My diary is not to point Kos in a bad way, considering the fact that I'm using a conservative monarchist as a comparison figure. I'm choosing Bismarck as an analogy, because like Bismarck painstakingly unifying Germany, Kos is trying painstakingly to unify the Democratic Party, and with his idea of Libertarian Democrats, indirectly trying to forge a new liberalism to supplant both the decadent DLC of the Clinton years, and the '60s identity group liberalism that is best known for giving us Tom Hayden and Betty Friedan.
Historical analogy: View the idea of Germany as an analogy to the Democratic Party from 1932 onward. Like FDR's New Deal Coalition, the Holy Roman Empire lasted for quite a long time, 963 years according to
Wikipedia.
Ultimately, the Holy Roman Empire could not last forever, and was ultimately dissolved in 1806, when Napolean's forces entered. I would compare the period from the Peace of Westphalia to Francis' abidication was a gradual parellel to the 1968 Presidential Election, where the "Law and Order" electorate voted against Humphrey for both Nixon and Wallace. The subsequent disunity and infighting amongst the German principalities could be compared to the infighting within the Democratic Party between the "New Left" radicals comprised of groups like the SDS or NOW or NARAL, and the old-time blue collar members who would become part of the "Silent Majority."
After the Napoleanic Wars, the empire was replaced with the Confederation of the Rhine, and subsequently the German Confederation, which could pass for the Democratic Party from 1972 to roughly the recent past (ie. five years or so, before the rise of the blogosphere.) The Confederation was weak and nominal, not a real state, but a quasi-indepedent entity comprising of Austria, Prussia, and other countries (ie., the disjointed Democratic Party of the '70s and '80s.)
Austria, which dominated this confederation until the rise of Prussian regional hegemony, would be analogous to the DLC. Austria, with the help of Klemens von Metternich, would serve as a barrier to stop German nationalism (as the Metternich system, post-Congress of Vienna, was to maintain a geopolitical status quo, especially one that favored Metternich's own country.) The equivalent of Metternich would probably be a fusion of Al From, Bruce Reed, and the Clintons.
Kos, like Bismarck, is seeking to build a stronger Democratic Party through means of realpolitik. Like Bismarck, Kos is seeking to "unite the clans," so the speak, but under a new umbrella within the Democratic Party (think of the netroots and "Libertarian Democrats" as being analogous to Prussia.) To restore the glory days of Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy (Holy Roman Empire), Kos is seeking to rid the party of the "Austrian" menace known as the DLC. Just as Bismarck waged wars against Denmark and Austria, Kos is leading an intra-party charge against people like Lieberman, and spineless incompetents in D.C. who would rather maintain a Metternich-style status quo. But instead of Bismarck's "Blood and Iron" policy, we are seeing "Blogs and Ballots."
Will a Franco-Prussian War equivalent be so far off? Where a Democratic President or slew of Congressional candidates not only defeat the GOP candidates, but do so under the "Libertarian Democrat" umbrella and unequivocally state what they stand for instead of running their campaigns in a political paralysis fearful of the staid politics of the 1960's? Will we see candidates who can build a cohesive Democratic Party NOT torn by the demanding and scattered identity groups?
If this can be accomplished on a wide scale (races such as MT-Sen and WY-AL are previews of this strategy, but we have yet to see this on a macro level) then we will see Kos being introduced at the White House by a reasonably progressive/libertarian-leaning Democratic President, a la Bismarck being present at Versailles for Kaiser Wilhelm I's coronation.