Throwaway thoughts on the US election

By now, everyone and their brother has given us their hot take on the 2024 US election results. Here's mine, as a former resident whose interest in that country has steadily waned over the years.

When I was living in the US in 2008 and Obama was a candidate, the main thing I remember from the campaign was that his skin colour was *everything*. And by *everything*, I mean *EVERYTHING*. During the primary season it was all that the Hillary Clinton camp was talking about. After the primaries, it was all that the McCain camp was talking about.

In fact, the backlash against his skin colour played a large part in eventually propelling Trump.

What Obama faced with race, Hillary Clinton faced with gender in 2016.

And yet, in 2024, when Harris was the candidate, neither her race, nor her gender played even a minute fraction of the part those factors played in Obama's and Clinton's situations.

Despite the fact that she eventually lost to Trump, and despite the fact that her race and gender definitely played *some* part in her loss, Harris was never in the same boat as Obama or Clinton. As soon as Biden dropped out, the enthusiasm with which she was embraced as a candidate was so unprecedented, it blew me away. The money she raised and the enthusiasm she generated right out the gate shut down every pundit fantasising about a drawn out bro-fest of a primary.

All through the race, Harris generated nothing but enthusiasm and optimism. Her race and her gender were brushed aside by both sides. I was shocked to see the casualness with which former Republicans were openly endorsing her. Dick Cheney, for fuck's sake! Even folks on the Trump side seemed to focus on trashing her using things that the democratic party stood for which they're used to trashing, rather than using her race or her gender.

This is progress. This is a *shocking* level of progress.

One thing I have noticed with human societies is that conservatism is repeatedly proven wrong over time and liberalism is repeatedly proven right over time.

• Anti-slavery protests were called woke liberal excess at one point
• The idea of women voting was called woke liberal excess at one point
• Desegregation was called woke liberal excess at one point
• Women working in offices was called woke liberal excess at one point
• Gay people having equal human rights was called woke liberal excess at one point

Conservatives have a 100% failure rate over a period spanning more than 150 years when it comes to correctly identifying "woke liberal excesses" in the US.

You would think such abysmal performance would force them to develop a modicum of doubt. Or at least some hesitation. But no.

As soon as the next battle comes around, conservatives are once again all up in arms going "liberals are asking for too much change!" and "we need to push back or we'll have social anarchy!"

But once the dust settles, they quietly accept progress and modify their opinions.

This is the pattern I have consistently seen from conservatives. Their outrage is loud and public. But once they come to accept a particular piece of social progress after ten or twenty years, their self-corrections are quiet and private.

Capitalists like to tell us that individual stocks may go up or down but the stock market as a whole delivers consistent profits. What works for economic liberalism also works for social liberalism. Individual battles may go one way or the other, but the wars have always been won by liberals and always lost by conservatives.