
Liberals should control the narrative and definition of the ‘Alt-Left’ — Not the ‘Alt-Right’
Trump’s echoing Fox News’ use of the term Alt-Left should surprise no one. Fox News has become Trump’s equivalent of “state news”. It functions as propaganda to deflect from real world problems, and it perpetuates fallacies. But this isn’t about Fox News, or about Trump, per se. The liberal side of things would do well not to embrace the term.
Despite what conservative media might have you believe, the left isn’t in crisis — yet. It’s incumbent on liberals to control the narrative. The 2016 presidential election was a consequence, a populist reaction of sorts, both in a liberal and conservative sense. It’s only natural that both sides would need to re-calibrate, and find their bearings.
Still, I find that on the left, rather than deal with the issues, constituents are duking it out over aesthetics. From my view, I see a lot of value in both camps that respectively voted for Hillary Clinton, and Bernie Sanders. This shouldn’t place me in the “ideological middle”, and neither, frankly, should the fact that I support incremental change over radical change — for more reasons than one.
Let me also say that if your “aesthetic” is to suggest that other progressives are either not progressive, or not progressive enough — then this is an issue. The Democratic Party has more important things to contend with than to have to deal with an identity crisis over what “progressivism” is. I’m willing to conclude that such squabbling is needed in order to let out the pent-up-rage around the frustrations of slow change — but progressivism is about moving forward, and it’s about slow changes. I’m also willing to conclude that sometimes, radical leaps are needed in order to protect people.
To be clear, I’m very frustrated by my colleagues on the far (but not too far) left who supported Bernie Sanders and ultimately have perpetuated, and for all intents and purposes generated, a “purity test” of progressivism — as if it’s their place to do so. It’s a bit absurd, for one, to create a purity test on progressivism without defining it first. The worst part is that this purity test doesn’t objectively tackle progressivism in any real sense as much as it is a “litmus test” to be considered an “ally” or an “enemy”. There’s a truly despicable outcome when we orchestrate our own failed logic into political dysfunction, and that’s exactly what’s going to happen. Clinton’s message from day one was particularly progressive — in a very functional sense of the word. This cannot be erased or corrupted, and any attempt to do so shows a lack of appreciation for much of the change that has occurred in this country over the last 200 years. Progressive change is often slow change — and that’s okay.
For further clarity, I am also quite frustrated with my colleagues closer to the center of things, but still quite to the left, who supported Hillary Clinton. In full transparency — I’m not bought into the notion that Sanders “cost” Clinton the election, and I disagree with the idea that he’s 2016’s Ralph Nader. There’s too many differences for that to be legitimately true. Still, what I see many Clinton supporters doing is vile. Some (I dare say many) seem to think that Sanders was a rape apologist. The stretch of logical reasoning and contextual misgivings are overwhelming, to say the least — but it goes to show that this kind of personal misrepresentation is only meant to distract, albeit slander a political opponent. All the while, Sander’s supporters are summarily being labeled as the “Alt-Left”.
There’s many very fair criticisms to be made against Clinton and Sanders — Russia collusion and rape apologist not being either, respectively. Clinton and Sanders shared significant policy agendas, and both were overwhelmingly progressive. To ignore this on the basis of primary politics is an injustice to any virtue, or attempt, at unity.
All of this is meant to get back to controlling the narrative. “Alt-Left” is a brand new label. If this term had always existed, then at various points throughout American politics the “alt-left” would have been composed of Suffragette’s, Civil Rights Leaders, Union leaders, workers, and supporters, supporters of Gay Rights (in any capacity), and countless other “agendas” were considered “too extreme” by conservative critics.
It’s imperative that liberals not adopt this label to brand other liberals. “Alt-Left” serves as a replacement euphemism for calling someone a fascist, or a communist. It’s meant to create the false equivalency to that of neo-Nazi’s, white supremacists, white nationalists, and the like. It should go without saying that this is a poor approach to disagreeing with actual allies.
___________________________________________________________________During the day, James works for a non-profit organization aimed at providing mental health services to parents and their kiddos who are at-risk, and just need a little bit of help. During the night, he spends time with his girlfriend and four cats (Juniper, Buttons, Oscar, and Flower), and occasionally complains about U.S. Politics, social issues, and world affairs. Like what you read here? Consider donating to my Go Fund Me! account, like or share this post, or follow me on Twitter!
