|
A Blueprint
for Taking Back the Democratic Party
May
2001
by TygrBright
Part
Three: It's Up To Us
So just who is "we," the people who are going to
take back the Democratic Party?
Well, Democrats, of course—but who are we?
We're a diverse lot, and I'm not just talking about physical
attributes like color. We have a range of concerns and priorities,
as well—a tradition that's been our worst weakness and our
greatest strength. For the sake of expediency, let's use a
tool from the marketer's kit, and create "segments"
which describe the various populations of Democrats who make
up the Party's traditional power base—the ones who need to
take back the Party.
Necessarily, these conceptual frameworks will involve generalizations
and even stereotypes. And we know that there are plenty of
us who don't fit any segment—or who fit them all! But we have
to start somewhere.
Workers
Well, almost everybody works—but this segment refers to the
classic backbone of the economy. They include some small business
owners, but most work for others. Whether they're phlebotomists
in a health care facility, paint specialists in a body shop,
shift managers at a fast-food restaurant, or data-entry workers
at an insurance company, their working conditions, tasks,
and compensation are in the control of their employer. They
may have special training, even considerable skill, but they
are easily replaced and they know it—how could they not? Their
employers never let them forget it.
They have a stake in the system. Many own homes, most own
cars. They believe in the American Dream—which they tend to
see in economic terms—and feel they are owed a chance to achieve
it. They're willing to work hard to make it come true. Their
education level is good—high school graduate, some with some
college or trade school. The group cuts across all age lines.
Their principal political concerns revolve around bread-and-butter
issues—especially maximizing their income. They're strivers.
The Marginalized
This group includes both economically and politically marginalized
populations—many of whom are ethnic minorities and immigrants.
Although some do quite well economically, most identify strongly
with their ethnic groups and maintain an us-vs.-them attitude
that reflects their marginalization. While most tend to be
extremely hard-working, the economic barriers constraining
them prevent some from participating in the economy at all,
and cause others to give up what appears to be an unwinnable
struggle.
They feel little stake in the system, but strongly desire
the economic and social benefits of participation (except
in the case of the small minority who have 'given up.') They
tend to be less educated, but there is a strong entrepreneurial
propensity exhibited among many subgroups. Again, the group
cuts across all age lines. Their principal political concerns
revolve around access to economic and social opportunity,
and fighting social systems they perceive as biased against
them. They're survivors.
Classic ("Progressive") Liberals
A large group of relatively comfortable middle-class white
collar and semi-professional citizens who espouse a range
of "classically liberal" ideologies, including vigorous
free-speech defense (anti-book-burning,) church/state separation,
individual privacy, and strong social/economic justice policies.
They tend to be professionally or semi-professionally employed,
owners of small professional businesses, or self-employed.
This group tends to be a little older, and quite well educated,
often at the college level. They benefit from the status quo
and have a relatively strong stake in it, but unless they
experience extreme economic threat they are willing to explore
change that will redress social inequities and promote economic
sharing. Their principal political concerns include a range
of general "issues" related to liberal ideology.
They're altruists.
Post-Modern ("Green") Liberals
A smaller group, generally composed of younger, less economically-secure
individuals who tend to be highly educated. They are passionate
ideologues with strong agendas related to modern ecological
and economic issues. Many relate their economic or social
activities to their ideology, making it a lifestyle as well
as a political philosophy. They bring phenomenal energy and
dedication to their causes.
They often reject a stake in the status quo and usually have
very specific plans for change—sometimes rigorous enough to
amount to actual restructuring of the economic and social
system. Their principal political concerns revolve around
concrete, specific and targeted legislation or regulations
that will advance their ideological concerns. They're crusaders.
In the past, the Democratic Party managed to unite all these
groups in a power base of tremendous size and effectiveness.
While there are differences among them, a common thread of
economic justice addresses some of the concerns of each, and
this gave the old Democratic Party a powerful tool for uniting
us.
But in the last thirty years the GOP has succeeded in sowing
dissension among us using a vicious mixture of economic fear-mongering
('there's not enough to go around and if those people
get any benefits, you'll lose') and selecting and magnifying
critical differences in each group's concerns—the 'gun issue,'
the 'eco-nuts-destroying-the-workingman's-livelihood' game,
etc.
And our "leadership?" Where have they been during
this process? What have they been doing to hold us together
and fight this insidiously effective attack?
They've given up on us and gone groveling to the corporate-money
interests so that they could win elections "the easy
way." Our agendas—the shared and the differing—are barely
a blip on their horizon. And so it will remain until we take
back our Party.
ON
TO PART FOUR »
Learn
From Experience
|
