Cross-posted from http://www.StandforJohn.com
Articles like this one about Edwards's forceful, unabashed support of the labor movement in America remind me time and time again why John Edwards must win this presidency.
That support, along with many other moves, is a signal that John Edwards won't be what I like to call a Cut-Your-Losses-Democrat (CYLD).
A CYLD is a Democrat who sees the American political landscape as an immovable, fixed entity, one that must not be led but instead catered to. Faced with the many advances made by the right wing in this country, the CYLD will, rather than push back and undo the damage, simply accept the advance as an irreversible, unchanging fact of political life. In short, a CYLD will cut our collective losses and accept a more right-wing America.
For example, a CYLD would say:
- "The 'Global War on Terror' is synonymous with fighting terrorists in the minds of Americans. Yes, it's what allows George Bush to do horrible things in America and abroad, but it's just too damn late."
- "America thinks Labor Unions are big bad bogeymen, let's cut our losses and avoid seeming too close to 'big labor.'"
- "FOX News is a major mainstream media organization. Yes it's conservative, but there's nothing we can do about it now but play ball."
- "Lobbyists and special interests are just how business is done in Washington. Yes they undermine progressive goals, but we have to play their game."
This list could go on and on. But what I describe is the all too familiar tendency for Democrats, some who might even call themselves progressives, to cut our losses and cede crucial ground to the right wing in America, ground that is vital in holding if we ever want to see a flourishing progressive movement in this country.
I'd say that most contenders in the Democratic nomination race are CYLDs, or at least show strong tendencies. Yes, they all stood up to FOX, but only after you-know-who did first. And there have been other strong, unanimous showings by the candidates, but they all usually have one thing in common: John Edwards did it first.
None of them have called George Bush's War on Terror the sham that it is. None of them have come out swinging for the labor movement. And none of them have made poverty -- the Democratic Party's foundational issue -- a central theme of their campaign.
The antidote to a CYLD, of course, is one thing: leadership. But leadership isn't easy, it's risky. It's risky to take on a major, distortive, right-wing news outlet that is broadcast into homes across America. It's risky to show support for a labor movement that is subject to daily negative PR by a corporatist, right-wing campaign. It's risky to break with a "War on Terror" slogan that for many Americans has served as a stand-in for a real, honest, effective foreign policy. And it's risky to make poverty a central cause when so many snidely call it an "obscure issue."
But what we also know to be true is that it's only through those risks that we'll ever achieve a truly progressive America. In short, John Edwards knows that in cutting our losses, we also cut our victories.
John Edwards won't cut our losses. There have been too many, and they are too important. And in the end, they mean everything.