The Old/New Democrat Debate is Stale

[WillyBrandt]

My thesis: The New / Old Democrat debate is stale. The real problem is that Al From, the DLC head, is a stupid asshole.

There has always been a spectrum of opinion within the Democratic Party, back to the time of Jefferson. Some of us are more liberal and are very suspicious of corporate power; others of us take a more benign view, that within certain constraints, corporations aren't the problem.

I think this distinction has little to do with policy issues at the end of the day, and more to do with manuverers who think that the Party must be a blury mess, sapped of pride, if it is to have power. Think about it: are the policy distinctions really why folks are angry?

Anti-DLC liberals like myself are sometimes pro-free trade; proud New Democrats are sometimes wary of NAFTA.

Regulation can help the market work better, as Securities regulation shows. Free-market ideas, like (certain kinds of) pollution trading, can aid common goals.

So why the bickering? It's a matter of political strategy. The DLC has aided in the enervation of the Democratic Party; if the DLC once seved a role, it is now obsolete. Likewise, Jerry Brown liberalism, as much as I like it, is an unfit model for building a large dominating coalition.

A New New Democratic Party is being built, and its structure is unsure. But I'm pretty confident that those arguing the old debates are wasting their time. Grassroots organizing, identifying and pushing for progressive causes, and fighting the reactionary right are the foundation of our new party. It's possible to be a proud Democrat, not at the mercy of triangulation strategies, and still claim power. It's possible to be a proud Democrat and not be terribly concerned about the liberal/moderate distinction, because the distinction lies more in labels than fact.

The only thing that is keeping this useless debate alive is that moron Al From, the head of the DLC, who provides worthless baiting and election strategy while standing next to Gingrich, or writing in the Wall Street Journal. Others in the DLC do good work; its CEO is just a horrible pain in the ass, suffused with his old self-importance.

Intelligent and energetic centrists are going over to the New Democrat Network. Resurgent liberals are working through MoveOn and MeetUp. Al From is a dinosaur; the sooner his policial life goes extinct, the sooner centrist and liberals can happily unite for a progressive future.

[mot78]

1. Here here!

I consider myself to be fairly moderate, just not Al From moderate. From's problem is that he wants to repudiate half of our party. The DLC can still be relevant, but it has to get rid of the divisive leadership, and try and unite the party.

[WillyBrandt]

2. Exactly: What is Al From good for nowadays?

He pisses of moderates and liberals, he makes worthless distinction between good and bad populism, and corporations have no use for him, given that the GOP is in their pocket.

[mot78]

3. Well, he's good for helping the Green Party grow bigger

[WillyBrandt]

4. Right-On! People want pride in their political identities

And it's hard to be proud of wonkish thinktank pseudo-centrism.

[lastknowngood]

5. I agree with a lot your ideas however the battle right now as I

see it. The centrist and Conservative democrats want to ignore the liberal and use the word as a purgatives just as the repugnants do.
perhaps a better definition is needed. I'm quite Conservative on some issues and very liberal on others. The other Dem's better learn that the energy form this party comes from a liberal base which they take for granted via the triangle system. If you have good ideas and express them well people will respond, if you have crap ideas and can express them well people will respond. I'm not sure where the answer is but I know my country is leaving me at an accelerating rate.

[WillyBrandt]

6. I agree with you entirely

Democrats need to understand that, compared with the crazy GOP, they agree with each other about almost everything. The differences tend to be at the margins.

Conservative and moderate Democrats need to realize that liberals provide the energy, fire, and support to the Party in a way that slick consultants never can. And mocking liberals only damages the party.

Liberal Democrats need to realize that appealing to the base is good, but it is not enough: the party must be a big tent, and the rhetoric (NOT the policy!) needs to be shifted in this direction. You must have an inclusive, not stubborn exclusive one. Liberals must combine oppenness and pride

[wyldwolf]

7. In the spirit of the original poster's point, the reverse ...

...of what you wrote is also true. The further left democrats want to ignore the moderates and use words like "republican lite" and such.

[WillyBrandt]

8. "Republican-Lite" served its purpose: but the spines have mostly arrived n

Too many centrist Dems were NOT standing up and fighting the right. The Dems needed a good fucking kick in the ass, unfair though it sometimes was.

But you're right--this kind of purist rhetoric is no longer useful, and is needlessly divisive.

[wyldwolf]

9. The way I see it...

Neither side can win without the other.

But the vitriolic attacks on moderates and the DLC here at DU is very divisive.

[WillyBrandt]

10. I think it has died down a bit--don't you

I mean, it still exists, but I'm really pretty hopeful about party unity once the nominee is chosen.

I do have one question: Do you think Al From sucks? Note, as a fellow Clark supporter, I don't mean the DLC or NDN, or Simon Rosenberg or Bruce Reed, but Al From himself

[wyldwolf]

12. Actually, I think it has picked back up here on DU...

..because it has become more obvious that a DLC member or DLC-type will be the nominee. I believe the further left feel excluded over this fact and may not fully realize that a Kerry/Edwards/Clark/Dean and even Lieberman presidency would be better for them than Bush.

As someone involved heavily in real world politics, this has never been an issue with democrats I know who are actively campaigning and working for the dem cause.

[WillyBrandt]

15. Fair enough--I just don't think the DLC is relevant

They're fighting the last war. We're fighting Bush, not Reagan/Thatcher. We already have economic credibility; we just have an emaciated party.

NDN is a far better centrist front, just as MoveOn is a better liberal front.

[wyldwolf]

16. Perhaps. But if the DLC is irrelevent

..then why are they taken as such a serious threat by many?

[WillyBrandt]

18. Because people are crazy.

I'll give you that. There's no giant DLC conspiracy--there is barely a DLC: it's just From being a pain in the butt, and a whole bunch of Washington Democrats with their heads up their asses. Though the last part is changing.

There was an excellent piece in the Washington Monthly called the "Myth of the Democratic Establishment" that I recommend.

The Democratic Party is actually being built before our eyes, and it's exciting. What I like best is that the liberal/moderate split isn't that important. Apart from message boards, it's barely a split. Some of those who froth at the mouth most are moderate; some of the most rabid liberals care more about balancing the fucked up budget budget than welfare re-reform.

Like I said, the DLC is as obsolete as Jerry Brown style rousing. It's yesterdays fight.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

11. Well, how many elections have the Old Democrats won recently?

The DLC *wins* elections. We aren't the Green party, we are the Democratic Party. We should all be thankful to Al From for keeping the Democratic party relevant and not just a social club of a bunch of purists.

[WillyBrandt]

13. Which have Al From won?

A majority party turned into a spineless ever-shrinking one.

The only--only--thing giving From any credibility among the brainless is the idea that the DLC got Clinton elected. Well, it was Clinton's amazing political gifts and talents that did that; but the sad side-effect of Clinton's triangulation was the rise of Gingrich, DeLay, and Bush.

Gore did shittily when he embraced wonkish DLC think-tankery; and he did better when he went for regular-folks populism.

And the less the primary candidates have listened to that invertebrae clown, that clownish inverbetrae From the better their fortunes have fared. The irony is that From's nemesis, Howard Dean, was surpassed only when his opponents ignored From's advice and followed Dean's example.

[wyldwolf]

14. Exactly right!

[Q]

17. Whew...I see the same type of hatred of 'liberals' from the Right...

...and now we have to put up with the same shit from the so-called 'moderates'.

- You may not have to worry about those 'purist' liberals for long...as many of them are leaving the party in droves.

- And really...I wouldn't brag too much about the DLC 'wins'. Perhaps you haven't noticed...but the entire government is under the control of the Republican party. How many more wins like this can the party withstand?

[mdguss]

19. Re: From Wanting to "Get rid of the Left"

Some on the left either try to say that, "you're not a real Democrat unless," or "we won't vote for you unless."

That kind of stuff drives people nuts. Then there's the fact that some of the left have waged open warfare on moderate Democrats in swing districts (ie the running of Green candidates). I don't blame Al From if he is upset at that.

Then again, some of us more to the center, have a bad habit of ignoring those on the left.

The point is we agree more than we disagree. We can work together or go down in flames together.

[Q]

20. The flames are licking at your butts...

...and the DLC still insists that they'd rather go after the 'swing' voter than appeal to the base. The 'base' isn't anti-corporation...but they're sick and tired of them being in bed with the federal government and together writing laws that are 'anti-people'.

- Worse than being 'anti-corporation' is giving corporations a blank check and allowing them to rape our environment for the sake of a bigger profit...that never does seem to trickle down to the workers.