What does it mean to be a Democrat today?

[quaoar]

What does being a Democrat mean to you? Are we nothing more than a collection of progressive policies or do we actually stand for something that can be easily conveyed to the average voter?

This column in the Washington Post by Harold Meyerson sums up the challenges ahead:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55689-2004Nov16.html

Time was when the Democrats were the party of economic justice and opportunity, the party that championed emerging constituencies as well as classes: Catholics, blacks, women. They were the party of the many against the powerful, which played a lot better in the electoral arena than being the party of the one against the many. But, with the signal exception of Clinton's '92 campaign -- a brilliant mix of economic progressivism and cultural centrism -- the Democrats haven't been able to persuade enough voters to choose them as their champions for a very long time. And Clinton's ability to deliver on that promise once in office was a sometime thing. Full employment made life better for the people at the bottom of the economy. But the erosion of the decent jobs of the old industrial economy never really stopped (and, of course, has escalated greatly under Bush), and the jobs that replaced them more often than not offered lower pay, fewer benefits and less security. The Wal-Mart economy has grown on both the Democrats' and Republicans' watch.

From Ronald Reagan to Newt Gingrich and now to George Bush, the Republicans have developed a clear response to these changes: They are the party of risk, which they call "opportunity." This is most certainly not why Bush won reelection; Americans are not pining to pay for their health coverage or retirement or college tuition with no assist from their employers or their government.

Historically the Democrats have been the party of security, but that's an identity they need to reclaim. The challenge of radical Islam demands more of them than a foreign policy of realpolitik; empiricism -- while a welcome counter to Bush's indifference to fact -- is not enough. The challenge of a global labor market demands more of them than a commitment to mid-career retraining; defending the American middle class means creating the kind of global standards that the Democrats created on the national level during the 1930s and '40s, the time of their greatest popularity. That's a daunting challenge, one that requires the Democrats to think and develop a story about the new threats to the American dream. If they do they'll come up with a more plausible list of culprits -- and solutions -- than the Republicans ever will. They may even come up with a new sense of self, with a purpose, with a theme.

[SaintAnne]

1. a plan

oh if only we had a plan, if only if only... if only

[codegreen]

2. it means being in a party that generally ignores its base, doesn't listen,

constantly succumbs to the media spin, refuses to match the verocity of the rightwing word for word, is more concerned with appealing to disinterested uneducated centrists and dumbing issues down than elevating the consciousness of the people, consistently suppresses its own leftwing, leaves voters apathetic at the process because the only electable parties are 'extreme right' and 'ho-hum center', won't take a firm stand for human rights when it's the right thing to do (i.e. condemn depleted uranium weapons, endorse same-sex marraige instead of running away from it, demand _universal healthcare for all_ as a human right, demand lowering or removing the profit from the health industry, demand a _living wage_...

that's what being a Democrat means to me. it means having worthless leadership and a hollow, barely anti-Republican party, a party that refuses to do and be what it must.