Rich Lowery makes an interesting observation in a recent article that liberals push back strongly against any proposal to deviate from “Democratic orthodoxy on race, guns and immigration” even when running in conservative-leaning areas. He points out that their nominee in the recent Georgia special election for Congress was an “orthodox liberal who conceded nothing on cultural issues, even though he was running in a Republican district in the South.” Lowery, a leading neo-conservative, would be loath to admit it but nominating a young Jewish Left-wing activist with a foreign-sounding name didn’t help the Democratic cause either. It was bad enough that Jon Ossoff was extremely liberal, but he was also alien to most Georgians.

Lowery doesn’t explain why Democrats are unwilling to compromise on hot button issues but I will put forth three reasons here. Firstly, Democrats are used to the idea that they have already won demographically. Non-Whites babies already outnumber White babies, meaning that the future belongs to the Democrats. Even if all further immigration was halted immediately the anti-White Left would win in this system because they won the demographic war. Only revolutionary change could prevent this. Democrats are used to reading in their magazines how in the near future everyone will be a brown deracinated consumer. And so they have every reason to be optimistic. The nomination of an unpopular elderly woman for president who campaigned on a feminist slogan of “I’m with her” is another indication of their confidence in the future. In their mind the war is won and they ought to be able to nominate anyone they please and push their unmoderated ideological agenda and still defeat the “old White men” in the GOP.

Secondly, the anti-White Left won the cultural war long ago. They control the educational system 100% and own almost the entirety of the media. Their values are re-enforced at church, school, on TV, at the movies and by the human resource department on the job. They are the establishment and are not used to having to endure any opposition (which they term “hate speech”) to their agenda.

Thirdly, the Left has long framed its causes in moral terms. Disarming the public, replacing White people, blending all the races together, raising your baby boy to be a tranny, banning “hate speech,” etc. – these are moral causes for the Left, not simply policy preferences, and as such they are unwilling to compromise upon them.

What they don’t count on is that there are still significant areas and numbers of people who do not accept their unmoderated Progressive message. And every time these people demonstrate a show of force it sends the Left into a tailspin which is hysterical to witness. Laughably, Progressives are actually blaming their loss in Georgia on “the party’s insistence on running moderate candidates who try to appeal too much to Republicans who dislike Trump.” Hopefully, they continue to think along these lines.