Discussion about this post

User's avatar
John Bowman's avatar

I was titillated by the phrase “coalition of the sane.”

Yes it is an interesting idea, and your definition of ‘sane’ in philosophical terms is apt, however I don’t think the clinical definition should be ignored - in essence, an absence of psychopathology.

The more I observe those who promote ‘woke’, transgender issues, climate doom, the way they screech at and defame any who don’t agree and/or do not actively promote their delusions, their lack of ability to reason or be rational, their rage when they do not get what they want, their willingness to destroy lives, reputations, society, the economy, the more it seems to me this is not political or ideological, but it is clinical - the result of mental illness.

As for a coalition of the sane, maybe it is a virtual coalition, but certainly it is not physical with any direction or plan.

Yancey Ward's avatar

Passionate intensity wins in politics pretty much always in the long run. How much popular support do you suppose the Bolsheviks really had in 1917-1918, or the Nazis had in 1933 forwards? That kind of intensity allows for a degree of ruthlessness that is difficult to defeat in electoral politics, and damned near impossible in despotic systems.

The illiberal Left, which is basically the core base of the Democratic Party, is far more passionate about politics than any other group in the US. This wing of the Democrat Party isn't even a fringe minority any longer- they make up almost half the voter support of the Democrats. A coalition of the sane will gut the Democrat Party, thus it will never really happen. To continue to win, the enablers of this in the party will continue to compromise their ethics away. I like Bari Weiss, but she is still incredibly naive.

15 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?