Democrats as the Party of "Out-groups"

yes, but.

Michael Barone has a concept that the GOP represents the American “in-group,” the majority of Americans that think of themselves as typical Americans. But,

The Democratic Party is the oldest political party in the world and has, from its beginnings, been a coalition of out-groups -- people not considered typically American but who, when they hold together, can assemble a national majority.

But is that really true? Is the Democratic Party really the party of “out-groups?” Or is it rather the party of Americans posing as “out-groups?”

Let us propose a radical and racist-sexist-homophobic notion. That our Democratic friends and Educated Gentry friends are lying: both to us and to themselves.

If we use the comprehensive and mandatory Three Layers theory and apply it to lefty definitions we can see that we have a problem right here in River City. Here is my current short-form Three Layers table.

The normal Three Layer has a clear upper layer, middle layer, and lower layer. But lefty versions are not quite the same. In the case of the Allyship narrative, we are asked to believe that the Allies, our liberal friends, are the middle layer fighting against the upper layer of White Oppressors. But it is clear to me that the Allies are not the middle layer, but the upper layer. Otherwise they wouldn’t have the power to help the Oppressed Peoples against the White Oppressors.

Then there is Marx’s classification: Bourgeoisie, Communists, and Proletarians. As with the Allyship narrative we are asked to believe that the Bourgeoisie is an over-class pounding on the workers, with the Communists coming in to rescue the workers. But really, the Communists are the educated-class overlords, and the Bourgeoisie is wealthy-ish people that get their income from work in the market system whose most distinguishing characteristic is that they are not that interested in power.

Finally there is the Anti-racist narrative, and we are asked to believe that the racists are in charge, lording it over the helpless BIPOCs while the Anti-racists nobly and peacefully protest for racial justice. But really, the Anti-racists are the ruling class and they are lording it over ordinary people — the folk they insult as racists — and baby-sitting their Little Darlings, the BIPOCs.

So let us look at the Three Layers as it really is and not how our liberal friends like to think of it.

Yeah. Let’s look at the world with reality glasses. In the Marxian scheme the Communists are on top; they are the ruling class. In the Allyship scheme the Allies are on top; they are the ruling class. In the Anti-racist scheme the Anti-racists are on top: they are the ruling class.

Now, there is a sense in which Baron’s notion is correct. If you define ordinary Commoner Americans who think of themselves as Americans as the “in-group” then we are indeed the “in-group.” But let us not pretend that we have any power. And if you define our liberal friends ans all their clients as the “out-group” because they do not think of themselves as ordinary Americans but as either specially special or as helplessly oppressed then indeed they are the “out-group.” But, for the last century, in-group or out-group, majority or not, they have the power.

So I think our liberal friends are lying to us and lying to themselves. The only question is: what do we do about it?