Friday, November 22, 2024

How Did We Get Here?

 I see three primary reasons LibDems lose elections they should win.

1.    Pacifism

Too many LibDems are pacifists. Don’t get me wrong; pacifism is a noble philosophy. It also too often contains the seeds of its own defeat. I believe in turning the other cheek, but there needs to be a Plan B if you are then struck with the other fist.

2.    Liberal pussies

Not the same as pacifism, which is a legitimate ethos. Being a pussy means not standing up for what you allegedly believe. Running your mouth on social media and not backing it up by doing something as simple and safe as voting is the literal definition of being a pussy. A wise friends once told me “What people say is important is what they’d like to tell themselves is important. What they do tells you what’s really important to them.”

3.    LibDems are too concerned with how things get done instead of actually getting them done.

This was discussed the other day in “Outrage Appropriation.” If the desired result is the same, any means should be acceptable, or at least considered, so long as it isn’t counterproductive. I’m pretty sure some LibDems prefer protesting to winning

Everyone would like life to be more linear, with simple, elegant solutions that are so obvious everybody can agree on them. Life isn’t like that, so we live a series of compromises.

Until we find something about which our conscience forbids compromise. Human rights. The rule of law. Hungry children. Then it has to be about winning. Has to be.

When you have to win, something my father said to me when teaching me to golf always comes to mind.

I hit a particularly nasty shot that ricochetted off a tree and came to rest three feet from the hole.

Dad said, “Nice shot.”

I thought he was breaking my balls. “Damn, Dad. It would’ve gone out of bounds if it didn’t hit that tree.”

Dad looked me straight in the eye. “When you’re keeping score, it doesn’t matter how. All that matters is how many.”

LibDems worry too much about how. All that matters now is how many

No comments: