Why #WhiteDudesforHarris and all the other subgroups mobilizing now are so valuable. Plus, what Seth Godin's seminal work on the cultural roots of change explains about the power of not being "weird."
This is a very thoughtful post! A lot here to help one get at what’s been going on since Biden stepped aside. The whole marketing thing is very interesting and I am especially interested to see you say the following:
“Of course, I don’t want our side to simply be an amalgamation of identity groups; we need to get back to one shared identity as Democrats—but that brand has taken a battering over decades. If what it takes to win is to start by rallying along various subgroups, that’s fine as long as there is a unifying goal. This is, in fact, what movements are: large numbers of people activating themselves towards a shared goal.”
Yes, exactly! But I think the one piece one might want to add to this to get a more complete picture of this “movement” is the critical role of leadership.
Trump surprised us all with what still seem to be not very well understood qualities that this moment required to bring together disparate identity groups around one idea of goals to embrace and fight for — encapsulated in the slogan: Make America Great Again. He’s leading his movement of people who do (or aspire to do) things like that.
Harris has clearly emerged, again unexpectedly, with what seem to be the perhaps also unexpected qualities that this moment requires to bring together disparate identity groups of “people who do or want to do things like she exemplifies.” Not sure it has quite a clear a theme, but perhaps: a particular idea of Freedom?
As we saw with Biden, you can have all these same interest/identity groups just trudging along with certain leadership. And then a different sort of leader can come along and ignite true excitement and passion. It’s these catalyzing and, I believe clarifying and thus galvanizing leadership qualities that are in many ways more difficult to anticipate and understand.
"We need to get back to one shared identity as Democrats" - why shouldn't citizenship be our "one shared identity"? Are you suggesting that the WFP and other fusionists should pack it in? Independents don't count? Etc. I want to see Trumpism crushed as much as anyone but don't want to become a foot soldier for the liberal wing of corporate America.
wonderful article as always! appreciated this perspective, as online snark is not really helpful to truly understanding something (even if it can be based on some things that are valid)
Tnx for highlighting what Harris said after meeting BiBi. Not earth shaking yet quite significant and deeply under teportrd. Your expplanation of the sub group strategy makes sense.
Insightful post, thanks for this. It’s good to see Godin’s work in action as an political organising principle!
Not to pour cold water on it, but for me the key quote is: “If what it takes to win is to start by rallying along various subgroups, that’s fine as long as there is a unifying goal.”
The challenge is that at some point, the stratification of these groups can work against that unifying goal. The specific, identity-based demands of a given subgroup can become the priority for that subgroup. Then those demands bump up against the demands of another subgroup… And you’ve got the recipe for progressive internal collapse that we’ve seen time and time again (and covered often on this Substack and elsewhere).
So the question becomes - this time, what can be done to mitigate against that happening? How can organisers ensure the ‘for Harris’ identity becomes stronger than the ‘White Dudes’ part?
Still, Kamala Harris should realize some polls have shown that a majority of Americans favor a governmental implementation of some public programs, notably universal health care and some form of guaranteed income plan. A sufficiently large number of Americans are financially struggling just that much.
Yet, the Democratic National Committee apparently refuses to allow the genuinely fiscally progressive Senator Bernie Sanders as its presidential nominee, however many Democrat voters want him.
For example, every county in West Virginia voted for Sanders in the 2016 primaries, yet the DNC declared them as wins for Hillary Clinton! That doesn’t sound very democratic, does it? The neo-liberal New York Times also is noticeably unprofessionally hostile toward Sanders for his ideals and desire to truly help disenfranchised, low- or no-incomed Americans.
I find it arrogantly presumptuous of the DNC and party (etcetera) to expect economically disenfranchised citizens to vote for an establishment Democrat candidate with thinly veiled ties to corporate interests and who’s not going to improve the poor person’s lot in life — simply to vote out or keep out an undesirable Republican. And, of course, to wait in long bad-weather lineups for the privilege.
Morally speaking, Americans [and Canadians with our prime ministers, for that matter] collectively deserve far better than just either the usual callous conservative or neo/faux liberal in the White House. But they/we won't get it.
This is a very thoughtful post! A lot here to help one get at what’s been going on since Biden stepped aside. The whole marketing thing is very interesting and I am especially interested to see you say the following:
“Of course, I don’t want our side to simply be an amalgamation of identity groups; we need to get back to one shared identity as Democrats—but that brand has taken a battering over decades. If what it takes to win is to start by rallying along various subgroups, that’s fine as long as there is a unifying goal. This is, in fact, what movements are: large numbers of people activating themselves towards a shared goal.”
Yes, exactly! But I think the one piece one might want to add to this to get a more complete picture of this “movement” is the critical role of leadership.
Trump surprised us all with what still seem to be not very well understood qualities that this moment required to bring together disparate identity groups around one idea of goals to embrace and fight for — encapsulated in the slogan: Make America Great Again. He’s leading his movement of people who do (or aspire to do) things like that.
Harris has clearly emerged, again unexpectedly, with what seem to be the perhaps also unexpected qualities that this moment requires to bring together disparate identity groups of “people who do or want to do things like she exemplifies.” Not sure it has quite a clear a theme, but perhaps: a particular idea of Freedom?
As we saw with Biden, you can have all these same interest/identity groups just trudging along with certain leadership. And then a different sort of leader can come along and ignite true excitement and passion. It’s these catalyzing and, I believe clarifying and thus galvanizing leadership qualities that are in many ways more difficult to anticipate and understand.
"We need to get back to one shared identity as Democrats" - why shouldn't citizenship be our "one shared identity"? Are you suggesting that the WFP and other fusionists should pack it in? Independents don't count? Etc. I want to see Trumpism crushed as much as anyone but don't want to become a foot soldier for the liberal wing of corporate America.
wonderful article as always! appreciated this perspective, as online snark is not really helpful to truly understanding something (even if it can be based on some things that are valid)
Tnx for highlighting what Harris said after meeting BiBi. Not earth shaking yet quite significant and deeply under teportrd. Your expplanation of the sub group strategy makes sense.
I remember being a member of Bros for Hillary back then... It was fun, it gave me a bro place a be... And then.. Well you know where 2016 ended up.
The bottom line is that whomever gets 100k independent voters in 5 states will win... Do those voters care about white dudes in LA for Harris? 🤔
Insightful post, thanks for this. It’s good to see Godin’s work in action as an political organising principle!
Not to pour cold water on it, but for me the key quote is: “If what it takes to win is to start by rallying along various subgroups, that’s fine as long as there is a unifying goal.”
The challenge is that at some point, the stratification of these groups can work against that unifying goal. The specific, identity-based demands of a given subgroup can become the priority for that subgroup. Then those demands bump up against the demands of another subgroup… And you’ve got the recipe for progressive internal collapse that we’ve seen time and time again (and covered often on this Substack and elsewhere).
So the question becomes - this time, what can be done to mitigate against that happening? How can organisers ensure the ‘for Harris’ identity becomes stronger than the ‘White Dudes’ part?
I sent this to a large group as I do so many posts I like
For once got many positive responses.
Spread this great missive far and wide!
Still, Kamala Harris should realize some polls have shown that a majority of Americans favor a governmental implementation of some public programs, notably universal health care and some form of guaranteed income plan. A sufficiently large number of Americans are financially struggling just that much.
Yet, the Democratic National Committee apparently refuses to allow the genuinely fiscally progressive Senator Bernie Sanders as its presidential nominee, however many Democrat voters want him.
For example, every county in West Virginia voted for Sanders in the 2016 primaries, yet the DNC declared them as wins for Hillary Clinton! That doesn’t sound very democratic, does it? The neo-liberal New York Times also is noticeably unprofessionally hostile toward Sanders for his ideals and desire to truly help disenfranchised, low- or no-incomed Americans.
I find it arrogantly presumptuous of the DNC and party (etcetera) to expect economically disenfranchised citizens to vote for an establishment Democrat candidate with thinly veiled ties to corporate interests and who’s not going to improve the poor person’s lot in life — simply to vote out or keep out an undesirable Republican. And, of course, to wait in long bad-weather lineups for the privilege.
Morally speaking, Americans [and Canadians with our prime ministers, for that matter] collectively deserve far better than just either the usual callous conservative or neo/faux liberal in the White House. But they/we won't get it.