Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Another Two-Fer

At the risk of repeating myself, I am applauding Tom Vilsack's decision to get out of the presidential race good and early. Similar to the Biden post of yore, I think Vilsack didn't offer much and his leaving the contest is ultimately a good thing. Richardson is clearly the democratic candidate with executive experience who is more desirable. I had a chance to hear Gov. Vilsack speak at one point last year and cannot say he was too dynamic. I do, however, understand that he bothered to write a bunch of detailed position papers on a variety of subjects in an effort to win the so-called "ideas primary". Well, good for Gov. Vilsack, I guess, but how naive would you have to be to really think that having good ideas has anything to do with winning an election in America? That said, Gov. Vilsack is from Iowa, and it would be nice if somebody could get in and monkeywrench the Iowa caucuses a bit to give later primaries more weight. Nobody would have taken a Vilsack win in Iowa all that seriously, and it would have decreased the overall influence of Iowans on the presidential race, which I think everyone can agree is a noble goal.

With that out of the way, I wanted to use this space to flesh out a couple of bare bones thoughts that have been bouncing around after reading Sara's posts at Orcinus about the power (or lack thereof) of protesting and the concept of Liberal Pride parades. I agree with much of her sentiment and recommendations when it comes to protesting, but I'm a little taken aback by the idea of a liberal pride parade. You should go to the site and read it yourself, but let me give a short description: essentially she says that having annual liberal pride parades or picnics or get togethers of some kind is a good way to build community and have a nice time and remind everyone in the community that liberals are present and active. I understand these goals and they seem reasonable, but to call these events liberal pride parades brings some interesting conotations. Maybe I'm just being semantic, but to think of liberals (and I often think of myself as a liberal for the sake of political shorthand) in these terms says something about the mindset of the liberal community.

The gay pride parades which these events would be modeled on had the effect of forcing communities to acknowledge the presence of homosexuals in addition to having an organizational effect on the gay community. But are there really communities that do not know that liberals exist in their midst? Maybe in some small towns across the country that is the case, including many places in South Dakota, my home state. But more interestingly, does being a liberal mean that we are, and always will be, part of a minority that must fight to even be acknowledged? After all, liberals are not starting from zero. There are many members of the US House of Representatives and a even a couple in the Senate who are able to be elected even though they are obviously liberal, and may even say so publically.

Perhaps what I am trying to get at is that liberals are already an established part of the American community. Though they have not been in power for some time, the fact that a liberal could be in power is not completely unimaginable. Being a liberal is a far cry from being an atheist, or a Marxist, or a homosexual in this country. It's not the same as being publically shunned and completely cut off from the centers of power. And there have been times when liberals have largely run things for long periods of time, just as the conservatives have up to the last election. What is lacking in Sara's post is the admission that liberals have not been all that different from conservatives when they have wielded power. Acting like we're an oppressed minority may make us feel good in the sense that we think we didn't help cause all the chaos and misery of the world, but the truth is that we did. Genuinely oppressed minorities can use a pride parade to change the paradigm, but this is a paradigm we helped make.

So getting better organized is fine for liberals and certainly for the left in general. Heaven knows we are not always an organized bunch. But I want to see organization for serious change. Picnics to help elect another democratic congressman are not going to change things--let's quit trying to feel good about ourselves, and start trying to do good around the world.

2 comments:

Matt G. said...

While I hate to see you rip on Tom, a guy I really like, he did seem to run a poor and consequently short campaign. I have to admit that surprises me a little. He ran some outstanding campaigns in Iowa, and more or less won Chet Cullvers seat for him. That I suppose is the difference in a national campaign vs. a state.

Oh by the way, your blog sucks, according to this.

http://www.startribune.com/508/story/1022298.html

Freedom Toaster said...

You'll find no argument here that my blog sucks.