The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Democrats Face a Political Math Problem and Also, ‘Phallic Imperialism’

Posted on | January 30, 2017 | 2 Comments

 

Writing at The Patriarch Tree:

What is “phallic imperialism,” how does the protester propose to “crush” it, and what would a post-phallic world look like? We have to ask questions like that — what do these words mean in the minds of those who use them? — if we are to develop any treatment for the madness that has seized these kooks.

You can read the whole thing, which makes a point about how feminists and other progressives have isolated themselves from the political mainstream, so that they imagine everyone shares their weird beliefs. (Bonus fact: The phrase “phallic imperialism” was coined by lesbian feminist Sue Katz in a 1971 article in which she denounced heterosexuality as an “institution” of “phallic tyranny.”) What we are witnessing are the effects of “epistemic closure” on the Left, as the Obama era caused progressives to think of themselves as being on “the right side of history.” This triumphant belief in their own moral superiority, in turn, led Democrats to believe that they no longer had to debate the merits of policies, because anyone who opposed them could be dismissed as ignorant and/or evil. This is the kind of echo-chamber cult mentality that led to Nancy Pelosi’s infamous claim on behalf of ObamaCare: “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.”

These are not arguments, these are symptoms of a mental disorder, and Megan McArdle explains the practical effects of this insanity:

Why are the left’s public demonstrations more impressive than its voter turnout? Because there are a whole lot of Democrats in the large population centers where such demonstrations are generally held. People can join a protest simply by getting on the subway; it’s an easy show of force.
But there are a lot of small towns in America, and as Sean Trende and David Byler recently demonstrated, those small towns are redder than ever. Effectively, the Democratic coalition has self-gerrymandered into a small number of places where they can turn out an impressive number of feet on the ground, but not enough votes to win the House. Certainly not enough to win the Senate or the Electoral College, which both favor sparsely populated states and discount the increasingly dense parts of the nation.
The Senate map in 2018 is brutal for Democrats. If Democrats want to get their mojo back, they’re going to need to do more than get a small minority of voters to turn out for a march. They’re going to need to get back some of those rural votes.
To do that, they’re probably going to have to let go of the most soul-satisfying, brain-melting political theory of the last two decades: that Democrats are inevitably the Party of the Future, guaranteed ownership of the future by an emerging Democratic majority in minority-white America. This theory underlay a lot of Obama’s presidency, and Clinton’s campaign. With President Trump’s inauguration [Jan. 20], we saw the results.

Read the whole thing, but it’s not just “rural voters” with whom Democrats have lost touch. Hillary didn’t lose the election because of deep-red rural states like Wyoming and Arkansas, she lost because she was rejected by voters in states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The opinions of working-class white voters in Scranton or Kenosha were not considered relevant by Democrats, because people like that have no influence in the 21st-century Democrat Party. Instead, the people who voted for Hillary have decided that lesbian feminist slogans about “phallic imperialism” represent “an emerging Democrat majority.” A wealthy Hollywood degenerate like Ashton Kutcher calls himself “a citizen of the world” on national TV, as if this is going to influence voters in Montana, North Dakota, Missouri, West Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania — all states Trump won last year, and where Democrats will be defending Senate seats in November 2018.

What will happen to the New York/Hollywood elite and their progressive fantasies if Republicans gain a 60-seat majority in the Senate?

Alas, they will be crushed by “phallic imperialism.”

(Hat-tip: Donald Douglas at American Power.)

UPDATE: Welcome, Instapundit readers! Please remember that the Five Most Important Words in the English Language are:

HIT THE FREAKING TIP JAR!



 

 

Category: Democrats

Comments

2 Responses to “Democrats Face a Political Math Problem and Also, ‘Phallic Imperialism’”

  1. Pelosi Makes a Muslim | Regular Right Guy
    February 1st, 2017 @ 11:54 am

    […] Democrats Face a Political Math Problem and Also, ‘Phallic Imperialism’ […]

  2. News of the Week (February 5th, 2017) | The Political Hat
    February 5th, 2017 @ 4:11 pm

    […] Democrats Face a Political Math Problem and Also, “Phallic Imperialism” What is “phallic imperialism,” how does the protester propose to “crush” it, and what would a post-phallic world look like? We have to ask questions like that – what do these words mean in the minds of those who use them?? -?if we are to develop any treatment for the madness that has seized these kooks. […]