Thanks for the many comments, pro and con, to my diary about why I left the left. The headline was deliberately provocative and much of my language was offensive (as in, on the attack), neither of which I regret. But they may have obscured my key points, which in a nutshell are:
1. While understanding that the left itself is complex and has a variety of views, I believe that its most vocal members and prominent opinion vehicles are long on policy and very short on the realities of politics, process, and history. This makes them prone to criticism when in fact praise is due. I know something about health care, and can think of a dozen ways that would improve the ACA more than a public option. I also know that universal health care has been a progressive goal since Theodore Roosevelt was president. I know that FDR declined (three times) to take it on, that Truman was mostly talk, that Kennedy and Clinton tried for major health care reform and failed, and when LBJ succeeded he had the political wind at his back like no other president. The Affordable Care Act is not a sell-out. Considering the actual conditions on the ground, as limited as it is, the act is a political miracle to be built on and should be regarded as such.
2. For the left to succeed in its aims (and its not exactly clear what they are), it has to organize a mass movement that will hold together for years. Throwing up your hands because the MSM doesn't give adequate coverage to a rally or two doesn't cut it. The Civil Rights movement culminated in a March on Washington. Otherwise, it went to where the problems were. If you want to reform Wall St. go there and stay there. If you get arrested and thrown in jail, any member of the Civil Rights movement will tell you that that was the least of their worries. I appreciate that there are people doing much good work. But it is not coordinated in any meaningful way.
3. The left I write about has little strategic vision, no tactical sensibility, and no organizational acumen, something it used to possess in spades. Now we have Barbara Ehrenreich sneering at the election of an African-American president while writing "We've got to change the system" and Norman Solomon courageously stating that "We've got to get organized." With that kind of hollowness inside, their writing isn't dissent: It's the Olympian view of the dilettante.
4. There is a strain of the left -- not uniform, but there -- that insists on viewing teabaggery as economic populism instead of the racism it is. That amounts to making common cause with people who would shoot you on sight if they could. So for anyone who subscribes to the economic populist view, take it from someone who grew up around the 'baggers: They may not like it that a Wall Street banker makes 5M while they support a family on 60K. But at the end of the day they'll live with it as long as the shiftless blacks and the undeserving browns make 30K. They'll even convince themselves that the Wall St guy creates jobs. How do you ally with that?
5. I do not blame the left for November. Much of it was going to happen anyway. But it played a part, and when that part involves effectively making common cause with the likes of Limbaugh, Beck, and Palin, it irritates me, especially when it involves ignorance (see #1), irresponsibility (see #2 and #3), and a perversion of liberal values (see #4).
I see no reason why I should heed or even respect what the professional left has to say. They have maneuvered themselves into a position from which they can inflict harm and do no good. Feh.