(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
 . . . . . . . . . .



Reform Through Language [1]

['Chitown Kev', 'Thom Hartmann']

Date: 2026-10-10  

It is said that the left is of a politics that is diverse, a large tent of varied interests and peoples. Its politics certainly reflect this; wild oscillations of positions and movements all with an equally varied assortment of narratives and rallying cries. The success of any of these has been just as varied, rarely containing large sustained shifts, often failures, and most wins have been incremental and fragile.

The right has successfully used language for decades in ways the left has only mimicked on the most basic of levels. The playing field has been a home-court advantage with state’s rights as a catch-all for a whole variety of fears (racism, guns, poverty, self-determination, etc.) and language unification that enable a continuous power-grab by elites.

To even argue against “state’s rights” or accept a “well of course there should be a degree of state’s rights” is to have already lost the game. It is to legitimize a field of play that only has one end zone.

The left must exclusively adopt (without reference or countering to the right’s attacks or positions) language that appeals to and champions a working class, hard work, and labor. A language that strives to the ideals of a middle class, to aspiration and economic bettering, to a deeply embedded historic narrative and identity. This language needs to simultaneously always imply and reinforce the unstated reality of a class war, of an elite, and a power structure that does not empower but deceives and excludes through political, economic, and social means.

This language at its most basic is the dignity of the individual. This is not merely championing individual rights or atomizing every identity, or even talking about the role of the federal government (or any level of government) as a voice and arm of the people to do good and necessary things. Rather those things MUST be addressed within the laser-focus of the individual’s dignity and otherwise sit well down the list of talking points.

The dignity of the individual sits at the narrative founding of our country. Before state’s rights even. It is there in the Declaration, in the Amendments, and in a Puritan work ethic that champions labor, independence, self-dependence, neighborly responsibility, and the hope and potential within possibility. It is an idea that is universally tangible across the political spectrum. It is not 8 degrees separated from the voter as to how this policy will be good for them or overly abstract, not needing any further explanation. This cannot be stressed enough; across the political and social spectrum it is a shared feeling, a problem that has no name. What dignity is there in comparison consumerism? Or social media’s fake lens? Or squabbles on comment feeds? What dignity is there in subservience to an individual or a party or a corporation? What dignity in not owning yourself online, in debt to simply pay bills, in lives of anger or fear or fatigue or hopelessness? What dignity is there in hard work that reaps fewer and fewer benefits? Dignity of the individual is a framework and rallying cry that can be understood but even more importantly felt by all.

From this dignity of the individual we can begin a second level of narrative around dignity to place that individual in juxtaposition to a ruling class, to corporate interest and power, and to economic and political machines that continue to attack them and their voice. First, the dignity of work: work that provides the means to a pursuit of happiness; a healthy family, an education, a sense of fulfillment and not a sense of diminishing, a sense of empowerment whether in the workplace or the ability to leave (to not feel trapped). An equal sense of the individual owing something to the company and their fellow employees as well as the company owing something equally to the individual. This is not to enable the usual labor exploitation but to acknowledge our desire to do, to create, to think, and to contribute. Then there is the dignity of economic freedom; supporting the individual’s right to dignified labor in the means to its attainment from a quality education, care for children, and leaves of absence that promote the individual’s mental and physical wellbeing and hence their continued highest level of contribution through their chosen dignified work. Can an individual continue to live in dignity if the costs associated with a dignified life continue to outpace their wages (healthcare, education, rent, even traffic ticketing cameras aimed exclusively at diminishing middle class neighborhoods!). What dignity exists in usury level interest rates? What dignity exists in an economy that pushes more and more into ‘gig’ jobs that diminish the dollar’s local multiplier effect, leaves individuals fighting for scraps with each other, and erode more and more of the safety net? If we want individuals to truly be building the opportunities and possibilities of the future, it is far easier to do so when those individuals have some sort of safety net under them when they take those precarious steps: whether it is a family that can support their efforts or catch them if they fall, or a society. Individuals with that tangible or implied security are far more likely to strive than those without and with the lack of dignity in their current conditions who must spend far more of their energies on the day-to-day. What dignity exists when the two centers of power (D.C. and Silicon Valley) are so beyond the reach of influence? Finally the dignity of political participation; the thing that has united the voting and non voting public across the political spectrum is an unstated, intuited sense of diminishing political power. A sense that the individual’s voice and ability to participate in their government, in their future, and in any sense of personal value in the voting/political sphere is diminishing at exponential rates. The question should not be about whether a company gets to spend money for candidates and issues but whether an individual’s contribution matters. It is not a question of electoral allocations or state’s representations but the weight of any individual’s vote. How easily can an individual influence a vote, how close is an individual to a given seat of government, how much do the various structures around seats of representation distance themselves from the individual?

For too long the left has happily camped with flags high on a statist platform that champions government above all else. Yes, more than not with an end goal of individual rights but ultimately that starts with a first principal of government. Perhaps it is this reality that has also resulted in an all too often pro big business positioning by Democratic governments as is so often the case at the metropolitan level….

So if, in the name dignity of the individual and dignity of work, we are to camp on this higher ground instead what are we to say? How are we to frame our positioning and still allow the positive roles of government and community and organization to flourish? We must champion dignity of voice, of action, of family, of moral conviction, of our neighbor. And against that; dignity being suppressed, removed, ignored, or placated. Let the right continue to say State and Business. It is time the left said You and Your Labor have Dignity – and it’s about time our country looked like it. Then the levers of power begin to look more like individuals participating in their government.

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2026/10/10/800110029/community/s/

Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/