http://www.poppolitics.com/archives/2002/04/Liberal-Pride
QUOTE
Liberal Pride
Can the left wing learn from the right?
by Steven C. Day
4.16.02
The status of liberal politics in America can be summed up quite easily: People like liberal policies and programs. They just don’t like liberalism.
The dichotomy is remarkable. On issue after issue — increased spending for public education, legislation prohibiting discrimination against gays and lesbians, protection of the environment and opposition to tax cuts — public opinion polls show that the majority of Americans embrace liberal rather than conservative positions. Yet when asked to identify their own political philosophy, nearly twice as many respondents describe themselves as conservatives than as liberals, according to an annual Harris poll. And this result has held true for more than 30 years.
Why the dichotomy? Well consider this: No one would expect a consumer to buy a washing machine from a salesman who appeared embarrassed by the quality of the brand he was selling. So why should we be surprised that relatively few people are buying into liberalism right now, when liberal politicians routinely act as though they are ashamed of the word?
The truth is that the vast majority of progressive Democrats running for public office avoid the word liberal like the plague. When asked to describe their political philosophies, most respond in one of three ways: Some dodge the question all together by saying, “I don’t like labels.” Others fall back on the always dependable, “I consider myself to be a moderate.” And a few brave souls go so far as to describe themselves as progressives (Jon Corzine) or populists (Tom Harkin). But you stand a better chance of being hit by a meteor than you have of hearing any serious candidate for public office, other than a few running in safe Democratic districts, actually embrace the “L” word.
Call this pragmatism, or call it cowardice, either way it’s clear that most liberal politicians are scared to death of being tagged as, well, liberal politicians. They think it’s the kiss of death. Nor is this insecurity limited to politicians — it cuts deeply into the rank and file. To borrow a word from Jimmy Carter, there is a malaise infecting the liberal community, a sense of hopelessness and defeat.
The root cause for this probably goes as far back as the presidential election of 1972, when Richard Nixon walloped George McGovern, taking 60 percent of the vote to McGovern’s 37.5 percent. The size of Nixon’s landslide was widely interpreted as a repudiation of McGovern’s liberal views. When this was followed by losses in the 1980s by Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis, it became the conventional wisdom that a liberal Democrat could never be elected president.
While the election of Bill Clinton in 1992 was a welcomed interruption to the long line of Republican presidents, it hardly represented a liberal resurgence. Clinton was, after all, a Democratic Leadership Council-style moderate. And any hope liberals had that Clinton’s election heralded the return of progressive politics was crushed two years later when Gingrich & Co. grabbed control of the House of Representatives.
Meanwhile, conservative politicians and pundits have done a masterful job of discrediting the word liberal in the public mind, using phrases like “bleeding heart liberals,” ‘tax-and-spend liberals’ and “big government liberals,” even when describing programs that reflect conservative values. The conservatives have managed to control the spin.
So there we have the story of modern American liberalism: Pounded at the polls, slandered by the right wing and finally abandoned by much of the left wing. When you think about it, it’s a miracle that 19 percent of the public, as reported by Harris, still describe themselves as liberals.
None of this is to say, however, that a rebirth of liberalism as a credible political force is out of the question. Not at all. While the word liberal may presently be in ill-repute, the progressive spirit is still very much alive in America, as poll results make clear. History has shown that political redemption, for those out of office and out of favor, can occur much more quickly than anyone expects. Our friends to the right know this well.
You have to be “age-challenged” like me to remember it, but there actually was a time when the fate of conservative politics seemed every bit as hopeless as that of liberal politics today. The year was 1964. Lyndon Johnson had just shellacked Barry Goldwater, winning with 61 percent of the vote. Many commentators predicted that this resounding defeat of Goldwater, the poster boy of American conservatism, would represent the death knoll of the conservative movement.
To their credit, however, conservatives didn’t give up. They didn’t hide from the word conservative and they didn’t declare themselves to be “New Republicans.” They fought like hell for the principles they believed in, as misguided as I personally believe those principles to be. And a mere four years later, Richard Nixon was elected president; 12 years after that, Ronald Reagan, the new conservative poster boy, was swept into office.
Liberals need to ask themselves: If conservatives, who haven’t had an original thought since before Calvin Coolidge was president, are capable of pulling off this sort of political resurrection, shouldn’t we be as well?
The time for malaise is over. What’s needed now is pure and unadulterated liberal pride — no excuses, no apologies and, above all else, no fudge-words. We need to show the country the strength of our convictions. We need leaders who, when asked if they are liberals, will reply, “Hell yes, and here’s why.” We need the brass of James Carville, the political skill of Bill Clinton and the straight-shooting talk of Harry Truman. And speaking of Truman, we need to give ‘em hell.
America desperately needs a viable alternative to the current politics of greed. It needs a loyal opposition that actually opposes. So how about it liberals, are you ready to rumble?
Can the left wing learn from the right?
by Steven C. Day
4.16.02
The status of liberal politics in America can be summed up quite easily: People like liberal policies and programs. They just don’t like liberalism.
The dichotomy is remarkable. On issue after issue — increased spending for public education, legislation prohibiting discrimination against gays and lesbians, protection of the environment and opposition to tax cuts — public opinion polls show that the majority of Americans embrace liberal rather than conservative positions. Yet when asked to identify their own political philosophy, nearly twice as many respondents describe themselves as conservatives than as liberals, according to an annual Harris poll. And this result has held true for more than 30 years.
Why the dichotomy? Well consider this: No one would expect a consumer to buy a washing machine from a salesman who appeared embarrassed by the quality of the brand he was selling. So why should we be surprised that relatively few people are buying into liberalism right now, when liberal politicians routinely act as though they are ashamed of the word?
The truth is that the vast majority of progressive Democrats running for public office avoid the word liberal like the plague. When asked to describe their political philosophies, most respond in one of three ways: Some dodge the question all together by saying, “I don’t like labels.” Others fall back on the always dependable, “I consider myself to be a moderate.” And a few brave souls go so far as to describe themselves as progressives (Jon Corzine) or populists (Tom Harkin). But you stand a better chance of being hit by a meteor than you have of hearing any serious candidate for public office, other than a few running in safe Democratic districts, actually embrace the “L” word.
Call this pragmatism, or call it cowardice, either way it’s clear that most liberal politicians are scared to death of being tagged as, well, liberal politicians. They think it’s the kiss of death. Nor is this insecurity limited to politicians — it cuts deeply into the rank and file. To borrow a word from Jimmy Carter, there is a malaise infecting the liberal community, a sense of hopelessness and defeat.
The root cause for this probably goes as far back as the presidential election of 1972, when Richard Nixon walloped George McGovern, taking 60 percent of the vote to McGovern’s 37.5 percent. The size of Nixon’s landslide was widely interpreted as a repudiation of McGovern’s liberal views. When this was followed by losses in the 1980s by Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis, it became the conventional wisdom that a liberal Democrat could never be elected president.
While the election of Bill Clinton in 1992 was a welcomed interruption to the long line of Republican presidents, it hardly represented a liberal resurgence. Clinton was, after all, a Democratic Leadership Council-style moderate. And any hope liberals had that Clinton’s election heralded the return of progressive politics was crushed two years later when Gingrich & Co. grabbed control of the House of Representatives.
Meanwhile, conservative politicians and pundits have done a masterful job of discrediting the word liberal in the public mind, using phrases like “bleeding heart liberals,” ‘tax-and-spend liberals’ and “big government liberals,” even when describing programs that reflect conservative values. The conservatives have managed to control the spin.
So there we have the story of modern American liberalism: Pounded at the polls, slandered by the right wing and finally abandoned by much of the left wing. When you think about it, it’s a miracle that 19 percent of the public, as reported by Harris, still describe themselves as liberals.
None of this is to say, however, that a rebirth of liberalism as a credible political force is out of the question. Not at all. While the word liberal may presently be in ill-repute, the progressive spirit is still very much alive in America, as poll results make clear. History has shown that political redemption, for those out of office and out of favor, can occur much more quickly than anyone expects. Our friends to the right know this well.
You have to be “age-challenged” like me to remember it, but there actually was a time when the fate of conservative politics seemed every bit as hopeless as that of liberal politics today. The year was 1964. Lyndon Johnson had just shellacked Barry Goldwater, winning with 61 percent of the vote. Many commentators predicted that this resounding defeat of Goldwater, the poster boy of American conservatism, would represent the death knoll of the conservative movement.
To their credit, however, conservatives didn’t give up. They didn’t hide from the word conservative and they didn’t declare themselves to be “New Republicans.” They fought like hell for the principles they believed in, as misguided as I personally believe those principles to be. And a mere four years later, Richard Nixon was elected president; 12 years after that, Ronald Reagan, the new conservative poster boy, was swept into office.
Liberals need to ask themselves: If conservatives, who haven’t had an original thought since before Calvin Coolidge was president, are capable of pulling off this sort of political resurrection, shouldn’t we be as well?
The time for malaise is over. What’s needed now is pure and unadulterated liberal pride — no excuses, no apologies and, above all else, no fudge-words. We need to show the country the strength of our convictions. We need leaders who, when asked if they are liberals, will reply, “Hell yes, and here’s why.” We need the brass of James Carville, the political skill of Bill Clinton and the straight-shooting talk of Harry Truman. And speaking of Truman, we need to give ‘em hell.
America desperately needs a viable alternative to the current politics of greed. It needs a loyal opposition that actually opposes. So how about it liberals, are you ready to rumble?