Another Take on Brokenism
Brokenism is the real debate: do you buy it, or not?
In The Brokenism Axis, Arnold Kling elaborates Alana Newhouse's ‘brokenism’ pronouncement (which I buy, by the way):
The real debate today isn’t between the left and right. It’s between those invested in our current institutions, and those who want to build anew.
Kling builds that statement into a new axis of politics, replacing left v right with ‘institutionalists’ versus ‘brokenists’.
He writes,
Institutionalists are people who want to reform and strengthen universities, government, media, and corporations. Brokenists want to take more radical measures to replace existing institutions.
Institutionalists advocate for incremental change, while brokenists seek revolutionary change. Therefore, institutionalists of the right and left have more in common than they do with brokenists; ditto brokenists.
He goes on to divide the political scene into four quadrants, not necessarily of equal size:
left institutionalists -- my on left -- 'On the left, the institutionalists might be represented by Matt Yglesias, Noah Smith, or Josh Barro. They have the left’s concerns with climate change and inequality, but they favor technocratic solutions. They wish that the more radical progressives would keep quiet.' Some of the radical left are institutionalists, others brokenists. He even includes RFK Jr as a left brokenist, which I don't buy.
right institutionalists -- my on right -- 'On the right, the institutionalists might be represented by Yuval Levin, Ross Douthat, or Robby George. They want to see course corrections in government and higher education, restoring traditional Constitutional guardrails and truth-seeking ideals. They want institutions to function better. Nowadays the right-institutionalists struggle to exert any influence in Washington. Many of them are never-Trumpers, with no home in either party.'
left brokenists -- my off left -- 'The left-brokenists view the flaws in American society as fundamental, not minor. They favor radical change. Socialism rather than capitalism. Palestine rather than Israel. De-growth rather than fossil fuels.' I think this does not hit the mark squarely. Need to enlarge the list of socialist planks, because housing, childcare, health care, cost-of-living issues trump everything. Also the rejection of immigration norms of the on left. 'The left-brokenists include many young activists. They are not comfortable with the left-institutionalists, and the feeling is mutual.'
right brokenists -- the off-right -- 'The right-brokenists are represented by President Trump, and they currently dominate the Republican Party. They position themselves against the “deep state” as well as media, educational institutions, and corporations that they see as captured by the far left. They have rejected the traditional Republican Party on immigration, trade, foreign policy, and reining in entitlements.'
He tries to position the shift of some tech overlords to Trumpism as a rejection of on left policies and philosophy, but some of it might be political opportunism, like Elon's efforts to convince Trump against running a huge deficit.
Where does this lead? He doesn't predict where this will all shake out.
One thing we have learned in the past presidential election is that brokenism has political appeal as a populist rallying cry, at least on the right. The Dems failed to embrace the brokenism sentiment in American life in recent past presidential races, choosing Biden over Sanders, and Harris as the replacement for ur-institutionalist Joe Biden.
It could be that in 2028 we will see GOP and Dem brokenists running head-to-head for the White House.
Mamdani's rejection by the on left is an indication of the DNC's resistance to off left candidates, even those that are likely to win, and their eagerness to prop up on left figures like Cuomo, despite his many deficiencies.