Good piece in the Atlantic about Chris Murphy and Oliver Anthony. Anthony's song, "Rich Men North of Richmond"...
... which became an unlikely national hit, also took jabs at “obese” welfare recipients and high taxes. The right applauded and that turned off the left. Vox christened Anthony a right-wing breakout star; Variety floated accusations that he was an “industry plant”; The Washington Post divined in his song the “mainstreaming” of conspiracy culture. The press coverage of Anthony, and the dismissive tone on the left, would change only on Friday, when the singer released a video in which he disowned the right’s championing of his song.
So if right-wingers like the song, then cultural Lefties have to hate it, right? Those are the rules of engagement in this absurd culture war that the Left plays so obtusely. But really, what does it tell you that the Right immediately identified with this song and Left rejected it? Well, maybe there's good reason for ordinary Americans to see the Dems, the party of the cultural Left, as the party of rich men north of Richmond.
But Murphy had the compassion to see the song--without the culture-war lens--for what it really is, a scream of pain...
Progressives who want to fix a broken economy, Murphy argues, better find a way to hear out people like Anthony. It was with that in mind that a few weeks ago Murphy typed out a post on X (formerly known as Twitter):
a. I think progressives should listen to this. In part, bc it’s just a good tune.
b. But also bc it shows the path of realignment. Anthony sings about the soullessness of work, shit wages and the power of the elites. All problems the left has better solutions to than the right.
Murphy’s comment did not please his tribe. Some social-media liberals—skeptical that ties between Democrats and the rural working class can be repaired—decried Murphy’s apostasy and wondered archly if he had hit his head. Others muttered that the 50-year-old second-term senator deserved a primary challenge.
Is this negative response to Murphy's common sense compassion typical of Democrats? Certainly not typical of rank-and-file Democrats, but among the Dems' cultural elite? Alas--
Murphy is a repeat provocateur. In July, he tweeted that “there are a lot of social conservatives who believe in populist economic policies, and it would be a good idea to have those people a part of a Democratic/left coalition and accept a bit more intra-movement friction on culture issues as a consequence.” That post included a thoroughly unscientific but still revealing poll that found that 77 percent of those who responded disagreed with him.
Good for Murphy.
Whatever happens in the general election next year, the future of the country depends on whether the Dems or the GOP win the broad blue-collar vote, a vote comprising white, black, and brown voters--all of whom lean conservative in their cultural values. Most ordinary Americans are not ideologically driven, but they have no interest in the preoccupations of Neoliberal tribalists in media and the universities. Ordinary Americans have good reason to be completely turned off by those preoccupations, and insofar as those preoccupations become associated with the Democrat Party's brand, it gives them good reason not to vote for Democrats.
So what will be the post-Biden future for Democrats? Will it be the party the Clintons, i.e., the party of rich men and women north or Richmond, or the party that Sanders and Murphy, the party that sticks up for ordinary Americans?