Democrats and progressives: we need to take action. This past election day shows us that the results are not in our favor.
____
Tuesday was Election Day. Although you wouldn’t know it by watching cable news, who seem to be exclusively focused on the 2016 presidential race, municipalities across the country elected mayors, states voted on ballot measures and for governors. Things that, in most cases, will have a bigger effect on the average American’s life than the results of the presidential election in 2016. And my party, the Democrats, got absolutely obliterated.
If you follow, like me, media from the left of the aisle; Vox, The New Republic, MSNBC, or
(yes) NPR, you hear a lot of stories discussing the supposed disorder within the Republican Party, stories packed with a poorly disguised glee. These stories tend to center on two things: the chaos within the parties establishment as the tea party battles the old boys club, and the sort of statistical modeling that shows how difficult it supposedly will be in the future for the Republicans to win a national (i.e. Presidential) election. What these stories reliably fail to mention is that with the exception of Obama’s reelection, Republicans are trouncing Democrats everywhere. Yes, the leadership of the Republican Party in congress may be divided, but they control congress by a large margin and will almost certainly maintain their control. States like Kentucky and my home state of Michigan that have been reliably blue for decades are now dominated by Republicans in the legislative and executive branches. Left leaning media loves to point out the incompetence of Republican Party leadership. I say incompetent like a fox.
This disconnect has become obvious to me as I’ve been exposed to the new generation of “insiders” in the Democratic Party. The people in the establishment, the people working the campaigns, at the state and local level, are mostly young (under 35) and lifelong Democrats. I’m young and a lifelong Dem, but there’s a significant difference between me and most of them. I was drawn to the Democratic party at a young age out of a sense of economic populism. To me, the Democrats were the party that stood up for working people, the party that wasn’t in bed with banks and corporations. Of course, as a good progressive, I’ve always been in favor of LGBT rights, fighting racism and sexism, and a woman’s right to choose. But to me, the central issue was economic equity. The social issues were icing on the cake. This new generation of progressive insiders is the exact opposite. They identify as progressive and vote exclusively for Democrats solely based on social issues. Economic justice, corporate accountability, in these circles, is mentioned in passing if at all, and identity politics is the new hotness. For the new insiders, issues like choice and LGBT rights are the core of their political identity, and, in most cases, the totality of it.
Having these people with their hands on the controls is a dangerous position for a party or a movement to be in. Democrats and progressives continue to get hammered in local and state elections, where the winners have a great deal of influence over tax policy, energy policy, and infrastructure.
|
Having these people with their hands on the controls is a dangerous position for a party or a movement to be in. Democrats and progressives continue to get hammered in local and state elections, where the winners have a great deal of influence over tax policy, energy policy, and infrastructure. But no mayor is going to be able to repeal Roe v. Wade. No city commissioner or State Rep can reverse the Supreme Court’s decision on gay marriage. For the most part, social policies that the new insiders are most passionate about are created at the federal level, and in many cases, by the courts. But these insiders are working state and local level elections and the results speak for themselves. The lack of a coherent, passionate message on economic justice is limiting the progressive base and as a result, policy battles are being won by the right at every level.
Now, you may say, what about Bernie Sanders, the fire breathing economic populist and socialist? How to account for his surge in popularity? I would say his long shot candidacy proves my point exactly. Sanders is not of the establishment, and has embraced a message centered in economic policy. But the new insiders are overwhelmingly in support of Hilary Clinton, who is in lock step with them on social issues, but on economics and foreign policy is indistinguishable from a Republican. There’s a broad base of support for someone with a Sanders-like message, but not within the establishment. And the establishment tends to have the final say.
The more troubling effect of the new insiders rise to power is a sort of smug complacency. Their movement, their identity as a group, though they would probably deny it, is based on public outrage, both legitimate and exaggerated. Their defining characteristic is their opposition to all things “problematic”, the newly in vogue term for anything not politically correct. Their opposition to the problematic strains of society allows them to feel righteous and holy, even in defeat, and their blinders to anything other than presidential elections allow them to feel destined for victory, even as they fail. The new insiders are so defined by their opposition to so many things, that in order to maintain their sense of self they have to operate at a huge distance from the average voter. A distance that allows them to feel righteous, but that also leads to a condescension that is a recipe for losing elections.
The new insiders are so defined by their opposition to so many things, that in order to maintain their sense of self they have to operate at a huge distance from the average voter. A distance that allows them to feel righteous, but that also leads to a condescension that is a recipe for losing elections.
|
On Tuesday, I spent the evening at a post-election “party” for city council candidate whose campaign I had helped out on. He had to be in the top four to be elected, and he finished sixth. Needless to say, the atmosphere was not festive. Soon, the talk turned to the electorate. “Well, what are you going to do in a place like [X city]?” someone said. “It probably would have been better if [candidate] had made some crazy Christian statement”. Everyone laughed. Over the weekend, at a phone bank, another staffer on the campaign had told me that she didn’t believe that taxes should be raised on the rich, and no one seemed to bat an eye. We all felt more comfortable blaming the electorate, the citizens, for our loss than ourselves.
Interactions like this took place all over the country on Tuesday night. The new insiders are so sure of their purity on the social issues, that they feel no need to question their privilege on the economic front, or even to develop a strong position. Easier to blame the voters.
If the new insiders aren’t forced to evaluate themselves and their positions, and if they aren’t held accountable, the Democratic Party, and the progressive movement as a whole, are doomed. The attitude of righteous outrage in defeat is simply not sustainable. That’s the thing about Martyrs: they die. Democrats and progressives risk the same fate. Our movement can either develop a strong and true populist message on economics and war, and start emphasizing it, or we can enjoy our purity as we watch our movement die from a thousand cuts.
____
Photo credit: Getty Images
You talk about supporting dems because they are aligned with the people. In your tender experience it is obvious that you have not realized that both parties are against you. They are all simply about themselves and YOU do not fit in it except for your vote. Things need to change no doubt but honestly the progressive drooling is not helping the cause.
One issue that citizens from the left, right and everyone in between agree on is removing the Big Money from our political process. There is a way that all citizens can work together to accomplish this common goal. Think of it as a “Union for Politics”. Just as workers can go on strike by withholding their labor to get better wages, working conditions, etc., citizens can go on strike by withholding their votes from the Big Money candidates and demand candidates financed by small contributions. Instead of the money controlling the votes- the votes control the money. It is the… Read more »
Maybe your party should stop seeing constitutional amendments (1 and 2 so far!) as annoyances and obstacles. That might help too.
8ball, I honestly couldn’t agree with you more.
Great insight. As an African American I get it (not just because we share a common name), and I totally agree.