Sponsors

This is Who We Are Email Print

Far better minds than mine (including that sharp instrument that lurks between Georgia10's ears) have been casting about for a solution to the perceived wonkishness of the Democratic policies.  There's a feeling that we're a piecemeal party.  We have a detailed position on everything -- usually several -- but we're lacking a definition of the core principles on which the party is built.  

Maybe it's only that I'm too old to make a connection with the current zeitgeist, but I don't see why Democrats need a new message, a new frame, or a new way of talking.  All we need is the courage to embrace the philosophy that propelled the party from its inception.

We're the party of the common man.  Sorry if that sounds simplistic (or sexist), but that's really all there is to it.

However, that simple phrase means a lot more than "Democrats pull for the little guy."  It means that Democrats stand behind the rights of every man or woman, no matter what their status.  More than that, it means that Democrats understand that there is a common good which may not be attained by each individual pursuing their own goals.

Again, that may sound simple, but it represents a huge and fundamental schism between the Democratic position and those of the Republicans.  Anyone who claims there's "really no difference between the parties," and who thinks a (mythical) moderate Republican is right on the border of being a democrat, has missed this critical, basic point.

If you've ever been forced to sit through an economics class, and even if you haven't, you're likely run into the Tragedy of the Commons.  This phrase encapsulates the understanding that a resource held in common and open to exploitation by all, is bound to be over-exploited until it losses its value.  The usual example is that of shared pasture land.  Left unregulated, each individual farmer stands to gain more by over-exploiting the pasture than he stands to lose through the degradation of the pasture lands.  So the pasture gets over-exploited until it's ruined.

Now, extend that idea of the commons to our shared National Parks, our shared off-shore resources, our shared atmosphere, our shared rights.  

Democrats recognize that the commons must be protected.  Republicans don't.

Left on their own, corporations gain more through over-exploitation of the environment than they lose through its degradation.  The common environment must be protected.

Left on their own, employers gain more through over-exploitation of their workers than they lose through injury and turnover.  Workers must be protected.

Left on their own, those who seek power gain more through over-exploitation of the tools of power than they lose through erosion of our rights.  Rights must be protected.

That's what Democrats are about.  This is who we are.

Republicans love to poke fun at phrases like "it takes a village," but that's the core of the Democratic philosophy, not some trite phrase.  If they get us to retreat from that idea, they've won the day.  And they've won far too many days of late.

In my little country church, part of the weekly ceremony calls on us to "proclaim loudly" what we believe, and the old German farmers in the pews take it seriously, belting out the words "Christ has died.  Christ is risen.  Christ will come again!"

Democrats should do no less.  Those things we hold in common need and deserve our protection from those who seek to extend the tragedy of the commons into our air, water, voting booth, and bedroom.

The American experiment is not about the "rugged individual."  It's about individuals brave enough and moral enough to set their own gain aside and work for the common good.  If that idea fails, it means far more than just the failure of the Democratic Party.

Common people working to common purpose to protect the common good.

The nation... can employ force instead of reason; it can substitute might for right; it can conquer weaker people; it can exploit their lands, appropriate their property and kill their people; but it cannot repeal the moral law or escape the punishment decreed for the violation of human rights. -- William Jennings Bryan, 1900

If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1802

Democratic concerns have not changed from the founding of the country to this day.  They don't need to be updated.  They don't need to be modernized.  They need to be repeated, loudly and often.


KEYWORDS: , ,

Sign up for a Complimentary Member Account... Join the community! It's fast. And it'll allow you to take advantage of all this site's great features!

< Smirkin' in the Rain | Where Are All the Superheroes? >
 Display:
But one of the things that bothers me is that Democrats seem to have a problem sticking together and communicating our shared progressive vision in a way that suits us all.

Instead, we feel the need for semantic independence, often to the detriment of our overall cause.

This is something that the right has addressed for many years and has decided that it is in their best interest to see the forest for the trees in terms of spreading a message -- regardless of how deceiving it might be.

Thus, the rise of Frank Luntz and the republican party to the pinnacle of US  political power.

Political Cortex -- Brain Food for the Body Politic

by Tom Ball on 06/19/2006 04:25:31 PM EST

 Display: