Quite some time ago, I was given a book entitled, "DIVIDED THEY FELL: The Demise of the Democratic Party, 1964-1996" by Ronald Radosh, the Senior Okin Professor of History at Adelphi University. Radosh is a self-described center-right Democrat. His premise was simple... The Democratic party was flirting with irrelevance because of its liberal views. The country, he argued, moved to the mainstream... to the center... and the Democratic party remain to the left and therefore out of popular favor with the views of the country.
I was thinking about this book earlier today as I was reading reactions to the news out of the primaries. This primary, it seems has become a referendum of sorts between the traditional Democrats and the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). How these two bodies are competing openly for the heart and soul of the overall Democratic party and the two distinctly divergent messages from each seems to be playing a large role in how I am viewing this primary season.
I became familiar with the message of the DLC around the time they really came to prominence... in 1992 with the election to the Presidency of William Jefferson Clinton. In the fall of 1992, Clinton won a decisive victory over George H. W. Bush, ushering in 8 years of Democratic leadership in the White House. As the must of nostalgia has now settled upon that time, it may be a bit hard to remember, but some left-leaning Democrats (odd that I have to make that distinction) were not over-joyed with his policies once he was ensconced in the Presidency. I remember that, because I was one who was disheartened. He shifted from some cherished liberal viewpoints and policies... Welfare to work, a chestnut still espoused by Sean Hannity is a prime example.
To me, Democrats were Democrats... and I assumed that Clinton did what he had to do because he had a hostile Congress. I have come to the conclusion that the Republicans taking control of Congress was only half the issue. The other half was the role of the DLC. I said earlier that I was familiar with the message, but that Democrats were Democrats. I was unfamiliar with the actual organization until about 2003.
For those of you unfamiliar, the following is the entry for the DLC in Wikipedia:
The Democratic Leadership Council is a non-profit corporation [1] that argues that the United States Democratic Party should shift away from traditionally populist positions. The DLC hails President Clinton as proof of the viability of third way politicians and as a DLC success story while progressives assert that Bill Clinton won campaigning as a populist only to abandon those positions after getting elected. Critics contend that the DLC is effectively a powerful, corporate-financed mouthpiece within the Democratic party that acts to keep Democratic Party candidates and platforms sympathetic to corporate interests and the interests of the wealthiest one percent.
This differs from the DNC, which is the campaign and electoral arm of the Democratic party primarily. The DNC however is charged with the promotion of the Democratic Party platform, organizing the convention, and well, the important task of getting Democrats elected to Federal, State, and Local offices.
Basically, the DLC is the embodiment of Radosh's book. In order to win elections in America, you have to be in the center... arguably where the majority of the country is. My problem with that is, if you start in the center, and then have to compromise with, say Republicans, to get something done, doesn't that mean you are moving further right? How far exactly to the Right can you move and still be considered a Democrat? At my most cynical regarding the DLC, I think you can move all the way to the right and still keep the (D) designation, just keep supporting their policies and they'll have you.
I mentioned that I first heard of the actual DLC in 2003... This was around the time that Dr. Howard Dean was gaining momentum and making a wider name for himself in Democratic politics. Dean, as many of you recall was vehemently opposed by the DLC for his "unpopular views" on Iraq (never should have gone) and Bush's tax cuts (my God man... how much money does a billionaire need?). Now, given Dr. Dean's views mirrored my own, you can imagine whose corner I was in on that one.
But, the DLC got its way... they pushed back against the Dean-tide and the nominee was John Kerry. He got my full support... but I remained a bit leery of the DLC. A lot of this is due to their endorsement of the war in Iraq, which I opposed from day 1. It's not that I am a pacifist (well, I am sort of) or that I am against all war.... I actually supported the war in Afghanistan. That was my primary reason for opposing a foray into Iraq. The necessary resources, money, and manpower would be diverted away from the war we actually had the mandate to fight. My leeriness of the DLC also stemmed from their manipulation of the process. They didn't want Dean, we didn't get Dean. Very similar to the Republican establishment and McCain... they didn't want McCain, he didn't get the nomination.
Now we are in Presidential Primary season yet again. And, once again, there is a DLC candidate as one of the front-runners. I am speaking of Senator Clinton. Now, in the interest of full-disclosure, I will support whomever gets the nomination. Unlike in 2004 when I was backing Dean, I am not actually picking a candidate in the primary. Whomever the nominee is will have my full support. My ire toward the DLC has not extended to Senator Clinton as yet (although I could kick some of her subordinates in the teeth). I can only hope that, after the ferocity of this moment in time has passed, the majority of Democrats can reach the same conclusion and come together to support the eventual nominee.
(note: John Edwards used to be a member of the DLC. Barack Obama got added to the list without his knowledge and asked to be removed. http://www.blackcommentator.com/48/48_cover.html)
I do not mean to suggest that there is anything fundamentally wrong with being a member of the DLC, but, with the nation reeling after too many years of hard-Right rule and policies, it is ready to embrace the standards of the true Democratic party... The old Democratic standards that the DLC rejected a being too liberal.... help for the poor and children, environmental protection, national security not preemptive war, equal opportunity for all, and restoration of our civil liberties. Now is the time for Democrats to take back the country... but now is also the time for those of us who embrace these ideals to tell the DLC that they abandon them, and us, at their own peril. The country is ready to move to the left. The DLC should join them.
Who owns the heart and soul of the Democratic party...?
We do.