I’m seeing more behavior like this. And it typically calls for watering down progressive demands—as if the watered-down versions are perfectly fine. Typically, though, they’re made by people who aren’t suffering from they’re trying to be “moderate” about. And typically, the recommended alternatives require caving to those to their political right. But then, I should be used to the frequency with which Democratic politicians lack backbones.

On one point I agree: unless you mean it literally, the term “defund the police” is alienating and just plain inaccurate. Most of us mean “reallocate [and maybe amplify] relevant portions of police budgets to professionals like social workers who are skilled in tasks for which police are typically unequipped—indeed, they may exacerbate a bad situation. And (unless they mean it literally), I get increasingly enraged at the self-indulgence of people, otherwise progressive but often yielding to peer pressure, who don’t appreciate the impact of words and defend the term because it happens to resonate with them.

I’m not convinced that any particular group is responsible for the down-ballot frequency of Republican victories. When I lived in California in the 60s and 70s, it was claimed that voters commonly split their ballots to avoid a single dominant party. Perhaps this psychology exists today in some places. Perhaps in the unusually large turnout, enough previous Trump supporters who had become dismayed with him voted for Biden, while voting for other Republicans on the ballot. Perhaps the “moderate” Democrats would not have lost if they had trumpet progressive values.

But it seems that behind all these disputes is the hi-jacking of our language. Propagandistic and emotive subtexts of disapproval for key ideas seem to have won the day with far too many people.

I am at my wit’s end about how to reverse this. In the meantime, permanent damage victimizes people and institutions we need to protect. “Black Lives Matter” has become some sort of invalid narrowing that marginalizes (ha-ha!) everyone else rather than speaking to the historical and worsening treatment of Black people. “Fracking” has become a contribution to economic compromise rather than a dire exacerbation of the climate threat to the planet. “Socialism” has become “communism” which became a synonym for an oppressive state (as it too often was) rather than a strategy to bring social justice to everyone—including those Trump supporters who have valid concerns about their own economic and medical well-being. “Science,” whether about climate disaster or vaccinations, has become a source of hoaxes and self-interested, condescending eggheads who are getting rich at the expense of those they are duping. Add your own examples.

In the spirit of “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it” (George Santayana), consider this 2400-year-old philippic (roughly “tirade” but stronger) by Thucydides on the brutal fate of Corfu (then called Corcyra):

“To fit in with the change of events, words, too, had to change their usual meanings. What used to be described as a thoughtless act of aggression was now regarded as the courage one would expect to find in a party member; to think of the future and wait was merely another way of saying one was a coward… If an opponent made a reasonable speech, the party in power, so far from giving it a generous reception, took every precaution to see that it had no practical effect…. More interest was shown in those who could produce attractive arguments to justify some disgraceful action.” [The Peloponnesian War, III.82-3]

While I’m incredibly relieved about the removal of Trump, I’m still dismayed at the prospect of the world I’ll be leaving for my descendants before too many more years have passed. I can only hope that Biden will turn out to be much better than I expect, and that his administration will vigorously tackle social justice issues.