 |
People-Powered Politics: Beyond Bush |
 |
The Pitfalls of Too Much Strategizing
Liberal bloggers’ favorite subjects tend to be Democratic political strategy and Republican failures. And given that exposing and publicizing Republican blunders is often a tactic for boosting Democrats’ popularity, this too falls mostly under the umbrella of Democratic strategizing.
The blogosphere’s influence is growing in ways that are obvious to almost everyone. But the liberal blogosphere hasn’t yet truly delivered on its promise to promote “people-powered politics.” The blogosphere has, to some extent, given ordinary people a medium for helping to inform the strategy the Democratic Party uses. It has possibly given ordinary people a way to hold the Democratic Party more accountable. But it has not yet given ordinary people a way to express what they want Democrats to do if - and when - the dust settles.
Strategy is a tool used in the service of achieving goals. It is not an end in itself. So if the blogosphere is really going to create a space for people-powered politics, then liberal bloggers are going to have to strike a better balance between strategy and substance.
Recently, calls for the impeachment of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, as well as that of President George Bush himself, have come from such heavyweight liberal blogs as Daily Kos, Crooks and Liars, Eschaton, and many others. The appeal of impeaching either figure, from the point of view of strategy, lies in the hope that impeachment hearings for either the Attorney General or the President would discredit the administration and, by extension, the Republican Party. In a climate of pervasive distrust for Republicans, the thinking goes, Democrats could slide easily into a presidential victory in 2008.
Should George W. Bush be impeached? Emphatically yes. (He should also, incidentally, be tried as a war criminal in The Hague.) He should be impeached both for moral reasons (justice demands that high crimes and misdemeanors, as well as betraying America and the Constitution, be punished), and for the reason that, as notanamerican points out, without an impeachment hearing we may never know the full extent of what has gone on behind closed doors during Bush’s presidency.
The Pitfalls of Impeachment
I am in full support of efforts by the Democrats, or by Congress generally, to impeach the President. But Democrats, along with the liberal half of the blogosphere, need to consider carefully what they hope to achieve with impeachment proceedings.
The impeachment efforts against Clinton made Republicans look nasty and petty. They may have won some new supporters by painting Clinton as an immoral philanderer, but their tactics alienated many Americans. Republican attempts at character assassination did not win them the election of 2000, which they in fact lost, nor could it have saved them had Clinton been able to run again, in which case I believe he would’ve achieved a massive victory. An impeachment of Bush is different in that it would involve issues far more serious than adultery, but has the same potential to produce negative political fallout.
If Congress initiates an impeachment process, Democrats will need to handle it carefully so as to not A) Set up potential “allies” like Senator Chuck Hagel to emerge as powerful, untarnished Republican leaders and B) Not appear like attack dogs who can only criticize and cannot lead. Democrats need to keep the impeachment process mature and controlled. In short, when they make a bid for power, they need to prove that they are capable of handling it.
Similarly, liberal bloggers need to consider their audience when they call for impeachment. Anyone can preach to the choir. Meanwhile, taking too much pleasure in an enemy’s downfall can bother people who are on the fence. Bloggers need to be able to justify the reasons for impeachment to the people on the other side of the political spectrum - and, perhaps more importantly, to the 50% of Americans who don’t vote. For every person who sat glued to the circus of Kenneth Starr, Linda Tripp, and Monica Lewinsky, there was someone else who changed the channel in disgust and stayed home on November 7th, 2000. People-powered politics means showing those people why impeachment is important - which means, ultimately, showing them what your next move would be after Bush leaves.
And that’s the real question we need to ask ourselves: how does impeachment fit into a longer timeline of goals for revitalizing America’s democracy? If “impeach Bush, then win in 08″ is the sum of your answer to that question, I challenge you to think further ahead.
Even speaking purely from a strategic perspective, I believe that campaigning on a platform of “Republicans failed, we can do better” will not be sufficient to win in 2008. To win, Democrats must spell out what and how they will do better. And speaking from the perspective of a concerned citizen, I believe that if a Democrat President is elected in 2008, that person will have a huge responsibility to undo the damage Bush (and Bush and Reagan before him) have caused in this country, and to tackle the huge domestic problems America faces.
The Democrats, if elected, better not blow it. Because even though I’m rooting for them now, I can also say that this is their last chance in my eyes to stand up and put forward a real progressive agenda of change. Right now I’m all ears: tell me what you’re gonna do. And if you don’t follow through, I’m done with you. And I don’t think I’m the only liberal American who feels that way.
The Left needs to move in and destroy Bush’s credibility, legacy, and power, but at the very same time the Left needs to begin articulating a true alternative vision for America. The role of liberal bloggers will be crucial in this process, and in the latter component even more than in the former. Bloggers are not merely dogs that nip at Congressmen’s heels. If they are the spokesmen and women for a new form of people-powered politics, they need to deliver more than strategy and speculation about 2008. They need to serve as a conduit between the people and their leaders, a medium for transmitting ideas, hopes, and concerns. This, I believe, is supposed to be an integral part of political journalism - and the mass media certainly isn’t providing it any longer.
The War in Iraq and the Crisis of American Democracy
A final point is that what goes for the impeachment discussion also goes for the discussion about the war in Iraq. Americans are making it clear that they want an end to the war. This should not be exploited as an opportunity for Democrats - bloggers included - to score points on Bush and the Republican Party. This should be a chance for the Democrats to do what’s right, and to do what leaders are meant to do: solve serious problems. People-powered politics, as far as the war goes, means holding Democrats accountable to the popular will, and to higher principles of justice and the hope for peace.
The War in Iraq does not represent an opportunity within our political system; it represents the breakdown of our political system. A lot is at stake: the nature of executive power, America’s relationship with the rest of the world, and thousands of lives. That’s why candidates who waffle should be punished in the primaries. And that’s why bloggers who have been seduced by the strategic possibilities offered by the turning of public opinion against the war should take a deep breath and a step back. Are you trying to win the debate, or are you trying to open up a new debate? Because the debate about patriotism and supporting the troops, the debate about abortion and gay marriage, and the debate about family values and tax cuts needs to take a back seat to a new debate: the debate about democracy and human rights, energy and the environment, poverty and disease. Real victory isn’t winning elections: real victory is achieving positive change.
How will America feel if it wakes up in January of 2009 and realizes we have elected a Democratic President who is willing to sacrifice what’s right for the sake of political gain? This is why we need substantive discussion of issues now. This is why Hagel is, in certain ways, looking better than the Democratic front-runners at the moment: because he’s focusing more on being a leader than on being a candidate. Democrats aren’t heroes just because they happen to be the underdogs right now. This is an opportunity for Democrats to prove themselves - which I sincerely hope they will do - but it’s also an opportunity for them to fail the American people in a big way.
In the twilight of Bush’s reign, America needs to do some serious thinking and start making some serious changes. Getting out of Iraq and doing everything we can to restore, instead of destroy, the stability of the Middle East should be our top priority. But we also need to rebuild New Orleans. We need to rebuild our democracy that has been eroded by the Patriot Act, questionable elections, corporate influence, and an unconstitutional concentration of power in the hands of the executive branch. We need to eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels. We need to reflect on the fact that among developed nations, we have the highest percentage of our citizens in prison. We need reforms of our educational system at all levels from pre-school to college. The list goes on. One day soon America may wake up and discover that we have fallen far behind Europe and Japan economically and technologically, and that rising powers like China have displaced our global influence while we were busy playing political games with each other. We may find our image tarnished and our economic might gone, strained to the breaking point by giddy defense spending and outsized budget deficits. And I’m no nationalist - but I believe the a strong America makes the world stronger. There’s a lot of good we can do with our power, if we use it instead of squander it.
People-powered politics is an incredible and noble ideal. It’s an ideal that even our elitist and aristocratic Founding Fathers, in their best moments, shared. Technology is making the realization of that ideal possible, and the liberal blogosphere is taking center stage in that effort. So let’s broaden our horizons by a little, and let’s broaden the discussion by a lot. America is speaking: we don’t like Bush, and we want out of Iraq. But what about after that? Let’s get some ideas kicking around, and let’s give the people a voice in choosing which ones go forward, and which ones get thrown into the dustbin of history.
So, what is the solution to ensuring a more long-term view in American politics? I’ve toyed with the idea of longer presidential terms. I think more vital third parties might also be able to draw attention to longer term goals, as opposed to the two party horse race.
Or, what about less representative and more direct democracy? If universal Internet access becomes a reality in the next decade, is it too far off to think more direct voting by the people would become possible?
I am optimistic that the Internet will bring positive change to the democratic process in America, but I also feel we are stuck in a rut that praises the process more than its product. And I think in order for American democracy to regain its democratic power, the push for change needs to be led by the people–not their elected representatives.
There is something to be said for the continuity America edures each time it elects a new president. We experience the changes that cause civil war in other countries with relative ease and very little difficulty, yet at times we are too willing to wait for the regime change we truly need at home. At present, America needs to stop telling itself things will change after the next election–after the Democrats take the Senate, after a Democrat becomes president, etc.–and start initiating the changes it would like to see today. We are too willing to accept decisions we disagree with, too willing to accept “small victories”, and too willing to wait until we can achieve our goals using the avenues of decision-making that may not, if we ever examined them closely, fulfill our modern-day needs.
In the era of instant gratification, why are so many Americans willing to wait for political fulfillment?
Nice thoughts. I was thinking along similar lines today actually. Check out this post: http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2007/04/reading_and_d is.html
Policies have a much longer lifespan than some might think. There is a huge temptation for the Dems to just wait it out, Bush and co. will be gone in two years. But there needs to be proactive solutions happening even now.
This is reason enough (and there are many others) that the argument that “the Democrats gain politically by NOT impeaching Bush” is wrong.
Impeaching Bush is emphatically the right thing to do. He has subverted the Constitution, tortured prisoners in violation of US law and principle, illegally spied on innocent American citizens, appointed “Bushies” to positions of responsiblity resulting in profound mismanagement of the War, hurricane Katrina response, the Department of Justice, and more.
And what is the result of his lawbreaking, disregard for fundamental American principles of freedom, and gross negligence and incompetence? Thousands of dead American soldiers, tens of thousands injured, over 1800 dead in New Orleans, and the city devastated, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead….
And we’re supposed to say, “Ahh forgit it. Let’s just wait him out. Too much trouble. Too much political risk.” If that isn’t putting the party above the country–something Rove and his cabal are masters at–then I don’t know what is.
Respectfully,
Balonius
I actually can’t tell, Balonius, whether you’re agreeing with me or not. Maybe the fault is mine for not communicating my ideas clearly enough. So in the interest of clear communication, and to put it as simply as I can:
1. I am in favor of impeaching Bush.
2. I do not trust Democrats.
3. If liberal blogging is part of “people-powered politics,” then it should mean advancing an agenda for change and not just criticizing the administration.
4. You’re not ready for power (in my opinion) until you can tell me what you would do with power if you had it.