Below is Adam Werbach’s of Common Assets call to arms for those not at the center of the Democratic Party structure. It is the first salvo for those who dream a different vision of this country than the Republicans and want a party that can deliver.
No surprise that I agree with Adam’s Theses. Also no surprise that I beleive we must not wait on the leadership to define our vision. We must speak for ourselves and define our own voice. I plan to be at DNC HQ on Monday Morning, Nov. 15, 430 S Capitol St, SE in Washington, DC, at 7:30 a.m. Provided I can find someone to get Aaron on the school bus.
Now, more than ever,
stay tuned . . .
[Adam Werebach’s original email. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org]
[A prettier version of the Theses is available at http://www.3Nov.com]
If you’re like me, the results of this election opened your eyes to the extent to which the leadership of the Democratic Party is mismanaging our political future. At some point, people like you and me have to get together and communicate these profound misgivings.
We worked hard. We got out the vote. And we still lost by four million votes.
Yes it was close. Yes, we didn’t have the best candidate. Yes, the campaign made serious tactical errors.
But the bottom line is this: the Democratic Party is today in the hands of people who have failed to articulate a moral-intellectual vision for America and the world, and you can’t win the confidence of the electorate without a vision.
I feel complicit in these failures. I have spent the last 15 years of my life trying to organize the public towards social and environmental change. It’s not working.
It’s time for a bit of healthy debate.
To that end, I will be going to the Democratic National Committee Headquarters on Monday, November 15 to paste the November 3rd theses (below) on the front door. I’m hoping to find a few other people who will stand with me on that cold morning.
I’ll be there at 7:30 AM. The DNC is located at 430 S Capitol St, SE in Washington, DC.
Spread the word.
November 3rd Theses on the Failures of the Democratic Party
“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”
The 2004 presidential election was lost not by John Kerry over the last several months but by the Democratic Party over the last several decades. Democrats have lost control of all three branches of government for the foreseeable future. We are now a minority party.
When the Senate Democratic leader is defeated while spending $16 million attempting to get the majority of 500,000 votes, the problem is not a lack of funding or effort.
The failure of the Democratic Party to connect with America’s desire for fulfillment is political death.
Democrats are now history’s spectators, Republicans its actors.
The obsession with denouncing the radical conservative project as a “lie” has become a useful substitute for vision.
Renovating Democratic politics is not a question of moving to the right or talking more about G-d. It is about creating a framework that once again communicates to the core needs of the American people.
America is not now, and never was, simply “the economy, stupid.” What the American people want is a deeper sense of personal meaning, a national mission, and passion in times of fear.
Returning the Democratic Party to majority status will require a political realignment no less sweeping than that which was accomplished by conservatives over the last 40 years.
Only the breath of a serious and new moral-intellectual vision will be sufficient to resuscitate the Democratic Party.
Democratic candidates will continue to lose as long as they treat Americans as rational actors who vote their “self-interest” after weighing competing offers for health care, jobs, and security.
Conservatives have spent the last 40 years getting clear about the values they represent. They have even developed a “family values” brand to represent a framework that coheres traditional prejudices around prayer in school, gun rights, restricting abortion, and restricting gay rights.
By contrast, liberal or “progressive” groups and Democrats have spent the same period of time defining themselves against conservative values, even “morality” in general.
If resources continue to flow to the same leaders who have failed to construct a new vision and have thus left the Democratic Party in ruins then we can expect more of the same. And worse.
Those who resist the process to create a new vision will be left behind.
Candidates who intend to win should no longer hire consultants who repeatedly lose. Those who counsel caution when dealing with the indifferent, the disaffected, and the undecided do not understand American history. Consultants who advise their clients against offering a clear and compelling vision in fear that it will be attacked should find themselves without a home in the Democratic Party. The sooner they retire, the better.
Unconnected at a values level, the Democratic Party’s laundry list of policy proposals is a confusing and alienating hodgepodge of special interests bound together by a vague sense that “we’re all on the same side.” Such a conflation demands no critical self-examination of the interest groups whose turf, and very identities, are treated as inviolable by Party chieftains.
The progressive vision must be a direct challenge to fundamentalism in all of its forms: political, religious and economic. It must match fundamentalism’s power without replicating its authoritarianism. It must appeal to the values of liberty, equality, community, justice, unconditional love, shared prosperity, and ecological restoration, among many others.
Democrats serious about returning to majority status must:
·Retire any leader who believes that we are currently on a winning path that simply needs more money and effort.
·Define and articulate a coherent set of values of our base, and be willing to lose those allies who do not share these values.
·Fight battles, win or lose, that define and advance our values and expand our political base.
In despair and defeat lie the seeds of triumph and victory. In that loss lies the opportunity to define a new progressive politics for the new century.