The unDemocratic Party

What to do about the Democratic Party?

My Unpaid Punditry Corps colleague Goose posted yesterday over at Comments From Left Field that the Democratic leadership have decreed "no more primaries".

Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) gave a speech at a party in Georgia on August 2nd in which he admits to a new Democratic strategy whereby he and the DSCC leadership will choose who will run against vulnerable Republicans. The case he mentions in particular is that of the Pennsylvania fight for the seat held by Rick Santorum.

we are going to intervene if anyone one democrat attacks another, we're doing that in states where there are primaries. We can't afford to do it anymore. This always happens in the primaries, we would throw up the cards and see where they landed. No more, we are finding the best candidate in every one of the seats where a Republican is vulnerable."

"So I called up Governor...our number one target is Rick Santorum...let him go back to wherever he lives, Maryland, you know you heard about it, he is Pennsylvania but he tried to get exempt from the school tax there cause he lives in Maryland even though he is a registered citizen of Pennsylvania. In any case I called up the Governor of Pennsylvania, Governor Rendell, I said who is the best candidate to beat Santorum. He there is only one person who could beat him but A he won't run and B you wouldn't want him to run. I said why wouldn't we want him to run, he said he's pro-life. He's a deeply religious Catholic man. Bob Casey."

"I said, those days are over Ed. Yes I'm pro-choice, but we need the best candidate. We can't insist that every democrat check off 18 different issues before they get (unintelligible) we could do that, we can't anymore. And so, we persuaded, Harry using his very...Harry has amazing insights into people...and we together persuaded Bob Casey to run. A poll yesterday...national...all the polls they did...Casey 51 Santorum 40. You should see Santorum nervous and walkin on the floor."

(unintelligible)

"And we're doing this in the other states."

Goose points out that by running a pro-life candidate, taking out any and all competition for that candidacy, "the Democrats are writing off the majority of their voters." But worse, says Goose:

Not only is this strategy stupid, it rings of Soviet Politburo tactics. The Democratic party leadership, or more accurately the DSCC, has decided that they know better than anyone how to win and they are going to shove their candidates down our throats like it or not.

I would love to say I am surprised by this, but I'm not.

The Democratic Party has ceased to be anything like a party for the common man. It is a nest of elitist self-aggrandisment, latte-sippers gone wild.

There are, for instance, the Strategic Class of top Democratic hawks, who enthusiastically support a militarized "war on terror," protracted occupation in Iraq, "muscular" democratization and ever-larger defense budgets. They criticize the execution of the war, but not the war itself and attack other liberals in much the same terms as those from the Right do. That same class is the one who:

permits and even congratulates those within its ranks who sell out America's middle class, whether it be those who voted for the bankruptcy bill or those who consistently vote for corporate-written trade deals like CAFTA or NAFTA. The party elites--many of whom follow the corporate apologism of business-funded groups within its ranks--still believe they can ascend to power on the public's loyalty to a Democratic Party label, even as that party label is almost completely meaningless to much of the public.

The Stategic Class is a corporate-backed elite, a Republican-Lite in liberal clothing.

At the same time, comfortable pundits with middle-class incomes (latte-sippers, to give them the lable from the Right's critics) not only mirror but reinforce this elitism, backing up the corporate-elite with a message of "don't rock the boat" or "work from within" that seems sensible until one faces the facts about the true character of the Democratic leadership. As C.N. Todd puts it, during a discussion with Ezra Klein:

To understand why Klein wants pro-labor lefties to work within the current power structure you also need to understand this bit of difference between us: I do think things would have been just as bad off for workers if Gore and Kerry has won. In fact, I actually think they might have been worse. With a Democrat in office, pro-labor oppositions groups would likely have dropped the ball, allowing either of them to pass through pro-corporate legislation the way Clinton did. In some sense, a Gore or Kerry victory would have been a bigger risk for labor.

As for a second bit of background, you also need to understand that Klein thinks recent Democrat opposition to CAFTA is a sign of “liberal mobilization.” I think nothing could be further from the truth. Congressional Democrats voted against CAFTA because they had wealthy corporate constituents who were worried about their profits – they were not worried about the fact that CAFTA was a vile and undemocratic piece of legislation that spit at workers’ rights and that helped to protect certain American markets. When you actually read criticisms from Congressional Democrats you will see that their opposition was paltry – for the most part. Indeed, many of them would have voted for it if Bush had been able to give them “concessions” as he did for various industries, like the textile corporations in particular. The fact that no labor standards were part of the legislation would have changed that.

That hardly counts as "liberal mobilization."

Now Goose tells me that his own preferred Democratic candidate in PA, Chuck Pennacchio, will take his marching orders if given them and work hard for whomsoever is handed the candidacy by the DSCC leadership. That's a huge pity, in my opinion. I would love to see him take the path of integrity and courage - vote with his feet and run as an independent.

Damn, but this country needs a new voice for the working class. The Democrats have sold us down the river because we don't match the fundraising donations of big business. It needs that voice in political candidates but it also needs that voice in punditry and the blogosphere to counter the flakes of DU and the elitists like Duncan Black.

Anyone out there interested in a real blogging alliance for labor-minded lefties? Maybe even with a view towards eventually promoting labor-supporting independent political candidates in the same way that MoveOn supports Democratic nominees?