I’m really disheartened by how regularly “identity politics” are being mislabeled and dismissed on the podcast more generally and by this guest. And I am discouraged that any defense will make me sound too “woke.” I will just say that the experience of having to consider “race and..” or “gender and…” is a fact of life for the majority of Americans whether other people choose to acknowledge intersectionality or not. (And the discussion around whiteness is an attempt to see the ways racial identity has been rendered invisible for so many. Trump is a pro at playing to ideas of whiteness!). Turning against so-called identity politics is playing into the battle on “woke” ideologies that is tearing apart public universities…not with big endowments but universities that serve hard working, first gen, immigrant and non-immigrant students from local communities. I’ve worked for a university union and can attest that the majority of faculty are quite happy with the status quo, many more are moderate, and also conservative in many ways. We can move on as a party without leaving marginalized populations behind. We can embrace complex understandings of whiteness and gender and systemic racism because we all benefit when our workplaces and educational systems aim to be less biased. I appreciate the earlier commenters asking that we stop talking about universities as Ivy League monoliths. I also liked the comment that renewing the party with young people will mean sticking with identity. I know from working with young people that they are willing and able to hold more (not less) complicated understandings of identity. And while I appreciate many of Tyler’s takes, the surface level discussion of masculinity and whiteness put me off completely. As Tressie McMillan Cottom points out: Trump’s politics are identity politics!
I really enjoyed this episode. I think the part about Democrats linking all issues really hit home for me. At some point don't we have to think getting something done is better than being perfect because perfect never gets anything done. We know what democrats stand for. We might have a better chance of getting things done if we don't try to link trans rights with environmental studies? Even though we know both of those are important, we can't do everything all at once.
Grrrr, I really want to talk back to Mr Harper more than anybody I've heard on this show. His thing about "Democrats don't have men that working class men identify with": John Fetterman? He really seems like he's working class to me. Mark Kelly? I mean, he seems elite, but you can't get manlier than an astronaut. The bit about he didn't believe Harris cares about her gun? Sure she does! She's from where I live. If she didn't care about her gun she wouldn't have it. This is an area where nobody's pressuring you to be armed if you aren't into it. I think if the Democrats did exactly what this guy wants them to do, he's still complain about them.
But at the same time I agree with him. It's just I recognize this more in the California Democratic party than the national Democratic party. In 2017 I was following the repeal of the ACA very closely. The California lawmakers swore that they were going to go off on a retreat and figure out how to make sure that if the ACA was repealed, Californians would not lose health insurance. There was this aura of "Relax, we got this. We'll save you from Trump" coming off of the articles I was reading. So they went off and put their heads together and when they came back from wherever they were, they passed legislation to ensure that undocumented immigrants will be able to get health insurance. That's it. I was gob-smacked. It's not that I'm against undocumented immigrants having health insurance. It's just that didn't they realize that the California middle class exists? That we'd struggled with getting private insurance, that we were getting denied because of fairly nonexistent pre-existing conditions before the ACA. It was just so disheartening.
I've stopped midway through to comment on the primary everyone. There's no reason Chuck Schumer needs to be in office is one of the last things I heard. And WOW that resonates with me. It actually surprises me that it resonates with me. I have voted for Zoe Lofgren something like 15 or 16 times. During at least half of those elections I've thought "LORD can't we find anybody else?" This year's election was at least a little interesting. There is a local issue involving an Indian tribe's recognition that got Lofgren a little bit more opposition than usual. But usually she's running against the most cranky weird Republican they can scrape out of the bottom of the barrel, and I'm like OK I have no choice.
I listened to this episode and had to admit it’s valid that a lot of voters would say that Trump seemed to “like” them more than Democrats do. However, seeing peoples’ 401ks get rocked makes me wonder if that sentiment will hold? Will people keep thinking that Trump likes them?
I too found this very interesting, especially the part where you discussed Democrats’ compulsion to link all issues even when it’s counterproductive. However, I think that his expressed desire to bring more young people into the center of the party will run smack into any desire to deemphasize intersectionality. No one is more devoted to all identities being connected than young people, especially the politically active well educated young!
I mean. I think it depends on which young people and where. President Trump largely won the election because of his high levels of support among young men.
Such an interesting conversation! The discussion of conservatives in PA not liking Reagan surprised me a bit though because in South Carolina they loooove him.
And I really hope Pete isn’t out forever because he’s associated with Biden/Harris.
I was surprised as well. Lots of Reagan love observed growing up in Tennessee and knowing folks in Texas. Not to mention lots of kids born in the ‘80s and ‘90s named Reagan.
Midwest hated Reagan. PA is not the Midwest, but they do share some ... actually I'm going to walk that back. That American Nations book we all read a few years ago linked PA to the middle of the country. The political DNA is the same. During the 1980s people started losing farms and Reagan did not care.
I was a child in the Midwest in the 80’s but my memory is of people loving Reagan, which doesn’t make sense with the whole farms going bankrupt thing. I have kind of a strong memory of kids on the school bus saying mean things about Walter Mondale when I would have been 7. I also remember my family praising Reagan. Maybe it was more about culture war stuff.
I’ll never forget teaching HS English outside of Richmond, VA (2007/2008) and a 9th grade boy writing a very earnest poem about “the great communicator.” I didn’t even know that was one of his nicknames, but suffice it to say that the Reagan hero worship ran deep there. 🤭
I enjoyed this episode and I am wondering when the leaders of the party will start to receive this message of change, naming problems and working towards solutions.
I am continually frustrated at many things but the issue that keeps bubbling up for me is money. Particularly campaign donations. I gave during the election, and I was happy to do it. However, when I received the same pleas immediately after the election, I couldn’t take it. There may have been some ranting and raving concerning the gall of asking for more money when they couldn’t figure out how to beat a felon and sexual predator AND the Dems haven’t seemed to change any strategy!!
It seems their only solution is to ask for more money…well that didn’t work out last time.
Until I see some actual leadership, someone that has even a partial grasp of what life is like for the majority of Americans, I just can’t see myself giving any more.
To everyone at PSP, thanks for all the work you do and for putting new thoughtful ideas out into the world.
I see you there. 👀 This past election I gave money to Sister District for local candidates with very small budgets, and am feeling very good about that choice, especially if it gets new, fresh voices in political office. If a big campaign loses, it’s not because they couldn’t print enough flyers at FedEx….
Great episode. I hope if Mr. Austin is thinking this way, surely people in the Democratic Party are too. 🤞
I have told my kids they cannot fly in spacecrafts, free climb El Capitan, and now adding stripe bass fishing to the list of things they cannot do when they grow up to spare their mother’s sanity.
I found the discussion of academia frustrating. The things he talked about really only apply to elite universities, but he never said that. Most colleges don't have big endowments or lots of rich students, which is why recently every week or two another college announces its closing. Most community colleges don't have any endowment to speak of, and that is where most students go to school. Dipping into an endowments to, say, meet the gap of funds promised by the feds that the schools are not receiving, is risky for most places.
I agree in a way, because students at these elite schools are small in number, but they do have a huge influence on government and other influential institutions so I think they do matter.
I feel like higher ed discussion in the news often focuses on elite schools and community colleges, but we forget about the great state schools out there (Clemson!). We need those schools to be affordable and productive as well.
I’m glad you said this so I didn’t have to. I’m tired of “academia” being talked about as though the 4000 schools in the U.S. are a monolith, and that monolith all looks like the Ivy League.
I’m really disheartened by how regularly “identity politics” are being misunderstood, mislabeled, and dismissed on the podcast more generally and by this guest. And I am discouraged that any defense will make me sound too “woke.” I will just say that the experience of having to consider “race and..” or “gender and…” is a fact of life for the majority of Americans whether other people choose to acknowledge intersectionality or not. (And the discussion around whiteness is an attempt to see the ways racial identity has been rendered invisible for so many. Trump is a pro at playing to ideas of whiteness!). Turning against so-called identity politics is playing into the battle on “woke” ideologies that is tearing apart public universities…not with big endowments but universities that serve hard working, first gen, immigrant and non-immigrant students from local communities. I’ve worked for a university union and can attest that the majority of faculty are quite happy with the status quo, many more are moderate, and also conservative in many ways. We can move on as a party without leaving marginalized populations behind. We can embrace complex understandings of whiteness and gender and systemic racism because we all benefit when our workplaces and educational systems aim to be less biased. I appreciate the earlier commenters asking that we stop talking about universities as Ivy League monoliths. I also liked the comment below that renewing the party with young people will mean sticking with identity. I know from working with young people that they are willing and able to hold more (not less) complicated understandings of identity. And while I appreciate many of Tyler’s takes, the surface level discussion of masculinity and whiteness put me off completely.
🎯 I feel like I could go the rest of my life without hearing about whatever is going on at Yale. It’s about as relevant to my life as those NYT articles about what three people in Brooklyn are doing. I feel like media plays a big role in this, seeming to love a campus controversy. Right wing media has had it out for college students since talk radio and probably from the ‘60s, but when they talk about “what college students are like”, they are usually citing the Ivies, but for some reason not Ole Miss, and definitely not your local community college about to get its funding cut.
This was a great episode. It challenged me which is exactly what I need right now. I was a Hillary girl and I think I’ve always struggled to listen to voices from what I use to refer to as the Bernie wing of the party but I’ve been challenging myself to stretch my brain and to let go of some of my nostalgia for times that have since passed and this was a good talk. I especially appreciate how he was able to state purpose without blaming trans people, he got to the heart of the matter which is much more complex.
Great episode. I think I need to listen several times. . .more than once I found myself saying hmmm, wait, go back, say more about that. I especially appreciated Tyler's willingness to state the Democrats need traditionally masculine men and more working class folks.
I enjoyed listening to this conversation. I have to believe that someone in the party has a plan. I would love to know what that is, but maybe now is not the time. Is that part of the plan? 😬 And I 💯 will not be participating in open ocean nighttime wetsuit striped bass fishing. Who knew?!
I’m really disheartened by how regularly “identity politics” are being mislabeled and dismissed on the podcast more generally and by this guest. And I am discouraged that any defense will make me sound too “woke.” I will just say that the experience of having to consider “race and..” or “gender and…” is a fact of life for the majority of Americans whether other people choose to acknowledge intersectionality or not. (And the discussion around whiteness is an attempt to see the ways racial identity has been rendered invisible for so many. Trump is a pro at playing to ideas of whiteness!). Turning against so-called identity politics is playing into the battle on “woke” ideologies that is tearing apart public universities…not with big endowments but universities that serve hard working, first gen, immigrant and non-immigrant students from local communities. I’ve worked for a university union and can attest that the majority of faculty are quite happy with the status quo, many more are moderate, and also conservative in many ways. We can move on as a party without leaving marginalized populations behind. We can embrace complex understandings of whiteness and gender and systemic racism because we all benefit when our workplaces and educational systems aim to be less biased. I appreciate the earlier commenters asking that we stop talking about universities as Ivy League monoliths. I also liked the comment that renewing the party with young people will mean sticking with identity. I know from working with young people that they are willing and able to hold more (not less) complicated understandings of identity. And while I appreciate many of Tyler’s takes, the surface level discussion of masculinity and whiteness put me off completely. As Tressie McMillan Cottom points out: Trump’s politics are identity politics!
Why doesn’t he believe Harris when she says she’s a gun owner or it’s important to her?
I really enjoyed this episode. I think the part about Democrats linking all issues really hit home for me. At some point don't we have to think getting something done is better than being perfect because perfect never gets anything done. We know what democrats stand for. We might have a better chance of getting things done if we don't try to link trans rights with environmental studies? Even though we know both of those are important, we can't do everything all at once.
Grrrr, I really want to talk back to Mr Harper more than anybody I've heard on this show. His thing about "Democrats don't have men that working class men identify with": John Fetterman? He really seems like he's working class to me. Mark Kelly? I mean, he seems elite, but you can't get manlier than an astronaut. The bit about he didn't believe Harris cares about her gun? Sure she does! She's from where I live. If she didn't care about her gun she wouldn't have it. This is an area where nobody's pressuring you to be armed if you aren't into it. I think if the Democrats did exactly what this guy wants them to do, he's still complain about them.
But at the same time I agree with him. It's just I recognize this more in the California Democratic party than the national Democratic party. In 2017 I was following the repeal of the ACA very closely. The California lawmakers swore that they were going to go off on a retreat and figure out how to make sure that if the ACA was repealed, Californians would not lose health insurance. There was this aura of "Relax, we got this. We'll save you from Trump" coming off of the articles I was reading. So they went off and put their heads together and when they came back from wherever they were, they passed legislation to ensure that undocumented immigrants will be able to get health insurance. That's it. I was gob-smacked. It's not that I'm against undocumented immigrants having health insurance. It's just that didn't they realize that the California middle class exists? That we'd struggled with getting private insurance, that we were getting denied because of fairly nonexistent pre-existing conditions before the ACA. It was just so disheartening.
I've stopped midway through to comment on the primary everyone. There's no reason Chuck Schumer needs to be in office is one of the last things I heard. And WOW that resonates with me. It actually surprises me that it resonates with me. I have voted for Zoe Lofgren something like 15 or 16 times. During at least half of those elections I've thought "LORD can't we find anybody else?" This year's election was at least a little interesting. There is a local issue involving an Indian tribe's recognition that got Lofgren a little bit more opposition than usual. But usually she's running against the most cranky weird Republican they can scrape out of the bottom of the barrel, and I'm like OK I have no choice.
I listened to this episode and had to admit it’s valid that a lot of voters would say that Trump seemed to “like” them more than Democrats do. However, seeing peoples’ 401ks get rocked makes me wonder if that sentiment will hold? Will people keep thinking that Trump likes them?
Right. It's the trouble of not believing he means what he says. 🙄🙃
I too found this very interesting, especially the part where you discussed Democrats’ compulsion to link all issues even when it’s counterproductive. However, I think that his expressed desire to bring more young people into the center of the party will run smack into any desire to deemphasize intersectionality. No one is more devoted to all identities being connected than young people, especially the politically active well educated young!
I don't know if that is true of the very young - high school and early 20s. They seem to be very worn out by it.
I mean. I think it depends on which young people and where. President Trump largely won the election because of his high levels of support among young men.
Such an interesting conversation! The discussion of conservatives in PA not liking Reagan surprised me a bit though because in South Carolina they loooove him.
And I really hope Pete isn’t out forever because he’s associated with Biden/Harris.
I was surprised as well. Lots of Reagan love observed growing up in Tennessee and knowing folks in Texas. Not to mention lots of kids born in the ‘80s and ‘90s named Reagan.
Midwest hated Reagan. PA is not the Midwest, but they do share some ... actually I'm going to walk that back. That American Nations book we all read a few years ago linked PA to the middle of the country. The political DNA is the same. During the 1980s people started losing farms and Reagan did not care.
Agree with you on Pete.
I was a child in the Midwest in the 80’s but my memory is of people loving Reagan, which doesn’t make sense with the whole farms going bankrupt thing. I have kind of a strong memory of kids on the school bus saying mean things about Walter Mondale when I would have been 7. I also remember my family praising Reagan. Maybe it was more about culture war stuff.
Now I want to know how conservatives in other area of the country feel about him. I personally hate him, but I’m not a conservative.
I’ll never forget teaching HS English outside of Richmond, VA (2007/2008) and a 9th grade boy writing a very earnest poem about “the great communicator.” I didn’t even know that was one of his nicknames, but suffice it to say that the Reagan hero worship ran deep there. 🤭
I enjoyed this episode and I am wondering when the leaders of the party will start to receive this message of change, naming problems and working towards solutions.
I am continually frustrated at many things but the issue that keeps bubbling up for me is money. Particularly campaign donations. I gave during the election, and I was happy to do it. However, when I received the same pleas immediately after the election, I couldn’t take it. There may have been some ranting and raving concerning the gall of asking for more money when they couldn’t figure out how to beat a felon and sexual predator AND the Dems haven’t seemed to change any strategy!!
It seems their only solution is to ask for more money…well that didn’t work out last time.
Until I see some actual leadership, someone that has even a partial grasp of what life is like for the majority of Americans, I just can’t see myself giving any more.
To everyone at PSP, thanks for all the work you do and for putting new thoughtful ideas out into the world.
I have no idea why it isn’t priority number one for the DNC to stop the spam texts and for the love of god stop selling my email and phone number.
I see you there. 👀 This past election I gave money to Sister District for local candidates with very small budgets, and am feeling very good about that choice, especially if it gets new, fresh voices in political office. If a big campaign loses, it’s not because they couldn’t print enough flyers at FedEx….
Donations in local and state house elections go a long way.
Night bass fishing literally in the ocean…what the heck 🤣 that’s awesome
Great episode. I hope if Mr. Austin is thinking this way, surely people in the Democratic Party are too. 🤞
I have told my kids they cannot fly in spacecrafts, free climb El Capitan, and now adding stripe bass fishing to the list of things they cannot do when they grow up to spare their mother’s sanity.
For real!
I found the discussion of academia frustrating. The things he talked about really only apply to elite universities, but he never said that. Most colleges don't have big endowments or lots of rich students, which is why recently every week or two another college announces its closing. Most community colleges don't have any endowment to speak of, and that is where most students go to school. Dipping into an endowments to, say, meet the gap of funds promised by the feds that the schools are not receiving, is risky for most places.
I agree in a way, because students at these elite schools are small in number, but they do have a huge influence on government and other influential institutions so I think they do matter.
I feel like higher ed discussion in the news often focuses on elite schools and community colleges, but we forget about the great state schools out there (Clemson!). We need those schools to be affordable and productive as well.
I’m glad you said this so I didn’t have to. I’m tired of “academia” being talked about as though the 4000 schools in the U.S. are a monolith, and that monolith all looks like the Ivy League.
I’m really disheartened by how regularly “identity politics” are being misunderstood, mislabeled, and dismissed on the podcast more generally and by this guest. And I am discouraged that any defense will make me sound too “woke.” I will just say that the experience of having to consider “race and..” or “gender and…” is a fact of life for the majority of Americans whether other people choose to acknowledge intersectionality or not. (And the discussion around whiteness is an attempt to see the ways racial identity has been rendered invisible for so many. Trump is a pro at playing to ideas of whiteness!). Turning against so-called identity politics is playing into the battle on “woke” ideologies that is tearing apart public universities…not with big endowments but universities that serve hard working, first gen, immigrant and non-immigrant students from local communities. I’ve worked for a university union and can attest that the majority of faculty are quite happy with the status quo, many more are moderate, and also conservative in many ways. We can move on as a party without leaving marginalized populations behind. We can embrace complex understandings of whiteness and gender and systemic racism because we all benefit when our workplaces and educational systems aim to be less biased. I appreciate the earlier commenters asking that we stop talking about universities as Ivy League monoliths. I also liked the comment below that renewing the party with young people will mean sticking with identity. I know from working with young people that they are willing and able to hold more (not less) complicated understandings of identity. And while I appreciate many of Tyler’s takes, the surface level discussion of masculinity and whiteness put me off completely.
I agree…for a moment I thought “are we dismissing intersectionality out of hand here?”
🎯 I feel like I could go the rest of my life without hearing about whatever is going on at Yale. It’s about as relevant to my life as those NYT articles about what three people in Brooklyn are doing. I feel like media plays a big role in this, seeming to love a campus controversy. Right wing media has had it out for college students since talk radio and probably from the ‘60s, but when they talk about “what college students are like”, they are usually citing the Ivies, but for some reason not Ole Miss, and definitely not your local community college about to get its funding cut.
I live in Brooklyn and I don't give a shit what those three people in Brooklyn are doing.
Three people! A statistically relevant sample!
😆
This was a great episode. It challenged me which is exactly what I need right now. I was a Hillary girl and I think I’ve always struggled to listen to voices from what I use to refer to as the Bernie wing of the party but I’ve been challenging myself to stretch my brain and to let go of some of my nostalgia for times that have since passed and this was a good talk. I especially appreciate how he was able to state purpose without blaming trans people, he got to the heart of the matter which is much more complex.
Great episode. I think I need to listen several times. . .more than once I found myself saying hmmm, wait, go back, say more about that. I especially appreciated Tyler's willingness to state the Democrats need traditionally masculine men and more working class folks.
I enjoyed listening to this conversation. I have to believe that someone in the party has a plan. I would love to know what that is, but maybe now is not the time. Is that part of the plan? 😬 And I 💯 will not be participating in open ocean nighttime wetsuit striped bass fishing. Who knew?!
And SOLO nighttime wetsuit striped bass fishing at that! 🫣🫣🫣