All opinions posted. None too pathetic or contrived. Everyone gets their say.

"...even the wicked get worse than they deserve." - Willa Cather, One of Ours

Monday, June 14, 2004

The Silent Majority

New York Times


Is the public becoming more politically divided? The old Red/Blue conflict getting worse. Not according to most studies. It is only the political parties and party activists that are becoming polarized.
If you've been following the election coverage, you know how angry you're supposed to be. This has been called the Armageddon election in the 50-50 nation, a civil war between the Blue and the Red states, a clash between churchgoers and secularists hopelessly separated by a values chasm and a culture gap.

But do Americans really despise the beliefs of half of their fellow citizens? Have Americans really changed so much since the day when a candidate with Ronald Reagan's soothing message could carry 49 of 50 states?

To some scholars, the answer is no. They say that our basic differences have actually been shrinking over the past two decades, and that the polarized nation is largely a myth created by people inside the Beltway talking to each another or, more precisely, shouting at each other.

These academics say it's not the voters but the political elite of both parties who have become more narrow-minded and polarized. As Norma Desmond might put it: We're still big. It's the parties that got smaller...
This is confirms my sense that both parties have lost support from the large political middle.

Reagan was brilliant at bringing the moderates and conservative Democrats into his camp. His 1980 Presidential campaign completely changed the political landscape in America. He rewrote the book on national politics.

If the Democrats want to win again they will have to do what was proposed by the DNC and brilliantly executed by Bill Clinton, co-opt the moderate middle who make up the majority in American politics.

Posted by: Zayphar / 6/14/2004 01:36:00 PM
Comments:
This article does not discuss economic issues; that is, who gets how much of the economic pie. However much social or wedge issues intrude themselves on politics, no meaningful discussion of left, right, or middle can exclude economics. The author, John Tierney, is a libertarian who was transferred from New York to the Times' DC Bureau. He doesn't discuss economic matters because he doesn't believe government should be involved with them.
A progressive program properly presented has been shown to have significantly more support than a conservative or DLC corporate agenda. Why do you think right wing ideas have to be camoflouged in bs like "compassionate conservatism". Harry Truman said that if you present the electorate with a fake Republican and a real Republican, they'll vote for the real one. In the last generation we have become pensionless, house poor, and often medically indigent. Corporations have seized enormous politrical power in our democracy and plutocracy is within sight. People intuitively know this, but we have been so cowed by the reactionary forces in our country that meaningful discussion of these matters is termed "class warfare" and "divisive". The ONLY middle of the road course is the one that the Democrats have chosen, and to what benefit? The conservatives pursue a radical program dressed up like a lipsticked sow and somehow that's OK. It's long past time for us to wake up and stop being played for suckers.

FB
# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 7:06 PM
 
Jane,

I'm not sure what you mean by "socialism." Socialism, as defined, is usually state control of the means of production. I have a hard time believing that most mainstream Democrats, or for that matter more progressive lefties, would hold such views.

I think what you mean to say is that some liberals and progressive are social democrats--a far cry from socialists. Really, this is straight ahead Poli Sci 101 stuff for most undergrads. Basic stuff.

BTW, FYI the Western European democracies are also not socialist either. They are mixed economies--meaning power is contained in both private and public spheres. I don't understand why people make these factual errors so often.

D. Bishop
# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 8:17 AM
 
Post a Comment

<< Home