Cory Doctorow cuts through the noise of modern political cynicism with a blunt, almost radical proposition: the most effective strategy for any government is simply to make people's lives better. In an era where political discourse often devolves into personality cults or abstract ideological battles, Doctorow anchors his argument in the tangible reality of working hours and energy bills, offering a refreshing reminder that deliverism beats distraction every time.
The Power of Tangible Deliveries
Doctorow opens by celebrating what he calls "good politics," using the recent legislative victory in Brazil as the prime example. He contrasts the muscular, results-oriented approach of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva with the perceived failures of other Western leaders. Doctorow writes, "Lula's party has just scored a massive, national political victory by tabling legislation to establish a five-day workweek." This move directly addresses the brutal "escala 6×1 system," a legacy of Brazil's fascist dictatorship that forces working-class citizens to labor six days out of seven.
The author argues that this policy is so universally popular that even opposition parties felt compelled to support it, fearing electoral suicide if they stood in the way of weekends for their own constituents. As Doctorow puts it, "It turns out that weekends are popular and promising the electorate access to a weekend is good politics." This observation is strikingly simple yet often ignored by strategists who prioritize culture war distractions over material improvements.
The sadistic torture of your base's enemies will never please them so well nor so durably as making immediate, significant improvements in their lives will.
Doctorow draws a sharp line between this approach and the governance of UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer. He critiques Starmer for abetting austerity and handing public infrastructure over to private tech giants despite commanding a massive parliamentary majority. The author suggests that by refusing to improve daily life, leaders like Starmer are engaging in "bad politics" because they fail the most basic test of governance: making people's lives better rather than worse. While critics might argue that complex geopolitical crises or fiscal constraints limit what any leader can deliver immediately, Doctorow insists that the refusal to try is a political choice with severe consequences.
The Cleantech Argument and Economic Reality
Shifting from labor rights to energy policy, Doctorow makes a passionate case for cleantech, framing it not just as an environmental necessity but as a superior consumer experience. He details his personal transition to solar power, heat pumps, and induction cooking, noting that his energy bills have plummeted to under $80 a month even in Los Angeles. "Everything about living in the cleantech future is better," he asserts, highlighting the speed of induction stovetops and the reliability of electric vehicles.
He attributes the friction many face in adopting these technologies not to the technology itself, but to flawed policy design that favors financialization over ownership. Doctorow writes, "Financializing America's rooftop solar conjured up a vast army of scammers and hustlers who screwed the majority of people they sold solar to." This critique targets the specific mechanism of tax credits that allowed third-party owners to profit while leaving homeowners with debt rather than assets. The argument here is that the right wing's opposition to renewables is not just morally bankrupt but politically suicidal, as it denies voters access to cheaper, cleaner energy.
The author also touches on the broader geopolitical instability driving up fossil fuel costs, referencing ongoing conflicts and the volatility of oil markets. He argues that the administration's reliance on traditional energy sources is a strategic blunder that only accelerates the economic case for renewables. "Not only is cleantech improving every year, but fossil fuel is getting shittier every year," Doctorow notes, suggesting that market forces are already punishing the old guard.
The Human Cost of Political Neglect
Underpinning the entire piece is a profound respect for human time and dignity. Doctorow quotes Pete Seeger to drive home the point that working hours are finite resources that cannot be reclaimed once given away. He writes, "Your time is all you have, and every hour you give to your boss is an hour you can never get back." This sentiment elevates the debate from mere policy preferences to a fundamental question of human rights.
The commentary serves as a rebuke to the idea that voters are irrational or easily manipulated. Doctorow posits that when people are given the chance to improve their lives, they will support those who deliver it, regardless of party lines. The historical context of Operation Car Wash in Brazil adds weight to this argument; the corruption scandal that once imprisoned Lula was fueled by oligarchic interests, yet his return and subsequent focus on worker welfare have proven more resilient than the machinations of his detractors.
Good politics are a delight to watch, especially when it's your team doing them. But man, it can be pretty demoralizing to watch your team fumble play after play after play.
Bottom Line
Doctorow's strongest argument is that political capital is best spent on immediate, visible improvements to daily life rather than abstract ideological victories or cultural distractions. The piece's greatest vulnerability lies in its somewhat optimistic assumption that material benefits will always trump entrenched partisan identities, a dynamic that has occasionally failed in polarized electorates. However, the core verdict remains clear: governments that prioritize tangible deliverables over performative cruelty are not just morally superior; they are politically unbeatable.