I'm So Disappointed with Schumer and Jeffries. They Don't Agree with Me 100%.

[Cirsium]

120. Waiting for permission from the future

This is the same debate that went on on the 1850s within the Whig party. "Once we have the votes, then we can afford to take a stand" versus "we only ever get the votes by taking the stand first."

The Whig party didn’t fail due to insufficient procedural savvy. It failed because it tried to manage an existential moral crisis as if it were a negotiable policy dispute. By insisting on moderation, coalition maintenance, and “what’s achievable right now,” it lost coherence, credibility, and ultimately relevance. The votes didn’t materialize later — they migrated to a party that was willing to name the conflict clearly.

Waiting for permission from the future never produces the future you’re waiting for.

The disagreement here isn’t about sequencing details — it’s about causality. History suggests that movements don’t gain power and then discover their principles; they articulate principles that clarify stakes, attract allegiance, and reorganize power. The Whig collapse wasn’t caused by moral clarity arriving too soon, but by its indefinite postponement.