Document text
- Subscribe - Contact Us - Rate Card - Place an Ad Valley&State Backpage O&E Sports Archives Classifieds Faith&Beliefs Obituaries Revels October 4, 2004 More of the right needed for left to win Rob Asghar Democrats can only win battles by co-opting conservatism. Americans have pitched their tent to the right of the world's political center. But Democrats have yet to adjust fully to this reality. "Whether President Bush is reelected or Sen. John F. Kerry prevails, the United States will be the most conservative developed nation in the world," Harvard economist Edward Glaeser wrote recently in the Los Angeles Times. He meant that less as a compliment and more as a condemnation. Considering that America is still humanity's benchmark for economic strength, defense capabilities, cultural influence and technological innovation, Glaeser and others could do well to acknowledge that conservatism must be doing something right. The most effective national Democrat of the past 40 years, Bill Clinton, was the most effective at co-opting conservatism. Welfare reform happened on his watch; so did a budget surplus, which seemed a fantasy in the Reagan era; Clinton also called often on the American military; and no one accused him of being soft on terror until Republicans needed a scapegoat following 9/11. That helps prove Glaeser's point about America's conservatism: Clinton was not only one of the best Democratic presidents of recent years, he was one of the most effective Republican presidents. But how are Democrats wanting to operate in a post-Clinton world? I sat in a feminist coffee shop the other day (mainly to use their free wi-fi, not to read their tracts) and overheard two sweet but embittered elderly women lamenting Bush's rise in the polls. "The only good thing about the fact that Bush will probably win," one of them sighed, "is that this might finally push the Democrats to the left." "You're right," her friend responded. "They'll stop trying to act like Republicans." Reality check: No move could be more disastrous than a hard shift to the left. If voters don't like leftism in the diluted form in which Democrats currently offer it, why would they want a stronger swig of the stuff? Sorry, Governor Dean, but Georgia doesn't want the Democrat wing of the Democratic Party. To make any dent in our world, Democrats need to engage the prevailing values of American voters and then infuse them with liberalism's noblest values. Martin Luther King made a bigger dent than Malcolm X because King could speak to white Americans' value for fairness and to their self-interest: He helped them see that it was to everyone's benefit for white and black to stand equally under the rule of law. He could have spent more time trying to shame people for past sins; instead, he helped woo them to a more decent future. Here are some prevailing American values that liberals need to begin respecting and connecting with: 1) Opportunity. The free market has won the day. No form of wishful thinking or coerced socialism has matched the economic expansion that America has enjoyed. Liberalism can make the market safer and more decent for every last American; but they need to invest less energy opposing the inexorable forces of globalization and more energy guiding those forces down the best channels. 2) Faith. Liberals inherently aren't evangelists; they don't wear religion on their sleeve. But secular liberals have to encourage the religious ones within their flock to be more open about their religion, lest religious Americans continue to suspect that Democrats are predominantly secular and hostile toward matters of faith. Again, Clinton was the rare Democrat who "got" this, and won the evangelical vote in 1992 and 1996. 3) Morality. Liberals see homosexuality as purely a civil-rights issue, and they worry not a whit about whether a gay is promiscuous or purely monogamous or serially monogamous, so long as they use our free condoms. But mainstream Americans are busy trying to teach its children about responsible behavior, about the downside of sex devoid of commitment, and about lasting consequences. If such folks are taunted as uptight puritans, they won't be able to enter into more serious discussions about homosexuals' role in society. 4) Security. Women usually vote Democratic, but America's soccer moms are now becoming "security moms" tilting to Bush. Clinton "got" security too. Just as pro-choice Republicans keep a low profile on abortion in deference to the party's leaders, pacifists need to cede some ground here to the Clintonesque Democrats. Add it all up and you can see the irony: If only Al Gore ran in 2000 as "Clinton without the stained blue dress," he'd have won in a landslide. Instead, he tried to run as something more liberal, choked away an election and left America saddled with George Bush. America may eventually move more to the left, but for now liberals have to win whatever battles they can by making a Clintonesque lurch to the right and getting comfortable there. DailyTidings.com Home Page Valley&State | Backpage | O&E | Sports | Archives | Weather | Classifieds Columnists | Faith&Beliefs | Obituaries | Revels | Subscribe | Contact Us Copyright 2004 Ashland Daily Tidings and Ottaway Newspapers All Rights Reserved Click Here Site Search: .:Advertisements:. RESOURCES - Mail Tribune News - ODOT Road Cams