Amazon versus ‘progressives’ in Seattle
The gist of my argument is that a significant subsection of conservatives and progressives represent groups that have no chance. Many conservatives wish for a place that no longer exists, if it ever did, while many progressives wish for a place that never can be and never was.
Politically, the strategy of Trump is to encourage the Democrats to move further and further to the left because he believes – and I’d say he’s correct – that this will result in Republicans winning and – this is important – my guess is he believes that will suppress the progressive side as a force in Democratic politics at the national level.
On the local level, those who don’t have can’t successfully force their agenda on those who have because those who have will, in fact, leave. This has been demonstrated countless times: jobs go to cheaper places unless there’s a reason why they should remain. This has been over-stated: millionaires don’t necessarily care that much about their marginal tax rates – which are generally marginal, meaning they only affect income in tiers not across the board – because they have other reasons to live in an area. That’s the converse of what people also should recognize: that people who live in places with bad economies have difficulty leaving even when they have nothing because that’s their home, that’s where family is, that’s where memory is. If it’s difficult for people with nothing to leave, then why would people who can afford to stay leave?
But in general, let’s say a company like Amazon – or any industry in a city – is willing to contribute something. There’s a dispute over how much and what, and that’s normal. This is where the issue then becomes a real problem: both the ‘conservatives’ and the ‘progressives’ won’t give up on what they can’t have. They can’t negotiate well because they are wedded to dreams of what never was or never can be. If you are a company and you perceive that is happening, then you may respond to that in a different way than when you are approached to become part of a place, asked to sponsor events and make contributions so people there identify you with them and them with you. That in a nutshell is why this kind of advocacy doesn’t work: it alienates by the use of force to impose will.
jomi: playing with perception 