Morning Reads

“I don’t know that the Dem party has shifted to the left so much.”

The Democratic Party has shifted to the left drastically. They’ve gone far to the left on social issues, and by this I do not mean merely support for abortion and gay marriage – and on the latter let’s stop pretending that even Obama, the most socially liberal president ever, didn’t run for office opposing gay marriage in 2008, which made ousting Brendan Eich from his own Mozilla company for having the same position that Obama had at the time even more galling – but rather by embracing identity politics, which is a rejection of the assimilationist ethos that dominated the country from the 1920s until now. Identity politics ideology has existed for a long time – many decades – but the leaders of the progressive movements distanced themselves from and outright rejected it. I remember Jesse Jackson, for example, doing so in the 1980s and again in the 1990s. Kweisi Mfume, who considered himself more “cutting edge” than Jackson and the rest of the traditional civil rights movement, initially tried to embrace it but wound up having to renounce it when he became the leader of the NAACP. But now it dominates and the previous ideology is dead as a doornail. I do not mean to single out or pick on black leaders – I know the bad appearances especially on a southern blog in a state that is still under the auspices of the Voting Rights Act – but I am just using them as an example.

And not just social issues. Single payer healthcare, living wage, universal basic income, essentially the economic program of EU and Nordic countries … no Democrat in previous eras would have touched those with a 10 foot pole, not even proud liberals and progressives like Ted Kennedy, Walter Mondale and George McGovern. Now, lots of Democrats running for statewide office are championing those, and you had better believe that several running for the 2020 presidential nomination will be.

Another point. Yes, it is another civil rights related one. I am sorry. I am not an alt-right or anything like that. These are just good examples. I remember in the 1980s – yes I am that old – when CBC leader John Conyers claimed that the federal government had a lax response to the crack epidemic, and that this was proof that the Republican administration didn’t care about law and order in the black community. The rap group Public Enemy actually released a song called “911 is a Joke” that repeated a common complaint that the police was too slow to respond to crimes and emergencies in black communities and that black communities weren’t adequately policed. It was in that context that the stiff sentences against drug dealers were enacted: many black leaders demanded them. Now? A complete 180, with demands for decriminalization or legalization of drugs, anti-incarceration policies for all but repeat violent offenders, and conspiracy theories about “the prison industrial complex.”

So yes, the Democrats have moved very far to the left, and in a relatively fast period of time. If you haven’t seen that shift, then well it is because you agree with the shift to the left ideologically. Well lots of people do not, and that is what makes “debate” and “compromise” extremely hard. If one side believes in a tough, no-nonsense approach to criminal justice and the other believes that the very concept of incarceration is an institutionally discriminatory tool against minorities and the poor, what is debate and compromise going to look like? You can have those debates and compromises if the other side is Hillary Clinton (the 1990s version that supported 3 strikes laws and anti-gang measures, not the 2016 version) or our own late Zell Miller. And if you believe that Stacey Abrams isn’t far to the left of Zell Miller and even Roy Barnes, then well that is your personal choice. But surely you can understand that where a Casey Cagle can have productive policy conversations with a Zell Miller or Roy Barnes on a ton of issues, there isn’t that much that can be said to Abrams, Evans for that matter, Jon Ossof etc. beyond “have a nice day.” Now Barrow on the other hand, there you have some daylight. But even there is an example. The Democratic Party of 15 years ago elevates Barrow as their standard bearer, he gets elected to governor or senator easily, and he is on everyone’s short list as a potential vice presidential nominee. But the current state party has done their best to ignore the guy, so he had to pretty much run for secretary of state – and this is a former longterm U.S. Congressman mind you! – on his own. And even if he does get elected governor or senator, the national party would consider him radioactive, with absolutely no chance of joining the leadership or getting to chair a major committee no matter how long he servers were he a Senator. That WAS NOT the case not so long ago when there were tons of moderate and conservative Democrats in Senate leadership positions, with Al Gore and Sam Nunn counted among them.

So yes, the shift has happened. It is just that you agree with the shift is all.