Thanks for the good work and inspiration.

Maarja Krusten, retired U.S. Federal government historian (Government Accountability Office) and archivist (National Archives and Records Administration)

I do not disagree with anything here. Very good. But I think you are missing something and that is institutions. At least in the US (and maybe the UK), the left need to do more than win a majority to win power and sometimes much more. Therefore, the right doesn’t need to do coalitions. At the same time, it makes it hard for the left to produce anything. Maybe Biden wouldn’t have done massive green energy spending, expanded health care and child care, made college more affordable, etc. like was rumored. But he certainly won’t now despite his party winning by 2,8,a nd 5 in the last three election (16,18,20). So yes, a simple message is necessary (any ideas?) but the larger context is the electoral institutions. Different institutions and the situation may not be the same or the show may be on the other foot.

I think one of the failings of capitalism is that it has so powerfully separated us from family, culture, faith, and nature. Our reward receptors have been exploited by technology companies, the nature of work has become 24/7, the pace of urban life gives our brains a freneticism it wasn’t meant for. I don’t see how us college educated liberals can identify and rally around a “feel it in your bones” type of commonality, because we are so lacking in it ourselves.

One final point I want to make is that haven’t read you/many people addressing monetary policy and its role in America’s predicament. Quantitative easing and rock bottom interest rates have contributed mightily to the stock market/overall economy wealth gap.

I agree with everything you say here, especially going forward. One thing to add: at least in the United States (and maybe the UK?) if there were different electoral institutions, the center-left would not only gain power but (and I understand this is a big but) be in a position to enact change for the communities is struggles to keep in its coalition. I mean, on votes alone, Biden should have a commanding victory and a legislature willing to work with him on climate change, health care, democratic and court reform, etc. In fact, we may not even have a President Biden but a more progressive (and younger) president and a party that was able to move left prior to 2016.

In this scenario, it is not JUST that the center-left doesn’t produce for these people and has no message, it is that they need to compete in a system that stops them form doing the first and scrambles the second. That said, it doesn’t excuse everything democrats have done either.

One question this brings up for me: among the largely-white rural/suburban non-elites who support Trump, how much of their behavior is explained as a reaction to a global economic system that they no longer have as much purchasing power in, versus a more-or-less calculated rebuttal of ongoing demographic and cultural shifts that are beginning to challenge their highly problematic and previously-unassailable worldview?

When I visit my hometown in rural/suburban Ohio, I get the sense that a lot of people struggle financially, but all in all are doing much better than poor communities of color in the cities. Many if not most own homes, work service or public sector jobs, have some generational wealth to fall back on. They hold the police and military in high regard. A lot of them have college degrees even though they seem to lack much understanding of statistics or the scientific method. These individuals are presenting themselves as being underdogs in the system, but because of the electoral system they command way more political power per capita than they probably should.

As a privileged, college-educated white guy, I can be comfortable with the notion of a new left/liberal politics that is less patronizing and elitist, but I worry about how it will choose to address the harms caused by some of the people it hopes to one day win over.