I sat down with writer Akil Vicks (who runs the Substack on one) to dissect a pervasive dynamic in our current political discourse: the meta-narrative that it’s always the left’s fault, that every extreme position on the right is justified as a reaction to an overstep by the left.
Akil Vicks specializes in articulating the left position and putting frameworks around the social phenomena we experience today. Our conversation unpacks this persistent theme and reveals how it shapes nearly every political debate, making nuanced discussion impossible.
He defines the “Left’s fault” positioning as the general, underlying idea in almost every political conversation: No matter what the political right is doing, their actions are perceived as a reaction to something “crazy or outlandish” that the left has done.
In this model, this "reactive" logic is a primary engine of the outrage machine, stripping one side of agency while placing the entire burden of the national temperature on the other.
The Democrat’s Dilemma: This framework forces Democrats and the center-left to constantly operate on the defensive, perpetually on the “back foot”. Historically, mainstream Democrats have contributed to this by distancing themselves from the progressive left, searching for their next “Sister Soldier moment” to show they are the “serious guys” compared to the “wacky and silly” left.
The Cost of Simplified Narratives: In politics, narratives win over nuance because simple, “mimetic signifiers” (slogans, catchphrases) are required to appeal to the broadest audience and spread quickly. Akil Vicks notes that nuance rarely helps anyone achieve their material political goals. This inherent simplification allows the “left went too far” narrative to thrive, regardless of the facts.
The “Left Left Me” Industry and the Price of “Killing Woke”
We discussed the “Left Left Me” narrative—individuals who claim they were once liberal but were alienated by the progressive movement.
A Lucrative Industry: There is a well-funded economy built around framing issues as “Here’s the left going crazy again”. Akil Vicks theorizes that a major driver for the anti-woke industry, which sprung up nearly overnight with think pieces like “Is woke gone too far?”, was the Me Too movement. Powerful, wealthy men were “shook at the idea that they would be held accountable” and began funding anti-woke content to push back against consequences.
The Overreach of Reaction: Akil Vicks argues that the “woke” period of militant political expression from the left was brief—maybe “two years tops”. However, the aggressive reaction to “put the left in its place” has come at a severe cost, fundamentally shifting the Overton window of what is acceptable in U.S. political discourse. For example, a sitting president claiming “Democrats are destroying the country” is now met with virtually “zero news” coverage, something unthinkable in previous decades.
Beyond Individuals: The Institutional Problem
The most profound part of our discussion centers on moving beyond individual politicians and addressing the failure of our core institutions.
The Brochure vs. Reality: David and Akil Vicks agree that we must have a “hard conversation” about the liberal democratic values we claim to have (the “brochure”) versus the reality of maintaining a country designed to facilitate the flow of capital. The tension between the ideal of universal human rights and the reality of national interests (like borders) is where authoritarian politics “prey on” contradictions.
The Failures of the Centrists: The problem, Akil Vicks suggests, is not just individual bad actors like Trump, but the institutions themselves. The Democratic Party’s mindset has often been: the institution is fine as long as we are in charge. This has led them to concede power to the executive branch, power which they then complain about when the “wrong person” is using it.
Democratizing the Economy: Akil Vicks poses a crucial question: Do we like democracy enough to include it in the economy? While we value self-governance in politics, the economy—which affects far more of our daily lives—is authoritarian and top-down. This requires asking bigger questions about what our country is fundamentally meant to be.
Watch the full video to hear Akil Vicks discuss:
The political tradition of centrists rejecting the “extremes” and why that’s a fundamentally flawed approach (using the example of abolitionists).
The distinction between the online “influencer” left and the broader movement.
How concepts like worker co-ops and labor representation could lead to a more democratic economy.
Akil Vicks writes at onone.substack.com.
