|
Guest Entry: The Democratic Party Must Be Destroyed. This is a guest entry from Greg. It's a teaser for his forthcoming personal site (which won't really be a journal) which promises to include discussion and rants on topics like "politics, music, baseball, and stuff like that" (his description). The politics within do represent in many areas the politics of Planning A Sky, although I A. don't speak as intelligently about them B. don't rant quite so well and C. did vote for Bill Clinton twice. The journal itself is still on hiatus until after Saturday November 9th, when I take the GRE Literature in English subject test. Centrist Democrats, led by Martin Frost of Texas (which we denied independence why, exactly?) are already beating the drums for a move to the right. Their argument, when you think about it, is unassailable on its own terms: the Republicans won and the Democrats lost, so the Democrats need to be more like Republicans if we want to win. Those rare occasions when Democrats win reflect either (a) the victorious Democrats' effective embrace of conservative positions, or (b) a liberal aberration, based on fleeting conditions in some idiosyncratic state/district. Aside from the descriptive sophistry, that reasoning necessarily ignores the key normative questions: Exactly what is it we're trying to win, and who are you calling "we"? This is the legacy of Clintonism. You want someone to blame for Tuesday night's debacle? Look no farther than the whitest smirk in Harlem. Clinton plays as some kind of liberal hero now, which is the most sickening instance of a political Stockholm Syndrome I have ever seen. Remember, he wasn't a Democrat; he was a "New Democrat." The feeble attempts at genuine social change undertaken by good government liberals from Hubert Humphrey to Tom Harkin were far too much for his conniving ass. He had to demonize poor women, leave the world's victims of hunger and violence to twist in the wind, and urge along a theoretical economic resurgence that left ordinary Americans eating the stock market's dust. Liberal Democrats, starved for power, generally pledged allegiance to the New Democrat order; and when Clinton finally slithered out of town, what little hope the Democratic Party had once offered for positive social change was dead. Tuesday night, CNN asked Tom Daschle why continued Democrat control of the Senate was important. His answer: "So we can keep performing our checks and balances." Wow. How in the world did voters avoid the seductive allure of that message? That's what the party of Roosevelt is reduced to: "We play defense." Except, for instance, if Bush raids the treasury to pay off his wealthy puppeteers, appoints right-wing lunatic judges who have avoided overt shows of racism and covered their tracks on abortion, or fabricates the case for an insane powderkeg of a war. Then they don't. Principles? Too expensive. Political courage? Ill-advised in the fickle southern and western states that Democrats might as well just call the White Belt. Leadership? The outmoded province of losers, chumps, and people who don't get the juiciest corporate board invitations when they leave office. See, the Democratic leadership (sorry, term of art) enjoy being lap dogs. It's a good life, and no one can take it away from them, because federal election law virtually guarantees that no more or fewer than two parties, both with centrist ideologies, will compete for political power. The Constitution doesn't require single-member House districts with one-round "winner take all" voting, legislative redistricting to create "safe" districts, or (despite the protests of that esteemed constitutional scholar, Mitch McConnell) mandatory lap dances by elected officials for moneyed interests. All of those aspects of the system are legislative innovations that drive candidates to the very center that Martin Frost finds so sadly barren, strongly discourage voters from supporting third candidates, and make incumbents virtually impossible to unseat. Low voter turnout doesn't result merely from apathy -- it reflects the fact that most people who care about government have no serious hope that a candidate of their choice can ever win. (Sunday voting would also help, although the Bible-thumpers would give virgin birth to a cow, or we could make election day a federal holiday, although that would put the public good ahead of private profits, perish the thought.) Nothing is more corrosive to democracy than people who trumpet their reflexive location in the center of a theoretical political spectrum as the height of intellectual and moral accomplishment. I don't mind if you favor tax cuts targeted at the upper middle class, as long as you've thoughtfully considered and rejected alternatives ranging from democratic socialism to repealing the income tax. But please don't tell me your position deserves some special attention because it causes the least offense to the most people. I would much rather get into a screaming match with a racist, gun-humping asswipe who has the courage of his or her convictions (which I specify to exclude from this faint praise lobotomized Old South frat boys like Trent Lott) than have tea with some smug Lieberman Democrat who preaches from on high about the end of ideology (yeah; think Jackson Pollock proclaiming the end of color). The moderate mantra that "Americans are sick of partisan bickering in Washington" displaces blame from people who care about nothing beyond their own self-righteous stasis to those who are at least thinking and arguing about how to solve problems. The American Left needs to build a new party. Of course we're always saying that, and of course it never works. Unfortunately, it's our only hope. The Green Party and New Party are running a lot of candidates for state and local offices. Occasionally they do something asinine, like running a Green candidate against Paul Wellstone, but by and large these are the best people active in American politics, and they deserve our support and vigorous constructive criticism. Please don't confuse my belief in the substantive promise of left-wing third parties with my structural advocacy of multiparty competition. Right now the most powerful minor-party official in the United States is the execrable Jesse Ventura, whose recent record of statesmanship consists of wiping his ass with Wellstone's funeral shroud. Don't hate him because he's a ludicrous ex-wrestler; hate him because he's an egomaniacal, power-hungry right-winger. But the current force of centrist minor parties is the exception that proves the rule: our electoral system concentrates all power at the center, and only personality cults (where have you gone, Boss Peron?) occasionally break the two-party stranglehold. While we keep fighting for things like peaceful security, civil rights for everyone, and wise environmental stewardship, we also need to fight just as hard to change the legal and political structures that smother our society's democratic promise. The Democratic Party is dead. Long live democracy. If you have comments for Greg/want to rant back at him/wish to discuss this guest entry, you can do so in the forum. |