When Liberalism Seeks To Conserve The Status Quo
Sean Braisted has written a very interesting post expressing a little disillusionment with the old guard in his party. Within that post, he offers an outstanding political analysis about what works within the Democratic party and what works nationally, and how all of that relates to Obama (change) versus Clinton (status quo).
The “Change we can believe in” is not simply that Obama will change the course of policy, which he certainly will, but of politics too. Now, I can’t for the life of me fathom how Mitt Romney will “change” either one, but in the case of Clinton, she most certainly will change the course of some of the Bush policies….but the political realm will remain the same. She’ll continue her focus on targeting various constituencies (African Americans, Women, GLBT, Seniors), instead of expressing a broad message that appeals to people of all genders, races, and political affiliations.
Unfortunately, that tactic still works when it comes to those who identify as Democrats. That Obama’s campaign has won over the hearts of independents, and even garnered praise from Republicans, actually seems to anger some Democrats because they want a candidate who will put their foot on the throats of the opposition…and reaching out with a message of hope and optimism just doesn’t work well in their “frames”.
That is an excellent analysis and it says a great deal about why nearly everybody likes Obama. Braisted’s post reminds me of this article written by Andrew Sullivan. In it Sullivan labels Obama “a liberal Reagan”. Now obviously, Sullivan doesn’t think Obama is a small government conservative. What he is talking about is Obama’s optimism and his insistence on running for President of all Americans, rather than President of one or a couple of identifiable voting blocs.
Sullivan wrote:
What has long been remarkable to me is how this liberal politician fails to alienate conservatives. In fact, many like him a great deal. His calm and reasoned demeanor, his crisp style, his refusal to engage in racial identity politics: these appeal to disaffected Republicans.
Obama doesn’t wear his identity on his sleeve. He doesn’t insult whites by labeling them racist. He doesn’t play that victim card. Instead he speaks to all people as if he has faith in them as human beings, as if he truly believes that America is a great place filled with good people. As I have said before, he has a positive way of selling liberalism.
I almost see a divide within the Democratic Party between the Baby Boomer generation that has dominated politics for our lifetime, and the Generation X and Y types who are set to take over. The Boomers were shaped by the events of their lifetime like Vietnam and segregation, but the younger generations were shaped by different events. Obama represents the younger generation, while Hillary Clinton is the last stand of the Baby Boomers.
Reading posts like Sean’s, and hearing speech makers like Obama, leave me feeling optimistic about the future of liberalism. Gone is the cynical view of mankind, the identity politics. Of course these younger liberals are still wrong, but at least they approach the opposition with an open mind, rather than writing them off as a racist, sexist, or homophobic.