I'm going to do something which, if memory serves, I have yet to do at Command Post ... I'm going to post original writing on the Op-Ed page (those other Op-Eds have been from Alan E. Brain, a different Alan altogether ... I'm the co-founder, he's the rock-solid Australian contributor).

For me Command Post has always been about Journalism By The People, For The People, and not about a platform for my own writing, so I’ve stayed away from this page. Today, though, perhaps because of my closeness to the news, my participation in the two conventions, and my unwillingness to publicly impose my "side" on others, I've been asked all morning about my take on the election. And so while I traditionally eschew self-punditry here, this time, I actually do have something I'd like to share.

So here goes ...

I'll start with an email I received this morning ... one typical of the queries I've received throughout the day:

I don’t know if you care about what I have to say or not, but I have to share this with other election watchers.

1. The moral majority is bigger than I knew, it has spoken, and I am afraid.
2. David Gergen has one of the best quotes of the night at around 1am on CNN. I’m paraphrasing - Democrats will wake up on Wednesday and feel alone, isolated and wonder what America they’re living in.

I'll post here the gist of my reply.

Yes, the Democrats awake in a strange and foreign land ... a land with Red as far as the eye can see. But frankly, I don't think the moral majority is the issue. If anything, it's an oversimplification in explaining the election. I just don't believe that there are that many people who voted Republican based on gay marriage and abortion ... at least, not appreciably more than voted Democrat on the same issues.

For the Democrats I think the reality is worse than that: The Democratic party has lost its ability to connect, in a compelling way, with much of middle (read, “average”) America. Operationally, they're still planning strategy as if the GOP is the party of the wealthy and powerful. But look at the distribution of votes last night ... the huge swaths of Red nearly everywhere where major cities are absent ... and it's clear the GOP isn't the party of the Country Club, it's the party of the Rotary Club.

Of course, discourse like this doesn't help:

Why were we in this fight in the first place? Because terrible leaders are doing terrible things to our country and calling this wonderful. Because radical reactionaries are trying to impose their imperialist schemes on whoever they wish and calling this just. Because amoral oligarchs are determined to enhance their slice of the economic pie and calling this the natural order. Because flag-wrapped ideologues want to chop up civil liberties and call this security. Because myopians are in charge of America’s future.

That sort of language simply doesn't resonate with large numbers of "average" folks in any town in America. What's worse, the sentiment, "I know better than you and you're just not bright enough to see it," strikes as snobbish and elitist, and alienates the Rotary Club.

The fact is that the Republicans have a philosophy ... a narrative ... that works for lots of people who disagree with the President on gay marriage and abortion. That narrative: we'll let you keep more of your money, we'll keep you safe internationally through strength, and we'll keep government off your back.

It's an old Republican narrative. Ronald Reagan first articulated it in his Goldwater endorsement speech ("A Time Of Choosing") in 1964:

This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down -- [up] man's old -- old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.

In this vote-harvesting time, they use terms like the "Great Society," or as we were told a few days ago by the President, we must accept a greater government activity in the affairs of the people. But they've been a little more explicit in the past and among themselves; and all of the things I now will quote have appeared in print. These are not Republican accusations. For example, they have voices that say, "The cold war will end through our acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism." Another voice says, "The profit motive has become outmoded. It must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state." Or, "Our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century." Senator Fullbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the President as "our moral teacher and our leader," and he says he is "hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document." He must "be freed," so that he "can do for us" what he knows "is best." And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as "meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government."

Well, I, for one, resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me, the free men and women of this country, as "the masses." This is a term we haven't applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that, "the full power of centralized government" -- this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.

Old, but still relevant. Indeed, you have to work awfully hard to find a Democratic narrative that can compare ... that isn't simply "we're not what the Republicans are." The fact is: there IS no compelling Democratic counter-narrative. Witness Mother Jones:

It’s plain why this [the Republican] story works as well as it does. It presents a classic hero and a journey that reaches down through the brain into the gut. And Republicans can translate it into simple, clear lines of action: Wage war and don’t stop. Cut taxes. Put bad guys in jail, or to death.

Many on the left harbor the delusion that Republicans can be dislodged by criticism of this story. There are two main styles of critique. The first is ironic and humorous (see Al Franken). The second style is serious and raging, bordering on caustic (see Tim Robbins' “Embedded.”)

But, by definition, critics are at the margins. However loud they shout from the sidelines, they’ll never get in the game. The game is for those who can tell a story ...

... What’s the [Democratic] story here? It puts forth two main characters: There’s this greedy, powerful character named “Special Interest” who has been kicking ass! Special Interest runs the political and corporate worlds. Hell, Special Interest runs the world. S/he has a penthouse in Trump Tower, a chalet on Aspen Mountain and a ranch in Montana. S/he spends the morning on the phone with Wall Street, making a few billion, and the afternoon on the phone with Washington, making the money tax-free. Then, at night …

Up against “Special Interest” is a perennial loser called “Everyday American.” Loser has a nagging spouse and impeccably average kids and a long commute to and from a cubicle. At home, the toilet leaks but it’s hard to find a decent plumber. The cell phone keeps blinking out, but the new ones are so expensive. But then again, Loser thinks, “I’m worth it.” So s/he logs onto to Internet — wants to save the sales tax — and goes to bed excited, wondering whether UPS will take two or three days, and whether there will be someone at home to sign for the package, and whether s/he is as truly, deeply pathetic as it seems.

Which of these characters would you rather be? John Kerry and Bob Shrum don’t condescend to give you the choice. They tell you, “You’re Loser.” You secretly hate them for this. You may hate their opponents more, and vote for Kerry with clenched teeth. Or you may vote for Nader (at five points in the May Gallup poll). Or you may (like huge chunks of the core Democratic constituency) just not vote.

Whereas the right-wing has a good story that they believe, liberals have a lame story--and they don’t even believe it.

Last night Bob Novak said that the Democrats are now "in the wilderness." Regardless of the good Electoral College showing of John Kerry, the whole damn country is Red ... the White House, the Senate, the House, the Supreme Court, the Governorships, local legislatures, school boards. But it's not uncharted territory ... the Republicans were in the wilderness when LBJ demolished Goldwater (and the entire Republican party) in 1964 ... a time when people wondered if the Republicans would ever win a national election again.

The Democrats can find their way back, but they first must craft the compelling narrative ... the political philosophy that will be relevant to Rotary members all across this land: We believe in this land no man is a loser ... that everyone has potential. And if times get tough, which they will, we'll be there to give you a hand up, but never a hand out. Oh ... and we'll keep you safe, too might be a start. Clinton had that narrative nailed ... but when he left office, the narrative left with him.

Before the DNC I heard Mark Shields note that Reagan said his inspiration was FDR, and that the next great Democratic leader will say his inspiration was Ronald Reagan. He's right. The Democrats are never going to get America to come to them; they must go to America ... an America that has changed from when it considered the Democratic Party the party of the "average" man, as it did in 1964. They must articulate a clear and compelling political philosophy and narrative ... here's what we stand for! ... and must then leave their ivory tower and go to the field ... spreading that compelling narrative one school board race ... one Rotary Club ... at a time.

Posted By Alan at November 3, 2004 12:32 PM | TrackBack