David Litt, once a wordsmith for Obama, now admits his cold shoulder to his conservative brother-in-law was a misstep. His New York Times essay reveals a shift from smug superiority to a grudging respect for family ties over political divides. It’s a rare mea culpa from the progressive elite.
Fox News reported that Litt, a political speechwriter, initially saw shunning his brother-in-law, Matt, as a noble act. Matt’s fondness for Joe Rogan and skepticism about COVID-19 vaccines irked Litt’s liberal sensibilities.
This wasn’t personal, he claimed—just strategic. “My frostiness wasn’t personal,” Litt wrote, justifying his chill as a tactic to nudge Matt toward compliance.
How noble, to ice out family for not towing the progressive line. Yet, this sanctimonious stance crumbled when Litt needed something only Matt could offer.
Litt’s desire to learn surfing led him to Matt, the only surfer he knew. Swallowing his pride, he set aside his disdain for Matt’s views. It’s funny how self-interest can thaw a frozen heart.
Matt’s generosity on the waves surprised Litt. Teaching Litt to surf, Matt showed patience and goodwill, not the caricature of a backward conservative. This act of kindness forced Litt to question his dogmatic approach.
“Matt and I remain very different, yet we’ve reached a radical conclusion: We don’t always approve of each other’s choices, but we like each other,” Litt admitted. This sounds like common sense, but for some liberals, it’s a revelation. Shunning, it turns out, doesn’t change minds.
Litt’s rethink came as Matt’s surfing lessons made him braver, he noted. Matt even said he’d vote for Litt if he ran for office—a gesture of goodwill Litt couldn’t ignore. Family, it seems, can trump ideology.
Yet, Litt’s epiphany has limits. He’d still snub Trump aide Stephen Miller over a surf lesson, though he claims he wouldn’t fully shut the door on anyone for their politics. It’s a half-step toward grace, but better than nothing.
“Ostracizing him wouldn’t have altered his behavior—and it would have made my own life worse,” Litt wrote of Matt. Shunning, he realized, only deepens divides. It’s a tactic that leaves everyone poorer, not just the shunned.
Not all liberals share Litt’s newfound humility. Co-hosts of “The View” have championed cutting ties with Trump-supporting kin, calling it a “moral issue.” Apparently, family dinners are now battlegrounds for ideological purity.
A Yale psychiatrist echoed this, deeming it “essential” to sever ties with Trump-voting loved ones during holidays. This clinical approach to family feels more like a cult than compassion. It’s division dressed up as virtue.
A socialist leftist also joined the chorus, urging liberals to ditch Trump-backing relatives. This trend of moral grandstanding isn’t new, but it’s chilling. It’s as if love and loyalty must bow to political litmus tests.
Litt warns that shunning plays into the hands of those who thrive on division. “Our differences are meaningful, but allowing them to mean everything is part of how we ended up here,” he wrote. He’s right—cutting ties doesn’t heal; it hands demagogues a megaphone.
“When we cut off contacts, or let algorithms sort us into warring factions, we forget that not so long ago, we used to have things to talk about that didn’t involve politics,” Litt added. Social media’s echo chambers amplify this madness. Real connection, like a surf lesson, can break the spell.
