http://commondreams.org/views03/0710-02.htm
Published on Thursday, July 10, 2003 by CommonDreams.org
An "Aberration" Responds to the DLC’s Attack on Progressives
by John Vigileos
In their July 3rd LA Times opinion piece, "Activists are Out of Step," Bruce Reed and Al From of the Democratic Leadership Council shed their sheep’s clothing and reveal themselves to be, not wolves, but little emperors with not much on. The DLC leaders make a desperate case for alienating the growing chorus of progressive voices within the Democratic party. Their discourse succeeds, however, only in betraying a myopic agenda that is startlingly void of anything remotely suggestive of such things as vision, principle, ideas, and er substance.
Reed and From dismiss the Democratic party activists as belonging to "special interest" groups that are out of touch with the "rank-and-file" Democrats. And who are these rank-and-file Democrats? Well, according to Reed and From, they are that group of Democrats who look pretty much the same as "all registered voters." In other words, the Democratic rank-and-file have the same views as the rank-and-file Republicans. Well golly, what do we even need two parties for? Why not just one party? We can call it the "rank-and-file" party.
Of course single party rule is exactly what we are up against in this country. While the DLC has been busy formulating its cautious, middle-ground strategy, based not on principle but on political expediency, the Republicans have been aggressively redefining what the middle-ground will be. The right-wing opinion makers, who dominate the media landscape, take every opportunity to attack the most moderate Democrats and portray them as elitist ideologues. The success of this strategy is all too apparent in Reed and From's appropriation of the right-wing's standard abasements of the left. These DLC leaders castigate progressive elements within the Democratic party as being "a modern-day version of the old McGovern wing of the party, defined principally by weakness abroad and elitist interest-group liberalism at home." The Republicans are fortunate indeed to have such brave soldiers fighting their war at the middle line.
The party of George Bush and Tom Delay did not attain its dominant status by playing middle ground politics and dismissing Republican party activists and "single interest" groups as "aberrations." Certainly Bush finagled his way into the White House by feigning moderation on the stump. But he gave enough winks and nods to those single interest groups—energy interests, media corporations, the gun lobby, Christian fundamentalists, anti-choice activists, etc.—that they knew ol' George could be counted on to push their agendas right past the rank-and-file if they supported his campaign. Their expectations have not been betrayed.
From and Reed's status quo philosophy—that the Democratic party should stand for whatever the majority view happens to be—puts them in a poor position to protest the policies of an extremist President who also happens to be polling well. The DLC has failed to see or care that the majority dollar that it is so desperately clutching after is on the end of a string being pulled by Bush's Republicans. Bush and company did not gain approval of the majority by following the polls—they have shaped the status quo by setting a bold (though extremist) agenda and letting the polls follow them. The DLC's best alternative to this Bush juggernaut seems to be something along the lines of "what he said, but maybe just a little less of it." Having boxed itself in as a weak proxy for the majority rule, the DLC brain trust is reduced to tearing down the activists in its own party.
Reed and From tell us that real Democrats stand for the death penalty, big defense budgets, and welfare limits. But what is lacking in their apologia is the least modicum of vision or principled leadership. There is no willingness with this group to consider how America might be made safer by spending less on bloated military contracts and illegal wars, and more on homeland security and renewable energy to reduce our dependence on Middle East oil. In parroting the majority view on capital punishment, From and Reed cannot be bothered with the hard fact that the death penalty is disproportionately meted out to minorities or that too many innocent people are executed to justify an unqualified endorsement of this most extreme form of punishment. And they are too busy jumping on that republican engineered crusade against social (but not corporate) welfare recipients to notice that many struggling single mothers cannot support their children off the welfare dole unless they are provided universal day care, and a national minimum wage above the poverty line.
When Reed and From warn their fellow Democrats against "special interest groups," who are out of step with the majority of the voting public, their words reek of that cynical political doublespeak that has fostered an intense voter apathy in this country. The DLC is not a grassroots organization composed of that "everyone else" in America who Reed and From claim to speak for. Far from representing the concerns of ordinary Americans, the DLC exists for the sole purpose of furthering the special interest agendas of its large corporate patrons.
In contrast, liberal activist groups are working to break down the doors of a political establishment that is controlled by elite corporate interests to the exclusion of ordinary citizens. For example, organizations like Moveon.org, Common Cause, and Free Press mobilized public opposition against the recent Federal Communications Commission’s decision to ease media ownership restrictions. If that decision stands it will allow conservative media moguls like Rupert Murdoch to strengthen their monopoly hold on the marketplace of ideas—that would be anathema to our form of participatory democracy and would only shift the DLC’s coveted middle-ground further to the right. But thanks to grassroots organizing and pressure from activists our elected representatives in the Senate have promised to overturn the FCC decision.
The bad news for Reed and From is that aberrations don’t get those kinds of results. The good news for ordinary Democrats is that the progressive base of the Democratic party has been energized, and is giving us all the courage to challenge and redefine the "mainstream." By pushing against this growing tide of activism the DLC is only creating the ironic result of leveraging itself into the margins. But then, that is really where Reed and From can do their best work for the party—gauging the shifting sand of the middle-ground, following polls, cheering on the rank-and-file from the back of the room, and letting the leaders lead.
John Vigileos is an ordinary Democratic voter and student at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego, CA. He can be contacted at
john@vigileos.com.
###
Threaded Mode
