I've been reading more and more analysis about the rise of 'conservatism' in the US, and have some suggestion for lines of attack.
But if the British experience is anything to go by, Democrats will also have to think long and hard about what they stand for and, while keeping hold of their core values, find new ways of putting them into practice.
One way of doing this is to look at how conservatives have captured the 'pro business' vote. Democrats can't let them get away with this. Conservative may be pr-corporation, pro-Enron, pro-Halliburton, but they are clearly bad news for entrepreneurs and small businesses.
I think this can be part of your strategy for defeating the Republicans, while being true to values of social justice and equity.
One of the radical changes that the British labour party went through after its FOURTH consecutive defeat in 1992 was reformulating its values on the role of the market, state control, poverty and social justic. I was part of that process, and while many on the old left or right simply see New Labour as an opportunistic attempt at 'triangulation', they miss the profound shift in attitudes to the free market. With the fall of the Berlin wall, the rising costs of the welfare and various disastrous attempts at state ownership of industry, we arrived at certain key conclusions.
1. EMPLOYMENT was a much better way of alleviating poverty than handouts and welfare payments.
2. A THRIVING ENTREPRENEURIAL MARKETPLACE was the best way of increasing employment - and most jobs came from small businesses and individual talent - NOT large corporations.
3. Most inequality in the market was caused by BARRIERS TO ENTRY. Lack of accesss education, health, childcare was the main reason people were left behind.
4. Instead of a FREE MARKET, New Labour politicians began to formulate the idea of a FAIR SOCIAL MARKET. The role of the state was to lower the barriers of entry, provide regulation, infrastructure, education and health so that all individuals could have access to the benefits of work.
Since American politics is so different, I'm not sure how this narrative might apply over there. But it seems to me that the Republicans won by creating a coalition between conservatism with classic free market republican values. This is an uneasy alliance, and one of the ways to defeat the Republicans (as it was to defeat the conservatives in 1997) might be to separate the authoritarians from the economic libertarians. You could do this with several wedge issues.
1. HEALTH AND EDUCATION. The classic free market theory of competition requires talent to be able to enter to the market place. But if poor families have little or no access to healthcare or education, how can they compete with the children from privileged backgrounds. 'No Child Left Behind' is a gesture in this direction, but I'm sure every statistic from the last four years, and the next four years ahead, will show a growth in child poverty, a more unequal and class based system developing, in which 'birth right' rather than talent is the key indicator of success.
2. THE ROLE OF CORPORATES. These are often attacked among liberal circles as some kind of Chomskian conspiracy, which seems to ignore the facts that corporations are much more transient and temporary. I forget the precise statistic (I could look it up) but something like half the top 20 corporations didn't exist ten years ago.
Rather than attack corporate excess from a conspiratorial quasi Leninist position, why not point out their role in snuffing out small and medium sized businesses: the way they lobby for government contracts, twist legislation to provide an unfair playing ground. Michael Moore's depiction of the small guy fighting corporate outsourcing and downsizing fails to point out where salvation might lie - it won't be through subsidy or some new deal government created job - it will be through training, innovation, and some smaller more flexible enterprises.
The government doesn't owe them a job - but it has a duty to bust monopolistic trusts, unfair regulation, lack of access to training, childcare and health provision.
3. CLOSED MARKETS versus FAIR AND FREE MARKETS.
Conservatism seems to be a form of aristocracy because it creates a self serving elite, a closed market for its members. It looks for economic and social stability in a class of protected like-minded inward looking groups.
Conservatism serves the interests of only a minority of Americans. So far it has managed to gain majority support by still appealing to older style republicans who believe in the enlightment ideas of secularism and liberty, but still associate the Democrats with big government and state control.
4. ATTACK AND REGROUP
The Republicans currently comprise an uneasy alliance of social authoritarians and economic libertarians. You will never win over the social authoritarians, and everything they believe is contrary to what you value. But the economic libertarians could be persuaded that the market place needs key strategic regulation to make it function properly
But you also have to renew your own base. This means remaining true to your values, but not being wedded to outdated solutions (many of them from the 1930s) to the glaring gaps of social justice.
You have to point out that Democrats believe in social justice and liberty MORE than they believe in big government. You have to show, through a NEW liberalism and that equal rights and equality of opportunity can be pursued through other means as well.
In short, you have to lose the tag of liberal elitism and argue once again that you are the party of the many, and they are the party of the few.