Fair warning: Expect assumptions to be challenged in this post. It’s part of my gadfly approach. That approach is probably the result of my working class upbringing, filled as it was with all the right values propped up by all the wrong lies, as well as my eventual over-education (for my class), which provided me with strong research and reasoning skills, an instinct for critical thinking, and the ability to articulate well. What that education did not provide me with was unvarnished truth, only a means to pursue it. And so it is that we go about the business of peeling off the lies here, of locating that center amongst the petals of rhetoric. Whatever the cause, I am driven to seek core arguments, to push away the decorations and trappings of our discourse, and to try to assert what really matters.
What matters today is the roiling exposure of authoritarianism on the left. It is symptomatic of the Neoprogressive reach, which is itself symptomatic of the neoconservative reach. Most of those who self-identify with the left, and that includes disaffected Clinton supporters (DCS), would agree that one of the goals of the neocon faction was to drive the center into solidly conservative territory. Parties who succeed in getting their opposition to join them don’t have to compromise much, do they? As I have noted in many posts at P&L, this election season is littered with what must look like delicious irony from the outside. It hurts like hell from the inside, but those with no vested interested must be howling their asses off at how quickly things have flipped.
Sadly, the Democratic Party, long billed as the Party for Women, has attempted to drive the ultimate wedge to prevent a feminist revival. Ironically, while they have succeeded in their own party, they have failed in the culture at large. PUMA and the choices DCSs make November 4th, as well as the attention they have gained and the momentum they have achieved have already constituted a revival among some women. The New Democratic Coalition, a.k.a. the Progressive Dude Nation, has already demonstrated its tolerance for sexism and authoritarianism, as well hypocrisy, which they display so aggressively and to such effect when they pursue Republican strategies they were railing against four and eight years ago. And they continue to be oblivious to their own weaknesses. The consequence is fuel for that feminist revival.
A couple of days ago I published a post called More Politics of Fear. I hesitated to publish it at the time because it was critical of two of the more respected bloggers in the DCS-sphere (doesn’t quite have the PUMAsphere ring, does it?). I think it was a good post and people responded to it, but I hadn’t realized at the time I posted it that I wasn’t done fleshing my issues out. This morning I realized two things: a) I am hurt by the argument that anyone who casts a vote for John McCain can’t possibly be a progressive, and b) what troubles me most about the argument is not the hurt, but what the argument says about the infiltration of authoritarianism on the left. To argue that one’s identity is tied to one vote, like the helix in mortal coil, is to make an authoritarian argument. As I said in More Politics of Fear, it is akin to the old one-drop rule, or the structure of the Indian caste system. There’s also another institution that practices that kind of rhetoric; it’s called a church.
But there’s a softer side to this authoritarianism too. It is personified in the I-could-never-vote-for-a-Republican-but-I-can’t-blame-you DCS. I know a lot of people like this, and I don’t judge them either. Everybody owns their vote. But I must take this moment to ask you if you are of this mindset: Do you think the Democratic Party will suddenly feel like home November 5th? Do you entertain fantasies that all of this madness will go away once the election is over?
How quickly we forget, sadly if we ever knew, the struggles of Stanton and Anthony, and Paul and Burns. Do you think that any one of those great, fearless women would have hesitated to cross a party line in the effort to secure a right for women? Did Alice Paul ever say, “I’m sorry Mr. Wilson, but you belong to a war-mongering party, so I can’t possibly petition and lobby you for relief”? And isn’t respect for and power for women, the opportunity for them, finally, a right worth securing? Women have the opportunity this year like no other to emerge as a super-constituency, to force both parties to notice and respond to us and some of our issues. It’s already working on one side of the aisle, even as it exposes deeply troubling sexist rhetoric on the left. That sexism will not magically disappear on November 4th. If Obama wins, the beast will just be caged until he and his faction need it again. If he loses, it will get worse, much worse for a while, before it gets better.
If we are an Army of Monsters in the eyes of the left, why does it matter if you cast a protest vote for John McCain? Have you ever considered that a huge feminine swing toward McCain as a result of his Palin pick may be all that is necessary now to achieve that super-constituency? And have you considered what a valuable opportunity this might provide Americans to reform the Republican Party? What if we could tame those beastly factions within it, and jerk the Republican Party more to the mainstream? What delicious irony, right? I certainly think that’s a much more (and truly) progressive strategy than adopting wholesale corrupt Republican strategies to win, all the while hypocritically claiming to hold on to liberal values.
I’ve recently given some thought to this whole notion of labels. I said in Barry and The Neoprogs that progressive was a good word for them because all they cared about was naked progress in the form of winning. They weren’t concerned with the long-term in the least. Joseph Cannon over at Cannonfire recently articulated the better argument against progressives. To wit:
As readers know, I am careful to describe my politics as “liberal,” not progressive. What’s the difference?
ALL PROGRESSIVES LIE. ALL.
Bolding his. I think that’s generally, though not so stridently, true because I can understand the distinction now between a liberal and a progressive. It’s basically the difference between the Stevensonian and FDR coalitions Anglachel articulated so well a while ago. And the Stevensonian faction, make no mistake, has been the one consistently flirting with conservative values and candidates over the last 40 years. Now that the convention is over, though, it’s not just that faction that is expressing its authoritarian beliefs. Unwittingly infected themselves, some of those on the left, especially those who left working class culture in the dust when they succeeded in bettering themselves, but who have preserved an affection for it, are now spouting these ridiculous purity arguments, either for others or for themselves.
As a Midwestern Democrat-turned-independent, a voter in a swing state planning to vote McCain/Palin, I have to ask myself, are we going to be expected to do the heavy lifting this November, even as we get no credit, and suffer ridicule for it? In case you weren’t aware, in the wake of the sham Convention, you have only two choices: Obama or Nobama.
If Obama wins, his faction gets credentialed and their values get adopted in the DP, but if Obama loses, and regardless of what happens in the Republican Party, none of that other stuff happens in the DP. This election has already proven to be the strangest in my lifetime and a lot longer, and I really can’t believe anyone in any red or blue state can feel certain they know how their state will go. How can they just kick back and rest assured that they won’t have to violate any personal values to achieve their goal of Nobama, without even trying to self-reflect on whether or not the value that argues all Republicans are evil is even rational? Leave it to the close-minded hicks in those swing states, right? Ain’t that the mother of all ironies?
Note: Whatever minor issues I may have with Anglechel over this particular rhetorical aside, I still think she is the best political analyst in the DCS-sphere by far. I do not speak for Murphy or other PUMAs either, only for myself.
Originally posted at Peacocks and Lilies. (I thought y’all would like it too)
Reminder!
We have 52 Days to stop the DONC.
Thank you to everyone who contributed to Sheila Jackson Lee yesterday. I will post the final tally later this morning.
We will be mounting a weekend Fundraiser starting later today to raise funds for Canvassing and Outreach for our Protest of the Election. Get a jump now and donate this morning if you can, and THANK you! You can Contribute HERE!
