Is a Powerful Counterrevolution Building Against Progressive Elites?
NOTE: This post was updated on June 10, 2021 with additional material.
During the entire Trump administration, American progressives accelerated their struggle against Trump into a campaign against American cultural institutions. American leftists told us our nation was a hateful thing, created to perpetuate the institution of slavery. Historical monuments to any person from the past two-and-a-half centuries were torn down or defaced. Indeed, progressive projects to rewrite American history, such as the 1619 Project, attempted to demonstrate the U.S. is fundamentally evil. Police departments were “defunded”, emasculated to allow the looting and burning of private businesses. Crime, especially murder, exploded. If you believed in a meritocracy supported by equal opportunity (as opposed to equal results) in a free-market economy, then you must necessarily be not merely a racist but a fascist as well. Could all this be inspiring a powerful counterrevolution against the progressive elites?
The Revolution Progressive Elites Want
Why has all this befallen us over the last few years? My suspicion is the expectations of progressive elites that they could nudge American society ever farther leftwards were rudely shattered by Donald Trump’s 2016 election. Those expectations had been interrupted once before by the razor-thin victory of George W. Bush over Al Gore in the 2000 election. To be disappointed like this once again by a swaggering, bombastic, hyperbolic individual like Trump was entirely too much for them. During a Presidential debate on July 27, 2016, Trump had suggested the Russians probably had hacked a large number of his opponent’s emails. Referring to Hillary Clinton’s deleted emails from her secretary of state email accounts, he foolishly declared,
Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’ll be able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you’ll probably be rewarded mightily by our press.
Taking this as a hint, Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party immediately after the 2016 election suggested Trump had colluded with the Russian government to steal the election. As Trump effectively mounted a campaign against big government with tax cuts and reforms and with a partial deconstruction of the regulatory state, progressives’ desperation deepened into almost hysterical despair. Trump’s impeachment and following Senate trial came and went with Trump victorious.
In the middle of this existential combat between the American Left and Right came the event that traumatized the entire nation: The murder of George Floyd. This crime was so egregious, both sides of the ideological divide united to censure it. Yet, the Left saw an opportunity. Peaceful protests against Floyd’s murder by day morphed into violent riots, the burning of inner cities, and the looting of businesses at night. Below is a limited selection of images of riots in major cities. These images were taken as screenshots from YouTube videos. From left to right, top to bottom, the images and their sources are: Minneapolis (CBS 8 San Diego), Washington DC (MSNBC), New York City (The Hill), Chicago (ABC 7 Chicago), Los Angeles (ABC 7 Los Angeles), and Seattle (King 5 Seattle).
Throughout Trump’s presidency, progressives continually outdid themselves to alienate those Americans who did not hate American culture and institutions. If you did not agree with their beliefs, progressives claimed you were a racist or a fascist, and probably both. The lives of people who supported any Trump policies were to be “canceled” and they were to be ejected from society. Right-wing Republicans were simply not to be tolerated.
The Unpopular Progressive Program
All of this progressive posturing was in the service of a social, economic, and institutional revolution they desperately want. Let us take a more detailed look at some progressive policies that are turning voters off. Many of these policies are inspired by the Leftist dogma that the U.S. is systemically racist. Others are spawned by a progressive need to possess more control over the economy. Others are prompted by Democrats’ beliefs those policies can better sustain their political power.
Defunding the Police and Encouraging Crime
In the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder, many Democratic politicians in state and local governments demanded police departments should have budgets greatly reduced, or even eliminated altogether. Assertions were made that a major function of the police is to maintain white supremacy. It was also claimed spending on police departments diverted funds away from needed social programs, schools, and health care.
Democratic mayors and local politicians of Minneapolis, MN; Portland, OR; Seattle, WA; New York, NY; Los Angeles, CA; San Francisco, CA; Oakland, CA; Austin, TX; Washington D.C.;and Baltimore, MD have all approved police defunding to one degree or another. Democratic support for defunding in the U.S. Congress has been much more muted. Nevertheless, the House responded on March 3, 2021 by passing the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act. The bill passed 220 to 212 along party lines. Among other measures, the bill would ban chokeholds, racial and religious profiling, and prohibit the serving of certain “no-knock” warrants. In addition, it would effectively end “qualified immunity” for police officers by making it much easier for people they arrest to sue officers personally for alleged civil rights violations. The passage of this bill by the Senate appears, for now, to be unlikely.
The response of local police to all these hostile acts was entirely predictable. It was the Ferguson Effect all over again. In order to protect themselves, many police officers became much less aggressive in enforcing the law, particularly in riot situations. Police reticence in turn encouraged criminals to increase the violent crime rate. In 2020, major cities experienced a 33 percent increase in homicides. Aggravated assaults rose by 6 percent and gun assaults by 8 percent. Property and other nonviolent crimes generally fell due to the COVID-19 lockdowns. Robbery fell by 9 percent, residential burglary by 24 percent, nonresidential burglary fell by 7 percent, larceny by 16 percent, and drug offenses fell by 30 percent. It will be interesting to see how much these nonviolent crimes will increase as we come out of the lockdowns.
Critical Race Theory Indoctrination for All
Related to the progressive rewrite of American history is their attempt to force indoctrination of citizens, especially children and government workers, into their dogma. Progressives in universities, in state governments, and on school boards across the nation have been pushing for the teaching of Critical Race Theory (CRT) to students. The major motivation for CRT seems to be although everyone is now equal before the law, social results (mean income, health, life expectancy) are not the same for all races.
Fundamentally, critical race theory asserts a person’s social interactions are completely defined by that person’s race. Racism is regarded as so endemic to the United States it cannot be expunged. If you are white, you must necessarily be a racist, especially if you don’t think you are. In contradistinction to Martin Luther King, you are necessarily defined by the color of your skin, not by the color of your character. Moreover, you are naive if you think it can be any different. Clearly, by definition critical race theory is itself a racist doctrine. Below is a PragerU / YouTube video that accurately portrays its basic ideas.
On his very first day in office, Joe Biden rescinded President Trump’s executive order prohibiting training of federal employees and contractors in critical race theory. Prior to Trump’s now-defunct order, many federal agencies had been giving CRT training. Tellingly, at the same time, Biden also ended Trump’s 1776 Commission and withdrew its final report. The 1776 Commission had condemned the foundational assertion of the New York Time’s 1619 project. The 1619 project declared the United States had been founded to protect slavery, not to insure individuals’ freedoms from an autocratic government.
By allowing federal organizations to continue this indoctrination, Biden has joined the far-left insistence that all whites are intrinsically racist. We can only assume the Biden administration will form policy in accordance with this racist assumption.
An Open Southern Border
Another unpopular Biden Administration policy is the opening of our southern border to illegal immigration. During Donald Trump’s administration, illegal immigration across the Mexican border had been mostly controlled. This feat was accomplished partially by ending “catch and release,” building an extended border wall, and with an agreement with Mexico to keep claimants for asylum inside Mexico until their cases were heard in court. Joe Biden advertised during the 2020 campaign that he would end all these policies. When he took power, he delivered on his promises.
And the Mexican drug cartels paid attention to Biden’s promises. They immediately organized caravans of illegal immigrants seeking a better life in the U.S. These caravans also gave the cartels an opportunity to smuggle in drugs and engage in sex trafficking. The Department of Homeland Security estimates 500,000 to 800,000 illegal immigrants will arrive during the 2021 fiscal year, which ends in September. With immigration on the southern border accelerating, one should not be surprised if the number of immigrants crossing the Mexican border exceeds one million for 2021.
Yet, Biden’s Secretary of Homeland Security has constantly lied recently about our southern border being closed. And, as the Fox News video below makes clear a large fraction of those illegal immigrants are from places other than Central America, South America, or Mexico.
Who are you going to believe: The Biden Administration or your lying eyes? The date on this video is May 17, 2021. Below is another video, dated June 4, 2021 about how the cartels are the people who are in actual control of the southern border.
The Green New Deal
A growing unpopularity of the Democrats’ Green New Deal is ensured by its insanity. In particular, its costs would destroy the economy for an almost unmeasurable decrease in global warming. Let us assume the same sensitivity of global temperatures to increases in carbon dioxide concentrations as the U.N.’s IPCC does in its modeling. Then, if the U.S. completely ceased CO2 emissions, the world’s average temperatures would be only 0.137 degrees Celsius cooler by 2100. Even if every country in the world followed suit, by 2100 the world’s average temperature would be only 0.278 degrees Celsius cooler.
One of the major provisions of the Green New Deal is obtaining 100 percent of the nation’s electricity from “clean, renewable, and zero-emission” energy sources. The Heritage Foundation estimates that just this one goal could easily cost $5 trillion, or about 24 percent of today’s GDP. Moreover, the Heritage Foundation estimates an average annual loss of 1.2 million jobs through the year 2040. They also estimate the average family of four would lose almost $8,000 in income every year, or a total of more than $165,000 through the year 2040. Noting these costs for so little gain, any rational person could only conclude the Green New Deal is totally insane.
Yet, that is not the end of the Green New Deal’s insanity. All plants need carbon dioxide to produce their food by photosynthesis. Our current atmospheric CO2 concentration is about 400 parts per million (ppm) Should the CO2 levels ever fall below 150 ppm, massive die-offs of plant life could be expected. As the NoTricksZone post by Pierre Gosselin, at which I found this information, put it: “Do we really want to live on the brink of extinction?” Better to subsidize the burning of fossil fuels to replenish our atmospheric CO2!
The final insanity of the Green New Deal is that atmospheric carbon dioxide cannot possibly be responsible for the observed global warming. The explanation of this fact is somewhat lengthy, but you can find it here.
Federalization of Election Law
One threat to Democratic Party control of the federal government is new election laws being enacted in many states to ensure the integrity of the ballot box. As of May 14, 2021, 48 states are considering 389 such bills. Many of these bills also require more stringent management of voter roles to weed out those who have died or moved to another state. The first state to pass a new voter law, Georgia, was accused by President Biden of reviving Jim Crow and of being racist. Democrats, in general, are aghast that any measures would be taken to make voting more fraud-proof. Why would they have this attitude, unless they indeed regularly commit electoral fraud to gain power?
Progressives are charging that Republican politicians in states like Georgia are racist for imposing legal safeguards against illegal voting. Their claim is that photo ID is too difficult for many minorities to get, and therefore such ID requirements will suppress minority votes. However, most (if not all) states offer such IDs for everyone.
In an attempt to kill these incipient voting laws in their crib, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives passed House Resolution 1, also disingenuously known as the “For the People Act.” It has yet to pass the Senate, where its chances are uncertain.
Among many other requirements, H.R. 1 would force the states to implement early voting, automatic voter registration, same-day registration, online voter registration, and no-fault absentee balloting. The states would be required to automatically register all individuals whose names and addresses could be found in state and federal databases. These databases are found in agencies such as state departments of motor vehicles, and corrections and welfare agencies. Federal agencies with such databases would include the Social Security Administration, the Department of Labor, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services of DHHS. Inevitably, large numbers of ineligible voters would be swept up in this automatic registration. Aliens and felons would be registered. Multiple or duplicate registrations of the same individuals could easily happen. Not, only that, but the states would not be allowed to check the eligibility of registrants. Federal agencies would be put in charge of making such checks. The bill would also completely ban state voter ID laws. Individuals would be allowed to vote without any ID by merely signing a declaration that they are who they claim to be. The “For the People Act” appears to be a huge power grab by the Democratic Party, enabling them to get away with massive voter fraud.
Unfortunately, the “For the People Act” is quite possibly constitutional. Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution states that “[t]he Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof … “. However, in the same sentence, the Constitution continues to say ” … but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.” Unless the Senate can stop it, the U.S. could quite easily lose its democracy through this bill. In the video below, the Senate Minority Leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell, gives the Republican view of this obscenity.
The Brewing Counterrevolution against the Progressive Elites
A second American Revolution led by the progressive Left is not what most Americans desire. Even most of the rank and file Democratic Party voters are against large tracts of it. For example, the Democratic warcry of “defund the police” is supported by only 34 percent of Democrats and 28 percent of African Americans, as evidenced by an Ipsos-USA TODAY poll and confirmed by an Axios-Ipsos poll. Overall, only 18% of Americans responding to the Ipsos-USA TODAY favored defunding the police.
Also, progressives are seeing major pushback from ordinary Americans in the rewriting of American history. Most Americans remain patriotic and proud of their nation.
Unlike progressives, most Americans do not see their country as a fundamentally and systemically racist nation. They do not see the United States as an evil state spawned by slave-holding racists. To be sure, everyone recognizes the evil sin of slavery in our history. However, that imperfection has been expunged by the Civil War, the emancipation of all slaves, and the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1968. While many systemic elements of racism (specifically “Jim Crow laws”) remained after the Civil War, those elements were removed by the 1960’s Civil Rights Acts. A majority of our citizens oppose the rewriting of American history to justify the vilification of the United States.
In addition, Biden is losing support from many groups over the crisis on our southern border. A recent March 15, 2021 Rasmussen Poll showed that 73 percent of likely U.S. voters “are concerned about the government’s ability to handle the growing number of migrants at the border while meeting COVID-19 protocols. That includes 48% who say they are Very Concerned.” An additional finding of the poll is that 51 percent of likely voters are opposed to expansive amnesty plans for illegal immigrants being discussed in Congress. An April 14, 2021 Quinnipiac Poll showed 55 percent of adult Americans said “they disapproved of Biden’s handling of the influx of migrants at the southern border.” Only 29 percent approved. Biden fared worse among independents with 64 percent disapproving and 22 percent approving. In addition, a Yahoo/YouGov poll taken between March 23 and March 25 showed 62 percent of U.S. adults believe there is a crisis at the southern border.
Tellingly, even Hispanics, particularly in Texas and Arizona, fear the loss of border control as the Biden Administration takes over from Trump. According to the Quinnipiac poll, only 27 percent of Latinos approved of Biden’s border policies, while 55 percent opposed them. Why would American Latinos be opposed to Biden’s policies? The border crisis has the potential to severely damage, perhaps even overwhelm, the economies and health and welfare systems of border states. These are states heavily populated by Hispanics. This explains the increasing opposition of Democratic border state politicians to Biden’s policies. For example, both Democratic senators from Arizona supported Republican Gov. Ducey’s deployment of the Arizona National Guard on the border. Sen. Kyrsten Sinema and Sen. Mark Kelly want Biden to reimburse the state for the $25 million state expenditure required to deploy the National Guard. In addition, Texas Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar is upset with the border crisis in his state and how the Biden administration is portraying it.
Biden’s policies collectively comprising his Green New Deal might be the most politically damaging part of his agenda. I have already written how the Green New Deal could destroy the U.S. economy without a measurable decrease in global warming. Already, Biden’s closure of the Keystone pipeline has increased gas prices nationally. Yet, according to a recent Gallup poll, barely three percent of adult Americans view climate change as a primary problem. According to another recent poll by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, only 5 percent of adults view climate change as the most important problem. The same survey showed only 14 percent of registered voters would be willing to spend $100 per month to mitigate climate change. Thirty-five percent said they would not be willing to spend anything. As both social and household costs mount to reduce CO2 emissions, we can expect opposition to the government to grow ever more militant.
One signal that a major counterrevolution is brewing against the progressives is becoming unmistakably clear. That alarm is the growing flight of businesses and citizens from blue cities and states to red states. Based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau, the top five states experiencing a flood of departures are all blue: New York, California, Illinois, New Jersey, and Michigan. Altogether these states lost 4 million people between 2010 and 2019. According to U-Haul, the top 10 states people left in 2019 were all blue or purplish and bordering on blue: Illinois, California, Michigan, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Colorado, and Wisconsin. The top 10 states to which the blue state refugees moved include 5 red, 3 purple, and 1 blue state: Florida Texas, North Carolina, South Carolina, Washington, Alabama, Ohio, Utah, Indiana, and Vermont. The one blue state in this list, Vermont, also gained the least inmigration. If progressive policies are so superior in producing a more liveable society, why are almost all the net outmigrations originating in blue states and going to predominantly red states?
The migration pattern of businesses moving from one state to another is very similar. For example, businesses have been exiting California for years, either relocating their headquarters or their entire operations. The major reasons for moving out include high taxes, high cost of living, and overregulation by the state government. Beginning in 2020, the reasons for leaving expanded with poor public security caused by the “defund the police” movement and violent, destructive rioting. When a company’s building is looted or burned down by rioters. you can understand that business’ reluctance to stay in the state. These motivations for companies to abandon the state appear to be identical in all blue states.
The list of major businesses and prominent citizens leaving California since 2019 are the following (the state to which they moved is in parenthesis): Gene Simmons (Nevada), Oracle Corporation (Texas), Elon Musk and Tesla HQ (Texas/Nevada), Hewlett Packard (Texas), Ben Shapiro (East Coast), Real estate group CBRE (Texas), The Daily Wire (Tennessee), podcaster Joe Rogan (Texas), Charles Schwab (Texas), Mitsubishi Motors (Tennessee), The ICEE Company (Tennessee), and Dole (North Carolina).
Similar lists can be made for businesses and prominent citizens leaving other blue states. For example, the motivations driving both citizens and businesses out of New York are exactly the same as for California. The Empire Center, a New York think tank, says New York state has lost 1.4 million people since 2010. The whittling away of their workforce by citizens fleeing New York gives companies an additional reason to leave the state. Any list of companies that have moved their HQs and/or a significant fraction of their operations out of New York would include the following: Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Barclays, UBS, Citigroup, Alliance Bernstein, among many others. In addition, twenty top finance and tech firms are set to leave New York if the state increases their taxes by an additional $7 billion.
This picture of adverse business conditions in blue states driving out companies to red states can be repeated over and over with little variation. I shall not continue drawing it ad nauseam.
To add to their problems, the Democrats are finding a dearth of public support for federalizing elections. A recent American Greatness post cites polling data released by the Honest Elections Project.
[O]ver three-quarters (77%) of Americans want people to show a photo ID to cast a ballot, while only 14% oppose it . . . by huge margins both Black and Hispanic voters favor voter identification for voting: Black voters, 64%, Hispanic voters 78%.
Similarly, 64% of Black voters, 77% of Hispanics, and 76% of low-income voters reject the notion that showing an ID is a ‘burden.’
Cleta Mitchell, American Greatness
Another sign progressives are increasingly losing the approval of a large fraction of Americans is the diminishing viewership of progressive-allied media, such as MSNBC and CNN. At the beginning of Biden’s administration in the last week of January, MSNBC had 1.3 million viewers on average while CNN had 1.2 million viewers. After Biden’s first 100 days in the week ending April 25, MSNBC had 868,000 viewers and CNN had 749,000. That amounts to a 33.2 percent decline in MSNBC’s viewership and a 37.6 percent decline in CNN’s viewership. To be fair the Republican-oriented Fox News also had a decline, albeit much smaller. Over the same time period, Fox News’ viewership fell from 1.3 million to 1.2 million, a decline of 7.7 percent.
Part of the reason for this drop in viewership can be ascribed to President Trump leaving the limelight. However, Trump’s departure from office is not the only factor causing the falling ratings. Ask yourself, why is it that the decline in Fox News’ viewership is so much smaller than that of MSNBC or CNN? Could it be a growing fraction of the population doubts the accuracy of what MSNBC and CNN assert about the American Right? Is much of the U.S. population beginning to doubt the truthfulness of progressives and their media allies?
Evidence that this is so can be found from the crashing viewership of Hollywood’s Academy Awards. Over the years, speakers at the Academy Awards repeatedly have delivered attacks on right-wing positions. As a result, the once-glamorous show has devolved into an increasingly sparsely watched spectacle. In 1998, America was fascinated by the Academy Awards, with 57 million viewers. In 2021 that number fell to 9.85 million people, a reduction of 82.7 percent. Why the huge reduction? The New York Times — not known as an admirer of the American Right — got the explanation right.
Increasingly, the ceremonies are less about entertainment honors and more about progressive politics, which inevitably annoys those in the audience who disagree. One recent producer of the Oscars, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss confidential metrics, said minute-by-minute post-show ratings analysis indicated that ‘vast swaths’ of people turned off their televisions when celebrities started to opine on politics.
New York Times
The progressives of the Democratic Party and their media allies are beginning to annoy the hell out of a growing fraction of the American people. Not only that, the results of the Democrats’ policies are beginning to frighten them. A counterrevolution against the progressive elites is building.
Views: 2,458