brush' for insights on modern political climate, values, and economies.
According to Patrick Deneen, our values and policies need correction, and we've taken a wrong turn. He believes that both major political parties require significant adjustments. During their conversation, they discussed Michael Lynn's book, "The New Class War," which touches on themes of the current political climate. Another recommended book is Tom Holland's "Dominion," which explores the impact of Christianity on modern secular humanist values in a post-Christian world. Lastly, Deneen suggested Wendell Berry's "The Art of Loading Brush" for its essays on agrarianism, local economies, and the importance of learning and accepting limits in a prodigious age.
