So, I'm going to be honest. Tim Walz is a very unique figure in politics. He's been called a moderate, he's been called a progressive. He's been attacked for being too far left for some, but the attacks really don't land. After listening to Kyle talk about his policies for 30 minutes, i think I know why this is. Is it him being "Minnesota nice?" yes. Is it him being part of the DFL, ie, the Minnesota version of the democratic party, which is distinct from the rest of the country's democratic party in the sense that it appeals more to normie and rural Americans dems often have trouble connecting to? Yes. But above all, i think that what really makes this guy so hard to fricking attack is because ideologically...he's just jello. Try nailing jello to a wall, you can't. Because it is this soft amorphous blob that when hit just goes around the nails and flops into the floor.
The fact is, Tim Walz has no underlying ideology. Is he a moderate? Some will say so, pointing to his record of hinting and being pro gun (while also being for gun control). Some will say he's been business friendly in minnesota with the state being one of the most pro business states in the country. But at the same time, the dude is progressive AF. He will appeal to progressives and lefties because he'll just be like, here's free college, here's free lunches, here's free tampons. And then people attack him like he's a monster for this when he's just like "im for good things and against bad things, why are you anti good things?"
Contrast this with me. I'm VERY ideological. I'm actually a bit of an ideologue all things considered. And that makes me predictable, if you know what I'm about. You can nail down how I think and attack me for it. And I can fall into some politically incorrect traps as a result. I'm willing to compromise on ideas outside of my main ideological goals to achieve my ideological goals, this makes me unpopular among some lefties as i'll fail their purity tests and appear "immoral" to them. I have strong convictions, but that's the thing, I'm TOO strong headed where, again, it makes me predictable and attackable. I end up meeting peoples' attacks head on, and while being called immoral, or "lazy" or whatever doesnt bother ME, it will open me up to losing popularity with more mainstream, sensible normie types.
Walz is the opposite. He's extremely normal. he's extremely relatable. He's like your super friendly uncle. He's like the nicest person you ever met (while I can straight up be a jerk to people if I have to be, I'm not trying to win popularity contests), and he's just so unimpeachable that attacks just bounce right off of him. he recently said that one person's neighborliness is another person's socialism. He literally defused the S bomb just by pointing out that he's neighborly.
Now, with that said, after watching the above video from kyle, how WOULD I classify him? Well, he's not socialist. Straight up. Socialists are those who want workers to own the means of production, and propose solutions ranging from worker cooperatives to a government controlled economy. He isn't that. AT ALL. If anything he has been somewhat business friendly, so he is some sort of capitalist. But is he a die hard capitalist? No, he'll just diverge from conservative orthodoxy, being in favor of anti trust, or regulations, or government providing free stuff to people. Is he a social democrat? Well...he doesn't have the ideological commitment to big ticket ideas like I do. He doesnt seem pro medicare for all, instead opting for a the ACA and maybe a public option. Which is right up the biden-harris alley of policy. He's only been for free public college below certain income thresholds, which comes off as a little hillary like. His state has flirted with UBI but he hasnt made any public statement on the subject it seems.
I mean, he kinda fits the bill for the kinds of policies I want, but again, with him, it's just being a good person...or neighborly. He doesn't have a grand theory of everything it seems. It's just "I'm a nice person for good things." I can kind of respect that, I admit I would like a stronger ideological fighter in my camp since not being ideological makes him possibly less committed to certain proposals, but at the same time vs the republicans it makes him like one of those drunken boxers where they just go with the flow, and you cant really attack them but they'll sure as heck hit back and you can't even see it coming because you have no fricking idea what they're gonna do. The guy is just "chaotic good" in a nutshell. Like, his mind is all chaos as i see it, there isnt' really an underlying ideology or set of values to attack, and if you hit him, he just bounces back up like one of those inflatable kids toys that you punch and it just gets right back up again. And that's what makes him a huge asset on the left and makes him so hard for the right to attack. THe dude just disarms attacks with his charming midwestern personality and makes the other person look like a piece of crap for attacking him. Because you wouldnt attack the nicest person ever, would you? Why would you do such a thing and be such a meanie? And it works. And it's working. And republicans have no fricking idea what to do with this guy. And everyone on the left from the middle all the way to the far left loves him for different reasons.
Ideologically, he does seem very close to harris. Kind of doing that weird unity bridge the gap thing between the corporate center and the hard left. Not as scary as a hardcore socialist like bernie sanders, but also a lot more progressive than someone like hillary clinton or even joe biden. Idk, i can work with this, I'm actually curious to see what a harris-walz administration accomplishes here. Again, could be a complete disappointment, or it could be the most progressive administration since the new deal era. We'll have to see.
No comments:
Post a Comment