The predictable New Old Left of the 21st century

Today's New Old Left has merged with the New Left of the 1960s--Jerry Rubin, Jane Fonda, and Bill Ayers, Obama's old neighborhood buddy, who helped launch his presidency. The New Old Left uses the methods of Mao and Stalin, yet instead of organizing coal miners, they want to destroy the coal industry. They've got a long list of forbidden words, whereas the New Left liked to shout out obscene words to shock.

"No wonder the New Old Left shares the worst traits of both inheritances: protestors shout profanities and yell in classrooms and lecture halls, but their shouts are boring and predictable. With all the boilerplate directives of “white privilege”, “intersectionality” and “institutional racism,” Antifa protestors sound like hippies as they shout out New Left obscenities, but they also put on black riot gear and masks, and resemble the old well-organized communist street mobs of the 1930s."

Victor Davis Hanson, “The Rise of the New Old Left.” https://www.hoover.org/research/rise-new-old-left?

The New Left and today's liberal progressives

This article, about why the voters are so deeply dissatisfied with Obama and his policies, plays around with terms. He left out Communists and Socialists when describing the splits in the Democratic party. There's nothing "new" about the New Left, and there's nothing progressive about a liberal. Look at any American city attempting to enact their policies and you see more poverty, more crime and more hopelessness than ever before.

Henry Olsen at AEI.

3756

Why older Democrats left the party

This looked like a pretty balanced explanation of what has happened to the Democratic Party since the early 1960s. The author is wondering why there aren't Moslem Methodists, i.e., mainstream. If you've watched the flap about PBS using our tax money to create a film on moderate Moslems, then refusing to show it, this explanation starts to expose some of the bizarre behavior of liberals. Still, it was written in September 2005, and since then the Democrats in Congress have gone completely over the edge, groveling before their New Left, socialist party leaders.

"The biggest problem in analogizing Democrats to Moslems is that the former did have other voices surrounding them, voices that were pointing out the radical nature of those organizations [Matt] Barr mentioned (NOW, the unions, and the teaching establishment): first, the Republicans, of course; in our republic, the critiques from the GOP could not be entirely shut out, even back in the 60s and 70s.

But second and more important, we need to bear in mind what Barr himself noted: Democratic leaders and organizations were not always so insane. The switchover (I'm using Judge Bork's timeline here from, I think, Slouching Towards Gomorrah) was when the New Left began to arise following the Port Huron Statement, released by the SDS in 1962 (the Students for a Democratic Society was the group from which the radical faction the Weathermen later spun off).

Most older Democrats never particularly embraced the New Left -- which was radicalized, hard-core, and Stalinist, inexplicably combined with feverishly anti-science, anti-technology, Luddite "environmentalism" -- and the New Left didn't take over the Democratic Party until, to be blunt, the older generation died off.

Thus, there has been reasoned resistance to the radicalization of the Democratic Party from the very beginning, coming from sources with unassailable liberal credentials, such as Hubert Humphrey and Pat Moynihan. Many Democrats retained their basic love of America... and unfortunately for the new radicalized Democratic Party (but fortunately for the country), that meant a lot of people left the Democrats and joined the Republicans, bringing the two parties into rough parity (during World War II, I would guess the Democrats enjoyed at least a 2-1 advantage over the GOP)." Big Lizards Blog, Where are all the Moslem Methodists?