Thomas Frank is omnipresent nowadays. In addition to the op-ed piece
below, I saw him on the McNeill news hour 2 nights ago. His book "What's
the Matter with Kansas" argues that the Democrats keep losing elections
because they are tarred with issues like gay marriage (even Cockburn and
St. Clair got this wrong--it is better to lose an election than take the
*wrong* position on this) and because they refuse to raise populist
demands. Of course, it is rather silly to expect the Democrats to take a
populist turn at this stage of the game. First of all, the social base
that could propel this turn does not have the demographic clout it once
had, namely organized labor in heavy industry. Second of all, even if it
did, the world economy dictates that both parties in the USA pursue a
neoliberal course. This is not 1950 when the USA was flush with war
profits and Japan and Germany were basket cases. The most realistic
prognosis is that the Democratic Party is on its death-bed, but it will
probably take years for it to kick the bucket. Sort of like heiress
Sonny von Bulow, an apt image considering John Kerry's Croesus-like
social status.)


NY Times, November 5, 2004 OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR Why They Won By THOMAS FRANK

The first thing Democrats must try to grasp as they cast their eyes over
the smoking ruins of the election is the continuing power of the culture
wars. Thirty-six years ago, President Richard Nixon championed a noble
"silent majority" while his vice president, Spiro Agnew, accused
liberals of twisting the news. In nearly every election since,
liberalism has been vilified as a flag-burning, treason-coddling,
upper-class affectation. This year voters claimed to rank "values" as a
more important issue than the economy and even the war in Iraq.

And yet, Democrats still have no coherent framework for confronting this
chronic complaint, much less understanding it. Instead, they
"triangulate," they accommodate, they declare themselves converts to the
Republican religion of the market, they sign off on Nafta and welfare
reform, they try to be more hawkish than the Republican militarists. And
they lose. And they lose again. Meanwhile, out in Red America, the
right-wing populist revolt continues apace, its fury at the "liberal
elite" undiminished by the Democrats' conciliatory gestures or the
passage of time.

Like many such movements, this long-running conservative revolt is rife
with contradictions. It is an uprising of the common people whose
long-term economic effect has been to shower riches upon the already
wealthy and degrade the lives of the very people who are rising up. It
is a reaction against mass culture that refuses to call into question
the basic institutions of corporate America that make mass culture what
it is. It is a revolution that plans to overthrow the aristocrats by
cutting their taxes.

Still, the power of the conservative rebellion is undeniable. It
presents a way of talking about life in which we are all victims of a
haughty overclass - "liberals" - that makes our movies, publishes our
newspapers, teaches our children, and hands down judgments from the
bench. These liberals generally tell us how to go about our lives,
without any consideration for our values or traditions.

The culture wars, in other words, are a way of framing the ever-powerful
subject of social class. They are a way for Republicans to speak on
behalf of the forgotten man without causing any problems for their core
big-business constituency.

Against this militant, aggrieved, full-throated philosophy the Democrats
chose to go with ... what? Their usual soft centrism, creating space for
this constituency and that, taking care to antagonize no one, declining
even to criticize the president, really, at their convention. And
despite huge get-out-the-vote efforts and an enormous treasury,
Democrats lost the battle of voter motivation before it started.

Worse: While conservatives were sharpening their sense of class
victimization, Democrats had all but abandoned the field. For some time,
the centrist Democratic establishment in Washington has been enamored of
the notion that, since the industrial age is ending, the party must
forget about blue-collar workers and their issues and embrace the
"professional" class. During the 2004 campaign these new,
business-friendly Democrats received high-profile assistance from
idealistic tycoons and openly embraced trendy management theory. They
imagined themselves the "metro" party of cool billionaires engaged in
some kind of cosmic combat with the square billionaires of the "retro"
Republican Party.

Yet this would have been a perfect year to give the Republicans a
Trumanesque spanking for the many corporate scandals that they have
countenanced and, in some ways, enabled. Taking such a stand would also
have provided Democrats with a way to address and maybe even defeat the
angry populism that informs the "values" issues while simultaneously
mobilizing their base.

To short-circuit the Republican appeals to blue-collar constituents,
Democrats must confront the cultural populism of the wedge issues with
genuine economic populism. They must dust off their own majoritarian
militancy instead of suppressing it; sharpen the distinctions between
the parties instead of minimizing them; emphasize the contradictions of
culture-war populism instead of ignoring them; and speak forthrightly
about who gains and who loses from conservative economic policy.

What is more likely, of course, is that Democratic officialdom will
simply see this week's disaster as a reason to redouble their efforts to
move to the right. They will give in on, say, Social Security
privatization or income tax "reform" and will continue to dream their
happy dreams about becoming the party of the enlightened corporate
class. And they will be surprised all over again two or four years from
now when the conservative populists of the Red America, poorer and
angrier than ever, deal the "party of the people" yet another stunning blow.

Thomas Frank is the author, most recently, of "What's the Matter with
Kansas? How Conservatives Won the Heart of America."


--

The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org

Reply via email to