This article is part of the Opinion Today newsletter. You can sign up here to receive the newsletter each weekday.
I sat down the other day with Ro Khanna, the Democratic congressman who represents much of Silicon Valley but nonetheless has emerged as a populist voice. He endorsed Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton in 2016 and has offered several ambitious policies to help working-class families.
A good portion of our conversation was about how Democrats could win over more white working-class voters. Here’s part of what Khanna said:
“Talk more about America — about America winning in the 21st century, about America outdoing China, that China is this authoritarian government and system of values that we don’t want the world to share.”
He described this idea as “inclusive patriotism” and contrasted it with President Trump’s agenda, which is actually weakening the country.
I was struck that Khanna mentioned China so quickly when answering a question about domestic politics. As I’ve written before, I think the Democrats’ political message has suffered from the lack of a clear antagonist.
China is such an antagonist. No, Americans should not demonize China in some sort of Cold War or xenophobic way. But China has become this country’s biggest rival. It often has competing economic interests and has radically different values. It is, in the simplest terms, anti-democratic.
Is it smart politics to cast China as a threat to American interests? I’m not certain. But I do know that it has the advantage of being true.
You can hear the rest of my conversation with Khanna on this week’s episode of “The Argument” podcast. The episode also includes a debate about climate change among Ross Douthat, Michelle Goldberg and me.
If you have ideas about how to make Americans care more about climate change, please consider leaving us a message at (347) 915-4324, and we may play your thoughts on a future episode.
Related: If you haven’t read the special report that The Times recently ran on the rise of China, it’s available here. For the Opinion pages, Ruchir Sharma has written about the coming tech war with China and L. Rafael Reif, the president of M.I.T., has written about how the United States should respond to the new innovation challenge. My colleague Bret Stephens takes a different view in his latest column and argues that the real China challenge is managing its coming decline.
And: Katrin Bennhold’s Times story about the recent success of the Green Party in Germany has echoes of Khanna’s ideas. Robert Habeck, the party’s co-leader, talks about “positive patriotism” and says, “We see ourselves at the center of the nation, and that also means reclaiming the symbols of our country from the nationalists.”
Local journalism. Julie K. Brown of The Miami Herald published an important investigation yesterday on the lenient treatment given to Jeffrey Epstein — an investor who sexually abused dozens of girls. It’s another reminder of the value of local journalism. Powerful government officials — including Alexander Acosta, Trump’s current labor secretary — let Epstein off easy. The Herald called those officials on it.
New blood. In an upset yesterday, House Democrats chose Hakeem Jeffries, a 48-year-old from Brooklyn, over Barbara Lee, a 72-year-old from Oakland, to be their caucus chair, the fifth most-powerful position in House leadership. Jeffries joins a Democratic leadership team dominated by members of Congress in their late 70s.
“Jeffries appealed to members who have been frustrated by how long current House leaders have held power,” reports The Los Angeles Times’s Sarah Wire. Jeffries is a relative moderate. A recent Economist profile noted his support for charter schools, fiscal rectitude and the criminal justice reform bill pushed by Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.
“At a time when the party’s base seems ready to turn left, House members seem reluctant to follow suit,” argues New York Magazine’s Sarah Jones. As The Times’s Sheryl Gay Stolberg writes, that moderation could help Jeffries bridge the liberal wing of the Democratic caucus and the newly enlarged red-state wing.
You can join me on Twitter (@DLeonhardt) and Facebook. I am also writing a daily email newsletter and invite you to subscribe.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTOpinion).
David Leonhardt is a former Washington bureau chief for the Times, and was the founding editor of The Upshot and head of The 2020 Project, on the future of the Times newsroom. He won the 2011 Pulitzer Prize for commentary, for columns on the financial crisis. @DLeonhardt • Facebook
Source: Read Full Article
Home » Analysis & Comment » Opinion | A Pro-Worker Patriotism
Opinion | A Pro-Worker Patriotism
This article is part of the Opinion Today newsletter. You can sign up here to receive the newsletter each weekday.
I sat down the other day with Ro Khanna, the Democratic congressman who represents much of Silicon Valley but nonetheless has emerged as a populist voice. He endorsed Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton in 2016 and has offered several ambitious policies to help working-class families.
A good portion of our conversation was about how Democrats could win over more white working-class voters. Here’s part of what Khanna said:
“Talk more about America — about America winning in the 21st century, about America outdoing China, that China is this authoritarian government and system of values that we don’t want the world to share.”
He described this idea as “inclusive patriotism” and contrasted it with President Trump’s agenda, which is actually weakening the country.
I was struck that Khanna mentioned China so quickly when answering a question about domestic politics. As I’ve written before, I think the Democrats’ political message has suffered from the lack of a clear antagonist.
China is such an antagonist. No, Americans should not demonize China in some sort of Cold War or xenophobic way. But China has become this country’s biggest rival. It often has competing economic interests and has radically different values. It is, in the simplest terms, anti-democratic.
Is it smart politics to cast China as a threat to American interests? I’m not certain. But I do know that it has the advantage of being true.
You can hear the rest of my conversation with Khanna on this week’s episode of “The Argument” podcast. The episode also includes a debate about climate change among Ross Douthat, Michelle Goldberg and me.
If you have ideas about how to make Americans care more about climate change, please consider leaving us a message at (347) 915-4324, and we may play your thoughts on a future episode.
Related: If you haven’t read the special report that The Times recently ran on the rise of China, it’s available here. For the Opinion pages, Ruchir Sharma has written about the coming tech war with China and L. Rafael Reif, the president of M.I.T., has written about how the United States should respond to the new innovation challenge. My colleague Bret Stephens takes a different view in his latest column and argues that the real China challenge is managing its coming decline.
And: Katrin Bennhold’s Times story about the recent success of the Green Party in Germany has echoes of Khanna’s ideas. Robert Habeck, the party’s co-leader, talks about “positive patriotism” and says, “We see ourselves at the center of the nation, and that also means reclaiming the symbols of our country from the nationalists.”
Local journalism. Julie K. Brown of The Miami Herald published an important investigation yesterday on the lenient treatment given to Jeffrey Epstein — an investor who sexually abused dozens of girls. It’s another reminder of the value of local journalism. Powerful government officials — including Alexander Acosta, Trump’s current labor secretary — let Epstein off easy. The Herald called those officials on it.
New blood. In an upset yesterday, House Democrats chose Hakeem Jeffries, a 48-year-old from Brooklyn, over Barbara Lee, a 72-year-old from Oakland, to be their caucus chair, the fifth most-powerful position in House leadership. Jeffries joins a Democratic leadership team dominated by members of Congress in their late 70s.
“Jeffries appealed to members who have been frustrated by how long current House leaders have held power,” reports The Los Angeles Times’s Sarah Wire. Jeffries is a relative moderate. A recent Economist profile noted his support for charter schools, fiscal rectitude and the criminal justice reform bill pushed by Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.
“At a time when the party’s base seems ready to turn left, House members seem reluctant to follow suit,” argues New York Magazine’s Sarah Jones. As The Times’s Sheryl Gay Stolberg writes, that moderation could help Jeffries bridge the liberal wing of the Democratic caucus and the newly enlarged red-state wing.
You can join me on Twitter (@DLeonhardt) and Facebook. I am also writing a daily email newsletter and invite you to subscribe.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTOpinion).
David Leonhardt is a former Washington bureau chief for the Times, and was the founding editor of The Upshot and head of The 2020 Project, on the future of the Times newsroom. He won the 2011 Pulitzer Prize for commentary, for columns on the financial crisis. @DLeonhardt • Facebook
Source: Read Full Article