Judging by that smear against Bernie Sanders about a "Woman not being able to win the presidency," I would say so. The Democratic Party seems to be a realm of endless self-criticism, denunciation and expulsion. Not unlike the Communist Party under Stalin...except, you know, without all the murder. :mrgreen:
Unlike
in every single other respect than "self-criticism, denunciation", and even as to the point of comparison the level of "endless self-criticism, denunciation and expulsion" is nothing like in Stalin's Russia.
At any rate, those who talk with people on the left know that the vast bulk of the left actually
is sick of the farthest end fringe setting up purity tests about everything. And yes, they are in general tearing each other apart before the election but they'd be doing that anyway. But it would be wrong to say "Democrats" or "the left" in general are drowning in "endless self-criticism, denunciation and expulsion"; this election, it's mainly candidates pandering to younger people coming out of college with the idea that they
That said, there is absolutely nothing wrong with introspection, especially if it's the kind of introspection during which one asks "have I wittingly engaged in a geniune "-ism"". The only valid questions here are where is the line, and just how many really do cross over that line. And even while I find taking it too far obnoxious, if I've got to choose between taking concerns about racism or other "ism" too far and focusing on it far too little, I'd take the former. There is still quite a bit of racism. Modern America acts like all is well if one announces "I agree that racism is bad!" but then pays little heed to alleged instances of racism, or says "that's not racist," then rants about "the left" --- something seen around DP all the time.
While I agree in a general sense that some take it too far, Shapiro doesn't seem to have much in the way of substantive argument here. Shapiro writes "In 2020, 12 years later, we have been informed by the media that Democrats are ensconced in racism anew. Why?"
There is no link. Which media source(s) specifically?
* None are named. Every now and then I've seen the odd article title saying "with so-and-so out of the race, there is less diversity in the Democratic primary." A light pander, sure, but one that is true in the most literal of senses. It'd have been nice if he supported such a statement with evidence, for example a link to whatever "media" supposedly did this. I haven't seen any media other than far right media claiming that "Democrats are ensconced in racism."
As to why, he claims it's because "Democrats refused to activate in support of" various candidates. This is particularly disengenuous. Even as he says it, he gives reasons having nothing to do with race why a person on the left might not like those candidates: "awkwardly robotic Sen. Kamala Harris . . . "wild-eyed . . . Julian Castro". Then he goes on to Hollywood of all things, which makes his partisanship all the more blatant. Hollywood movie nominations do not represent "Democrats" or left-lean people generally. Hollywood is in its own loony world.
There's no real substance to his piece. His argument for his article's title is made up of unsourced claims about unidentified media, partisan anti-left tropes, and the inevitable attempt to assign guilt to Democrats in general by pointing to Hollywood.
______________________
*And I suspect that Shapiro is making the dishonest move that so many do. Namely, accusing "the media" of something when they only really mean to talk about one or a few TV so-called "news channels" that lean left, which does not mean much since there is a huge variety of media consumed these days and since the closest anything gets to proper news on television is infotainment. Unless perhaps you want to live-stream congress (C-Spann?).
