Appeasement Won’t Work
I like Michael Smerconish. His Saturday morning show on CNN is appointment TV for me. His commentary is thoughtful and reasonable, and I find myself agreeing with his take on things most of the time.
But in a recent episode he said something that struck me as off base. It was shortly after Democratic Socialist of America candidates had won primary elections in congressional districts around New York City. In response, Smerconish said that that Democratic establishment would need to find a way to appease the DSA folks without blowing their chances to win in more competitive districts, or words to that effect.
It was the word “appease” that struck me as off the mark. Based upon what I have seen from a distance, my interactions with local folks of the DSA mindset, and my understanding of history, appeasement won’t work. I would advise the democratic establishment to steer clear of that strategy.
Michael Smerconish, Photo by David S. Holloway/CNN, on Columbia Journalism Review website.
Here it is important to make a few points. I think it is imperative that the Democrats take back at least the US House of Representatives this election cycle. The Trump administration was proven itself to be a rogue operation. And the Republicans in Congress have proven to be unwilling to check the president’s actions. This paradigm must be broken.
However, whenever a DSA candidate defeats a so-called establishment candidate in an already blue district, we come no closer to achieving that objective.
By necessity, for the Democrats to win back control of the House of Representatives, Democrats will have to win in districts that are currently being represented by Republicans. Meaning that they are not naturally left-leaning districts. Meaning that they are not likely to embrace the DSA platform.
Democratic Socialists of America co-chair Megan Romer. Screenshot via The New Yorker/YouTube
Speaking of which, there are elements of the DSA platform that strike me as self-indulgent, shortsighted and not grounded in anything approximating reality. I will leave it to you to do your own research to discern if you agree with my assessment.
But two platform items in particular strike me as “tells.” One is a proposal to eliminate the US Senate. The other proposal is the replacement of the President and the Supreme Court with an executive & judiciary chosen by and subordinate to Congress.
I interpret these platform items as a tacit recognition by the DSA that their proposals do not have broad appeal. Meaning US Senators must be elected statewide, rather than from highly gerrymandered Congressional districts. Of course, the President must be elected nationwide.
Could the DSA's platform idea to eliminate the U.S. Senate even become a possibility? Photo: U.S. senators at work on the Senate floor in the Senate chamber, U.S. Capitol, Washington, D.C. Photo from Brittanica
Does anyone who has even a rudimentary understanding of how our governmental construct is supposed to work, think that things would be better if we had a unicameral national legislature that functions like the current House of Representatives? I don’t think so.
Aside from a platform that I cannot support, there is something else about this group that bothers me, and it is stylistic. Many of these folks demonstrate two qualities in other people that offend me the most. Those qualities are arrogance and intolerance.
Arrogance in that they seem to be so sure that they are right. I don’t think the word humility is a part of their active vocabularies. And intolerance in that they seem to regard those who don’t agree with any of their policy prescriptions as heretics and sellouts and any other manner of pejorative adjectives. They cast themselves as revolutionaries determined to “tear it all down.” This is why appeasement won’t work.
It is certainly not my intent to demean or disregard them in any way. On the contrary. I think a lot of these DSA types are very smart and very charismatic. This makes them attractive to a certain part of the electorate.
But I think they know that as a standalone political party their chances of achieving their stated objectives are close to zero. Instead, they seem to be determined to highjack the Democratic party. And if the Democratic Party (the party of FDR and Truman, JFK and LBJ, Carter and Clinton, Obama and Biden) allows this takeover to happen then they will deserve what they get.
Considering this loud and growing movement, what is the Democratic party to do? I can distill it to one word: FIGHT!
Since most of these DSA types are big on supporting “fighters,” the establishment Democratic party should show these folks what a fight looks like.
Three of the Establishment Democratic Party leaders: Obama, Biden and Clinton. Photo: Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images, Washington Post
I was recently watching a show on MS NOW, and one of the panelists was haranguing the Democratic establishment. In response, former Democratic National Committee Chairman Jamie Harrison politely but forcefully chided the other panelist by basically saying, when you talk about the establishment who do you mean? Do you mean the folks who have been organizing, raising money and getting Democrats elected across this country for years? Is that who you mean? I loved that spirited defense of normal. And I want to see more of it, especially from people who know supposedly know better.
Spirited Jaime Harrison, Former Chair of the Democratic National Commitee. Photo: Jeff Blake/The State via AP
Therefore, I’ll be looking to at least some of the 2028 Presidential candidates, to see if they have anything approximating a backbone. Will they push back hard against the nonsense, or will they capitulate to the crazy?
The next President needs to be able to stand up to Putin in Russia and Xi in China and a host of other bad actors around the world. But to earn my vote, candidates must first demonstrate that they can stand up to these well-meaning but misguided upstarts. For the sake of our party and the sake of our country.
Finally, if I thought that reasoning with some of these folks and trying to come together as an actual “big tent” party was a viable option, I would certainly advocate for that. But based on what I have seen so far, I don’t see that as feasible. There is no reasoning with revolutionaries.
I sincerely hope that I am wrong. But if not, so be it. This reckoning is long overdue.
Steve Bradshaw
Steve Bradshaw served for eight years on the DeKalb County, Georgia Board of Commissioners. He is also a former corporate sales executive, adjunct college professor, and US Army officer.
Stay Connected
Comments