The landscape of American politics is witnessing a peculiar shift. While the right has long been vocal about its disdain for mass participation, a new wave of centrist liberals is now echoing similar sentiments. This movement, often characterized by a preference for elite-driven governance, is gaining traction in unexpected circles.
At the heart of this debate is the role of small-dollar donors in politics. Centrist liberals argue that these donors, often more liberal than traditional big-dollar supporters, push Democrats away from the preferences of the median voter. However, critics contend that this moderation bought by high-dollar contributions only serves to further cater to the interests of the wealthy.
The Rise of ‘Grownup Liberalism’
The concept of ‘Grownup Liberalism’ is gaining prominence among centrist liberals. This ideology posits that a class of wonky centrist experts could fix many of the country’s problems if the confused masses would just get out of their way. This notion is inherently undemocratic and increasingly discordant with the actual state of American politics.
As the center tries to cling to the tatters of institutional deference, the right is waging an intense fight against the foundations of liberal society. Republicans have set off a gerrymandering war, assaulted mail-in voting, and proposed deploying federal agents to polling places. These efforts, while sometimes showing mixed results, highlight the ongoing battle for the soul of American democracy.
The Abundance Movement and Its Critics
The Abundance movement, drawing heavily on the argument from Yale history professor Paul Sabin’s ‘Public Citizens,’ suggests that providing new avenues for the public in politics undermines the project of liberal democracy itself. Some proponents believe that politics can only marshal material change when titans of industry take the lead, while others support ideas like the ‘network state,’ which would replace democratic republicanism with techno-libertarian flavored fascism.
Not to be outdone, Third Way, a think tank that has been seeking to limit regular people’s input in political decision-making, has been on a tear. The organization has tried to cast the idea of taking any economically populist position as caving to a ‘purity test’ by the left and called for ending reliance on grassroots fundraising.
The Atlantic and the Power of the People
Even The Atlantic, a bastion of liberal thought, has joined the chorus of voices questioning the power of the people. In a review of a Howard Zinn biography, the author pondered whether recent history has revealed the limits of Zinn’s wisdom. The fact that conservatism has marshaled popular support confounds Zinn’s almost mythic sense of ‘the people’ as inevitably on the right side of history.
Across the board, the message is clear: common people need to get their noses out of politics, go back to trusting the liberal technocrats, and maybe have a little democracy once in a while, as a treat. This contempt for popular government coming from the self-appointed champions of liberal thought is both stunning and predictable.
At its core, the central premise of neoliberal thought is that the market must be the benchmark, with governance subverted to its will, and crucial economic policy cordoned off from the whims of popular rule. This perspective is increasingly influencing the political landscape, with hundreds of millions of dollars flowing into organizations that are explicitly anti-small money in politics.
As our country edges closer to full-blown authoritarianism, centrist thought leaders are flirting with the very ideas that justify the evisceration of popular democracy. The choice is clear: which pillar of liberalism will the center save—the free market-driven power of capital, or democracy itself?
