|
Every time we progressives try a new tack, we gain unprecedented success. It's when we bow to pressure to stay inside the 'tried and true' guidelines that we fail to advance our cause.
Working the DLC "moderate" stance has done nothing but alienate the "apathetic" (in my view they're more frustrated and disgusted than truly apathetic) voters, aggravate real progressives, and confuse everyone else as to the point and purpose of the Democratic Party.
One of the reasons Cindy Sheehan's protest is gaining momentum the way it is might be that it's different. It's not the same faces saying the same thing and doing things in the same manner. It adds a personal immediacy to the issue that few other things could have added. It's been made real.
It's not business as usual.
Howard Dean's leadership of the DNC has been exceptional--not because he's a 'go along to get along guy,' but because he's willing to step out on the ledge and try something different--blunt honesty in the face of ridicule from the DLC and the Republicans.
Paul Hackett's run for congress in Ohio garnered an unprecedented level of support because he didn't guard his tongue when it came to discussing the failures of this administration in Iraq. He spoke bluntly and clearly about these failures.
Air America is doing what they said couldn't be done and its reach is growing.
Personally I'm using as many unconventional methods of promoting my books as I can imagine...but, then again, I'm something of an 'outside the box' type person. It's thinking inside the box that seems to be my challenge.
I call upon all real progressives to challenge accepted wisdom and kick over the box...forget the box. Toss the box out with the recycling. Try something new.
We need progressive think tanks...we need NEW approaches to old problems that the old approaches couldn't fix. We need new vision and new ideas that fire up the base and bring the frustrated and "apathetic" back into the political discussion. We need politics to involve people as much as--if not more than--corporate interests.
We need hope. And that requires us to throw out the conventional wisdom that doesn't seem to be working in favor of a more experimental approach.
Who's with me on this? Who also takes pride in looking outside the box and dismissing the 'tried and <not so> true?' Who's ready for a new vision and a new direction and a new way of looking at the problems to formulate new ways of dealing with them?
|