Its the Solidarity, Stupid

Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson are political scientists and the authors of the influential book, "Off Center", which looks at why "Republicans have governed to the right of moderate voters and achieved considerable (but, of course, not unlimited) success in advancing their agenda, without (so far, at least) provoking gridlock or backlash."

Guest blogging for Kevin Drum today, they have this to say:

In particular, we think a central source of GOP success lies in the unprecedented (within the contours of modern American politics) capacity of conservative elites to coordinate their activities and operate in a unified fashion.

In a political system that was specifically designed to prevent unified action, coordination is an enormous political advantage, helping the GOP to get the maximum value out of many of the advantages mentioned in Friday’s discussion. It makes it far easier to control the agenda (which is crucial in politics), to stay on message, to use legislative procedure (as well as even more obscure elements of policymaking) to pursue off-center goals while presenting a more moderate face to the public, to divide opponents, and to protect potentially vulnerable Republicans from exposure—as well as shower them with cash if all else fails. The capacity to work in an unusually unified way allows GOP elites to provide what we call backlash insurance—a variety of protections to politicians who might otherwise feel a need to be more responsive to public opinion. In a later post, we’ll say more about how we think this works.

To be clear, we are not saying that the GOP is always unified, or that it can get away with anything even when it is. Over the past decade, however, it has been far more unified than its opponents, or than any political party in modern American history. And it is that unity that has helped it to achieve a surprising degree of electoral and policy success despite moving off center—a course of action that is supposed to bring a party to ruin. (bold emphasis is mine)

And in their book they write:

But the problem is not just polarization. It is unequal polarization — unequal between Democrats and Republicans, unequal in its effect on the governing aims of liberals and conservatives, and unequal in its effects on American society.

Now, if ever I read a better reason for a clearcut Coalition of the Left, I don't remember it. Yet it seems clear, and Hacker and Pierson implicitly accept, that the Democratic Party is currently controlled by people who have no intention of offering the Left a "big tent" but instead are intent on a move "towards moderacy" -which really means, in current conditions, a move closer to the Republican position - Republican Lite.

What we need then, is a group that is beyond party but offers a communications, focus and fundraising umbrella for all kinds of lefties. Hells, even lefties who want to stick with the Dems can join (maybe they CAN convince the Demlicans to change) - just dont ask that coalition to restrict itself to supporting the Dems because it should be casting its net of support wider than a single party. Folks who don't like it don't have to join but the tent should be big enough for every Leftie.

Some of us are trying to establish exactly that. An American Solidarity movement which would use bloggers and the internet as communicators in the same way that in the past underground magazines or pamphleteers provided the channels for activists to "coordinate their activities and operate in a unified fashion".

Interested? Then look here for more and contact details.