The overton window defines what policy proposals are considered mainstream and it’s easy to see that the position of the overton window in the US is very different from its position in Canada or most of Europe.
For instance, capital punishment is outside of the overton window in Europe. A tax on carbon emissions is inside the overton window in most European countries.
Certain gun rights are inside the overton window in many parts of the US, but would be seen as incredibly radical and outside the overton window in Europe.
Restricting abortion rights is outside of the overton window in most of Europe (there are notable exceptions), but not in the US.
The overton window can be dynamic, it’s easy to point to at least one area where the overton window has moved recently: marriage equality (both in the US and Europe).
So why does the overton window shift? Think tanks and lobbyists dedicate themselves to this question.
There are no definitive answers here, but it seems that a slow and prolonged shift in how same sex love was portrayed in culture and entertainment paved the way for marriage equality. The Will & Grace phenomena. Obviously coupled with political advocacy but political advocacy alone would never have been enough.
On the other hand a more patiant political approach may also be successful, Grover Norquist & co managed to make tax hikes completely toxic in the GOP by over time introducing it as a litmus test for candidates.
But for all of his hard work and education efforts it has been more or less impossible for Al Gore and other environmentalists to move the overton window with regards to climate policy, even a hyperrational approach like a carbon tax (which internalizes externalities, to use economical jargon) seems out of reach.
This may be because of pushback from other strong interest groups, or because the price of gasoline is especially politically sensitive in the US.
But most of all it illustrates the dangers of nominating a democratic socialist to the presidential ticket.
When shifting the overton window you need a slow and steady approach. Shock therapy doesn’t work. Shock therapy creates an impasse, or even worse, shifts the overton window in the opposite direction.
As when George McGovern (a hero of mine) was nominated against Nixon and created a costly backlash against liberals.
As when the leadership style and radical proposals of Jeremy Corbyn paved the way for a Tory majority.
As when Bobby Jindal overreached radically as a governor in a red state and was succeded by a Democrat.
As when the nomination of Roy Moore hurt the GOP, not only in Alabama but in the US and even abroad.
Let’s dispel the notion that most progressive people who oppose the nomination of Bernie Sanders do it for ideological reasons. It’s mostly about pragmatism. About what works and what doesn’t work.