https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought-terminating_cliché

As the party fielded more and more candidates who championed economic-right policies in order to attract corporate donations, the idea of “purity testing” was turned into a stock phrase to attack critics using labels, instead of justifying it on its own terms.

Phrases like “moral purity” now serve two functions: firstly, to dismiss criticisms from the Left wholesale without having to discuss them directly, and secondly, to blame them for the rise of fascism.

In theory it was also supposed to serve a third function of bullying the Left into voting Democrat, but that didn’t work.

  • Kühlschrank@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    15 hours ago

    The Dems absolutely do use the phrase to manipulate conversation. But it’s also a real problem on the left - it’s one of the ways we divide ourselves into smaller and smaller groups leaving us powerless to actually drive policy. I see it happen online every single day.

    • MonkRome@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Yeah I’m pretty far left and I’ve used the phrase unironically when frustrated by dialog. There are people, even in this thread that I’ve encountered before, that act like the exact version of leftism they believe in is the only kind that is correct and every other version makes you evil. I could agree with them on 95% of policy, but if that other 5% doesn’t align I am literally Satan and so are all the candidates I support. There are people on lemmy that will act like AOC, Bernie, Mamdani, and Warren are right wing simply because they understand politics involved consensus building.

      • Kühlschrank@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Absolutely agreed and that has been my online experience too. And as far as consensus building - a lot of people don’t seem to understand what it takes to create a coalition that has actual policy power in the USA. And they also don’t seem to understand that when you don’t have a bloc with political power you’re never going to get the respect, much less policy consessions, that you’d like to get.

      • eupraxia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 hours ago

        My impression is this is primarily an issue in online spaces, without a clear goal in communication. When you meet leftists involved in a specific project, bigger-picture disagreements tend to fade away into focus and concern around a shared goal. It’s a lot easier to stay focused on the things that are immediately relevant when the route to making a real impact is right in front of you.

        • MonkRome@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Absolutely true, I fear that some here don’t understand that distinction and stay away from left leaning activism because they are so paralysed in online spaces.

    • kadu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      That’s because “the dems” aren’t leftists. It doesn’t matter if we subdivide or not, your “leftist” party is a moderate center party drifting right year after year.

      Of course you’re going to have trouble gathering leftist support.

      • Kühlschrank@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I mean you’re totally right, anywhere else in the western world the Dems are a center right at best. But Trump turned the GOP into his party in less than ten years. If we on the left banded together with a common cause with deliberate action we could change the Dems similarly. But instead we’d prefer to fight ourselves.

      • MonkRome@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        You still need a majority to create policy, everyone 50% +1 is your ally, or you’re not part of the conversation. You don’t have to like them, but until we can get a majority of support for true leftist ideas, you have to work with people you disagree with, or you don’t actually believe in democracy.

        • kadu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Does anybody “work with” us on the left or are we the only ones that need to sustain this fallacy and always compromise, to the point we no longer are even being represented?

          • MonkRome@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            26 minutes ago

            Who is “us”, are they supposed to reach through your computer screen? I’ve done activism on and off for years, every time I put in the effort it yields results from the Dems, left leaning or not. If you want our side to win, you have to put in the work. You can’t expect the Dems to work with you if you’re not along side them doing the work as well. Your responsibility doesn’t start and end at the voting booth.

          • Kühlschrank@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 hour ago

            What is there to work with though? There’s no cohesive movement on the left to speak of so which of the umpteen factions would they start with? We’d need to think and vote as a much bigger bloc for the left to get the kind of representation we want.

        • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          5 hours ago

          Unfortunately, this “working with” is always a one-way street. Never do centrists say, “well, we just have to support the progressive cause to maintain party loyalty.”

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      14 hours ago

      The Dems absolutely do use the phrase to manipulate conversation.

      Would be nice if they would quit capitulating to every purity test the right throws their way.