For 2012, I am resolving to focus on strengthening my 3 P's: Persuasion, Positivity and Pissing on TV.
PERSUASION:
Calling people who agree with your political opponents names and immediately writing them off as unconvinceable fools solely on the basis that they disagree with you on certain issues is a surefire way to not convince them to agree with you on anything. Instead, we have to figure out ways to out-persuade the loudmouth voices on ultra-right-wing talk radio, cable and other news outlets, and 30-second billionaire-funded demon sheep ads.
I am not arguing that we, as a progressive community are guilty of name-calling any more than our political opponents. The evidence is probably to the contrary. But having said that, this year we were not able to convince most Americans that putting progressives in power is a good thing. We have to do better. After Citizens United, money speaks loudly, but luckily, so do we. So let's resolve to speak even louder.
We don't need to work on our "compromising-our-belief" skills, but we do need to work on our persuasion skills. That means we need to take a close look at the language we use when we speak. I'll give you an example:
I believe in equal rights, a strong social safety-net, and a tax structure that disincentivizes the hoarding of wealth by dynastic private entities, encourages a free market, and that makes sure smaller market participants don't get burned. That means I support polices like an Estate Tax, strong Social Security, Medicare, and Marriage Equality (but I didn't have to use those words to want them to succeed). These views are not far-left. They're not socialist. I see them as moderate, even if 80% of Americans don't. My point is: those are all amorphous terms. Whether or not we agree with the Orwellian Luntzification of them, words like "liberal" and "welfare," mean very specific (and unchangeably-negative) things to many Americans.
To accomplish our policy goals, it is more productive to reclassify them under different categories than attempting to alter our adversaries' misbegotten, yet firmly-ingrained schemas (yeah, I just got all psychology on you). Also, conservatives are able to convince people to vote against their own interests by manipulating language. Rather than try to "manipulate it back," we need to think outside the chatter-box and use language to our advantage more than we are often willing to (out of the desire to resist Luntz-style manipulation). Language is a tool used to accomplish communication, which in turn, is used to further societal ends. Language is not an ends unto itself. We don't need to save the word "liberal." We need to save what it once stood for. And if that means saying "moderationalist" or whatever I have to to convince people that giving more of their own money to billionaires is a bad idea, I am willing to do it as long as it doesn't hinder my ability to argue a more compelling idea.
POSITIVITY:
We need to take responsibility ourselves and figure out how to be positive about convincing people that progressive policies work. We can't just throw up our hands and say "to hell with you - you're a damn fool" even if at some gut level, we believe its true. Once again, my point is not that we do this more than the other side, but rather, we need to do it less, regardless of which side does it more.
As a door-to-door canvasser, I know persuasion is a tough gig and can foster negativity. As rewarding as canvassing and campaigning can be, in election cycles like these, it can also be unduly frustrating. But, as difficult as it may be, the solution is to not get outwardly mad. It's great to feel angry inside, but manage how you harness that anger. That's how we'll beat the Rove/Palin Tea Party and Mitt Romney in 2012 (call it a hunch). If, during canvassing, I encountered somebody that was diametrically opposed to my beliefs and who was enraged at my very presence, I followed a simple policy - I would just manifest more happiness, positivity, confidence. My goal: to leave them wondering "Gee...why am I so unhappy and angry and that guy wasn't?"
For the next two years, I propose we try a simple exercise that may take some will power. Don't express any lack of confidence that progressive policies won't be enacted. No matter how much Obama and other Dems triangulate, no matter how much crummy legislation is excreted out of the new House, let's assume, just as an experiment, that our policies will prevail. If not now, demand to know when. If encountering opposition, demand to know why. Above all, demand that our voices be heard, assume they will be heard, and if they are not, never give up.
SUMMING UP:
If somebody seems to be using rhetoric that we feel is uninformed and based in lies, we need to express that point in a way that makes them more likely to agree with us. We cannot express exasperated frustration every time we lose.
I am encouraged to see the positive energy re-emerging on this site, and among progressives as a whole.
Anger is a sign of desperation. It indicates an implicit lack of confidence - a ceding of control to one's foes.
We know that when people think clearly, with as much accurate information as possible, they usually make the right decision. We need to foster the conditions to allow for that clear-headedness among our peers. And yeah - you can call it Sanity.
If ultra-right-wing talk radio, cable and other news outlets, and 30-second billionaire-funded demon sheep ads make you angry - turn them off. Seriously, if you get mad watching TV, take your TV outside to the gutter, and leave it there to meet the wrath of your neighbors' incontinent pets. (That's the PISSING ON TV section - Gimme a break 3 P's is better than 2)
Stay focused, stay positive, and resolve for 2012 to work on changing something you can control (persuasion and positivity) rather than stewing about something you can't (Larry King's descent into senility).