The Abundance Debate Is Broken. Here’s How to Fix It. Populists and abundance proponents have retreated into factional warfare. But both sides need to realize that they need each other.

> Progressives are routinely blamed for decisions they didn’t make and outcomes they couldn’t control. The 2024 loss is the most recent example. Kamala Harris and Joe Biden ran on a strategy and platform crafted by centrists, not the populist left.

No, it was definitely mixed but with a strong emphasis on progressivism. Joe Biden was one of the most progressive Presidents in modern history. He massively ramped up government spending as a result of covid, and the overheated economy responded accordingly. Kamala was even more populist, including a wealth tax on unrealized gains in her platform. I doubt anyone can point out many examples of their platforms in 2020 and 2024 that were actually less progressive than Obama or Clinton’s when they ran for office.

> Nobody has ever had more money to implement their theory of politics than David Shor in 2024. He failed miserably.

David Shor is a progressive who says the Democrats should be more populist on the economy. How is this a counterexample against populism failing the Democrats?

> If the abundance coalition cannot distance itself from the billionaire class underwriting it—and the anti-populist impulses that come with it—it risks becoming not a governing vision but a technocratic buffer to prevent more transformative reforms.

This article was written as if it’s from a neutral point of view (look at the author’s credentials; he is very much not neutral), but this point which is constantly reinforced gives the game away. If the abundance faction needs to contend with its comfortable relationship with big businesses and rich people, why are we not mentioning the populist left’s alliance with their despicable counterparts on the right. On issues like technology, like foreign policy, like corporate power, they sure share a lot of common ground.

Im pretty convinced that the resistance to the abundance agenda from left-wing populists is mainly because they view it as a political threat and less about the actual policy ideas that it proposes.

Populists are afraid that people like Josh Shapiro and Pete Buttigieg are going to show up to the next primary with abundance messaging in their campaigns. They would prefer their primary opponents to either have no coherent message or be forced to adopt populist messages. Instead, they’re seeing moderate Dems start to get excited about abundance, which at least superficially doesn’t align very well with existing populist rhetoric.

Hence the rhetorical attacks of abundance being “just the status quo repackaged” about a philosophy that is fundamentally one big critique about how government is currently run and has been run over the last few decades. It’s not that there aren’t any valid criticisms of abundance, but the vast majority of of critics seem to be operating in bad faith and many of them don’t even sound like they’ve read rhetorical book they’re criticizing.

Progressive not willing to accept that something besides “evil rich people” is wrong with the way we build things in the country.

Centrists, especially the ones associated with that WelcomeFest, who are seeking to buddy up with the “good tech bros” don’t seem to have the faintest idea on what is electable.

Keep the policies that make sense, but dump the dorks and pundits who gave us the last few democratic presidential campaigns.