Tips:
Click
to switch between English and 中文
The Gap Between Ideal and Reality
The Gap Between Ideal and Reality
理想与现实间的距离
理想与现实间的距离
This chasm between progressives' ideals and the realities faced by everyday citizens may well define the fault line across American society—and indeed, across much of today’s world.
This chasm between progressives' ideals and the realities faced by everyday citizens may well define the fault line across American society—and indeed, across much of today’s world.
This chasm between progressives' ideals and the realities faced by everyday citizens may well define the fault line across American society—and indeed, across much of today’s world.
Last night’s U.S. election night illustrated the divide between “ideal” and “reality” as perceived by us “progressives” (or, in ideologies' terms, “liberals”). While the choice of U.S. president may not directly impact Canadians, many of us, myself included, can’t help but pay attention—especially when news and coverage are so pervasive, making it nearly inescapable. My daughter even mentioned that her teacher said he’d be “glued to the TV” for the results.
In many ways, Canada is indeed the heartland of North America’s “Liberal” movement. Though Canada and the U.S. share roots, a major reason they developed as separate nations was due to distinct ideological differences. Canada grew in part as a refuge for those fleeing the remnants of slavery and seeking the sanctuary of the northern border—a difference that shaped Canada’s “mosaic” versus the U.S. “melting pot.” If Trump ran in Canada, he likely wouldn’t garner even a third of the vote. Yet in this 2024 election, he claimed over half of the popular vote—a surprising outcome for many, myself included.
But “many” here may simply mean those of us within our bubble, those watching MSNBC rather than Fox, the crowd with whom I share similar values and ideals. “We” struggle to understand how a figure like Trump, whom we view as dishonest, reckless, anti-science, and authoritarian, could again secure the U.S. presidency. The result raises questions about how we instill values like integrity, honesty, respect for science, and rule of law in the next generation. After all, public figures of this stature often become role models, shaping youth perception of success and respectability.
This perspective is why the American Liberal front, represented by the Democratic Party, leans on moral and democratic ideals as the primary “weapon” against Trump’s Republican support. But this time, these ideals didn’t hold the sway they did in 2020. I wonder if last time’s success was due less to the appeal of values and more to the crisis of the pandemic and its economic fallout.
The world as seen through Liberal eyes may have drifted far from the American reality.
What the U.S. general public is really thinking is a mystery left largely unexamined by Liberal media. With Liberal viewpoints largely held by the educated elite, it’s easy to assume possession of “truth,” which is, at times, simply an ideal out of touch with many people’s realities. For working families preoccupied with daily expenses, democratic ideals or climate concerns a century away feel intangible compared to the immediate stresses of food on the table and monthly bills. When struggling to make ends meet, they care little about global issues or tariffs that may eventually impact their budgets. Distant threats are less pressing than daily pains.
Trump’s support base, indeed less educated on average, is a data-backed fact, not a bias. But this fact needs a nuanced understanding, not scorn. Their education level is less a cause of today’s social divide and more a result of systemic disparities. Decades of deindustrialization and financialization have led to increasing inequality, with the working class falling farther behind an educated elite. Education has become a commodity, and wealth barriers prevent many from attending college, limiting their earnings and opportunities, creating a cycle of limited upward mobility.
As Ray Dalio notes in Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order, each advance in productivity brings about greater wealth disparity until reaching a point where social tensions necessitate a reset. I believe the U.S. is at this tipping point—and perhaps the world too, as seen with the rise of far-right populism across Europe.
Ancient Greek thinkers warned that democracy could devolve into “mob rule.” Perhaps it’s more accurate to interpret “mob” as the working class or underprivileged majority. In a one-person, one-vote democracy, the widening social divide renders a “mob rule” less surprising, and yet not all leaders or citizens grasp this trend, let alone take meaningful steps to address it.
Thus, mainstream media optimistically heralded Harris’s “idealist” vision in the lead-up to the election, emphasizing democracy and moral values. But this missed the daily realities of many Americans, realities which widen the rift between idealistic progressivism and practical, pressing concerns.
This chasm between liberals’ ideals and the realities faced by everyday citizens may well define the fault line across American society—and indeed, across much of today’s world.
Last night’s U.S. election night illustrated the divide between “ideal” and “reality” as perceived by us “progressives” (or, in ideologies' terms, “liberals”). While the choice of U.S. president may not directly impact Canadians, many of us, myself included, can’t help but pay attention—especially when news and coverage are so pervasive, making it nearly inescapable. My daughter even mentioned that her teacher said he’d be “glued to the TV” for the results.
In many ways, Canada is indeed the heartland of North America’s “Liberal” movement. Though Canada and the U.S. share roots, a major reason they developed as separate nations was due to distinct ideological differences. Canada grew in part as a refuge for those fleeing the remnants of slavery and seeking the sanctuary of the northern border—a difference that shaped Canada’s “mosaic” versus the U.S. “melting pot.” If Trump ran in Canada, he likely wouldn’t garner even a third of the vote. Yet in this 2024 election, he claimed over half of the popular vote—a surprising outcome for many, myself included.
But “many” here may simply mean those of us within our bubble, those watching MSNBC rather than Fox, the crowd with whom I share similar values and ideals. “We” struggle to understand how a figure like Trump, whom we view as dishonest, reckless, anti-science, and authoritarian, could again secure the U.S. presidency. The result raises questions about how we instill values like integrity, honesty, respect for science, and rule of law in the next generation. After all, public figures of this stature often become role models, shaping youth perception of success and respectability.
This perspective is why the American Liberal front, represented by the Democratic Party, leans on moral and democratic ideals as the primary “weapon” against Trump’s Republican support. But this time, these ideals didn’t hold the sway they did in 2020. I wonder if last time’s success was due less to the appeal of values and more to the crisis of the pandemic and its economic fallout.
The world as seen through Liberal eyes may have drifted far from the American reality.
What the U.S. general public is really thinking is a mystery left largely unexamined by Liberal media. With Liberal viewpoints largely held by the educated elite, it’s easy to assume possession of “truth,” which is, at times, simply an ideal out of touch with many people’s realities. For working families preoccupied with daily expenses, democratic ideals or climate concerns a century away feel intangible compared to the immediate stresses of food on the table and monthly bills. When struggling to make ends meet, they care little about global issues or tariffs that may eventually impact their budgets. Distant threats are less pressing than daily pains.
Trump’s support base, indeed less educated on average, is a data-backed fact, not a bias. But this fact needs a nuanced understanding, not scorn. Their education level is less a cause of today’s social divide and more a result of systemic disparities. Decades of deindustrialization and financialization have led to increasing inequality, with the working class falling farther behind an educated elite. Education has become a commodity, and wealth barriers prevent many from attending college, limiting their earnings and opportunities, creating a cycle of limited upward mobility.
As Ray Dalio notes in Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order, each advance in productivity brings about greater wealth disparity until reaching a point where social tensions necessitate a reset. I believe the U.S. is at this tipping point—and perhaps the world too, as seen with the rise of far-right populism across Europe.
Ancient Greek thinkers warned that democracy could devolve into “mob rule.” Perhaps it’s more accurate to interpret “mob” as the working class or underprivileged majority. In a one-person, one-vote democracy, the widening social divide renders a “mob rule” less surprising, and yet not all leaders or citizens grasp this trend, let alone take meaningful steps to address it.
Thus, mainstream media optimistically heralded Harris’s “idealist” vision in the lead-up to the election, emphasizing democracy and moral values. But this missed the daily realities of many Americans, realities which widen the rift between idealistic progressivism and practical, pressing concerns.
This chasm between liberals’ ideals and the realities faced by everyday citizens may well define the fault line across American society—and indeed, across much of today’s world.
Last night’s U.S. election night illustrated the divide between “ideal” and “reality” as perceived by us “progressives” (or, in ideologies' terms, “liberals”). While the choice of U.S. president may not directly impact Canadians, many of us, myself included, can’t help but pay attention—especially when news and coverage are so pervasive, making it nearly inescapable. My daughter even mentioned that her teacher said he’d be “glued to the TV” for the results.
In many ways, Canada is indeed the heartland of North America’s “Liberal” movement. Though Canada and the U.S. share roots, a major reason they developed as separate nations was due to distinct ideological differences. Canada grew in part as a refuge for those fleeing the remnants of slavery and seeking the sanctuary of the northern border—a difference that shaped Canada’s “mosaic” versus the U.S. “melting pot.” If Trump ran in Canada, he likely wouldn’t garner even a third of the vote. Yet in this 2024 election, he claimed over half of the popular vote—a surprising outcome for many, myself included.
But “many” here may simply mean those of us within our bubble, those watching MSNBC rather than Fox, the crowd with whom I share similar values and ideals. “We” struggle to understand how a figure like Trump, whom we view as dishonest, reckless, anti-science, and authoritarian, could again secure the U.S. presidency. The result raises questions about how we instill values like integrity, honesty, respect for science, and rule of law in the next generation. After all, public figures of this stature often become role models, shaping youth perception of success and respectability.
This perspective is why the American Liberal front, represented by the Democratic Party, leans on moral and democratic ideals as the primary “weapon” against Trump’s Republican support. But this time, these ideals didn’t hold the sway they did in 2020. I wonder if last time’s success was due less to the appeal of values and more to the crisis of the pandemic and its economic fallout.
The world as seen through Liberal eyes may have drifted far from the American reality.
What the U.S. general public is really thinking is a mystery left largely unexamined by Liberal media. With Liberal viewpoints largely held by the educated elite, it’s easy to assume possession of “truth,” which is, at times, simply an ideal out of touch with many people’s realities. For working families preoccupied with daily expenses, democratic ideals or climate concerns a century away feel intangible compared to the immediate stresses of food on the table and monthly bills. When struggling to make ends meet, they care little about global issues or tariffs that may eventually impact their budgets. Distant threats are less pressing than daily pains.
Trump’s support base, indeed less educated on average, is a data-backed fact, not a bias. But this fact needs a nuanced understanding, not scorn. Their education level is less a cause of today’s social divide and more a result of systemic disparities. Decades of deindustrialization and financialization have led to increasing inequality, with the working class falling farther behind an educated elite. Education has become a commodity, and wealth barriers prevent many from attending college, limiting their earnings and opportunities, creating a cycle of limited upward mobility.
As Ray Dalio notes in Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order, each advance in productivity brings about greater wealth disparity until reaching a point where social tensions necessitate a reset. I believe the U.S. is at this tipping point—and perhaps the world too, as seen with the rise of far-right populism across Europe.
Ancient Greek thinkers warned that democracy could devolve into “mob rule.” Perhaps it’s more accurate to interpret “mob” as the working class or underprivileged majority. In a one-person, one-vote democracy, the widening social divide renders a “mob rule” less surprising, and yet not all leaders or citizens grasp this trend, let alone take meaningful steps to address it.
Thus, mainstream media optimistically heralded Harris’s “idealist” vision in the lead-up to the election, emphasizing democracy and moral values. But this missed the daily realities of many Americans, realities which widen the rift between idealistic progressivism and practical, pressing concerns.
This chasm between liberals’ ideals and the realities faced by everyday citizens may well define the fault line across American society—and indeed, across much of today’s world.