|
Edited on Mon Jan-29-07 03:15 PM by Superman Returns
Remember when we as a party were lost in the metaphoric wilderness? When we didn't know what we stood for other than opposing the policies of the Bush administration? Up until 2006, we had lost election after election, and we began to question the existence of the Democratic Party. Essentially, we asked, what was its purpose? Were we liberals? Were we "New Democrats?" Were we something else?
Republicans, masters of simplicity and word usage had three simple principles that embodied their platform: anti-taxes, pro-defense, family values. Many Dems in return tried to create an alternative, such as "middle class tax cutes, strong but diplomatic etc..." But just as the creators of the anti-federalist party realized that being "anti" is not helpful to a cause, we realized that we couldn't just be the inverse of Republicans; essentially ceding the ground of debate.
Although in 2006 Democrats won, we did so largely because we had an excellent field on candidates, numerically more vulnerable GOP seats, and mostly because of the incompetency and corruptness of both the Bush administration and the GOP dominated congress. Oh yeah, and a little thing called Iraq. However, having won, we can still see divisions within the party. Bloggers and progressives on the internet are more and more moving to what I would call the "Alpha Dog populist." Although seemingly liberal, this is a new kind of Democrat that bluntly can: talk tough, kick ass, and be beholden to no one. I would cite candidates such as: Jim Webb, John Tester, Wesley Clark, and to a degree John Edwards. However, with the rise and continuing dominance of the Clinton wing of the party as demonstrated by Senator Hillary Clinton's candidacy, we can still see that the party is in the crossroads of what Democrats should truly stand for. Moderation is simply a method, centrism ironically has no permanent center, and populism is more about language and appearance than guiding principles.
so what was the point of this message? Simply, we need to eventually come up with our three guiding principles in order to create Democratic unity and stability. After much thought,
Pro-Worker, Pro-Science, Tolerance
Worker: We need to be the party of those left in the dust by globalization. If we embraced this mantra would scoop up a lot of old school Democrats or "Lou Dobbs Dems." We also need to be the party that checks the growing influence of corporations and their domination of the political system. Simply: Fair Trade, living wage, health care, college tuition aid.
Science: We support Stem-Cell Research because we believe in scientific advancement. We need to confront the dangers of global warming because the overwhelming 99 percent of scientists tell us its real and is a threat. We support maintaining the environment and the fragile ecosystem because Earth is our home. We believe in transforming our military into a truly 21st century force; being ready for new threats such as cyber and economic terrorism along with growing asymmetric warfare.
Tolerance: We believe in the ideals embodied in the Constitution and wish to take part in the continuing national narrative of making those ideals truly applicable to all. While some may morally disagree with certain lifestyles and practices, the party is committed to making sure everyone is treated fairly with respect. We firmly believe in making sure discrimination of all kinds is minimized. Importantly, politicians should not legislate morality. "Live and let be."
Feel free to add policies to the three principles: Pro-Worker, Pro-Science, and Tolerance.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(804 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
