Let me admit this right up front: this sucks<\/i>. It’s depressing. And it makes things harder for the immediate future.<\/p>\n
The big mistake the Democrats, and most of the left, made was to believe that by winning elections we will change the country.<\/p>\n
Just the opposite is true. It is only by changing the country that we will win elections.<\/b><\/p>\n
We need to stop thinking in terms of winning elections, and start thinking about persuading more of the country to believe our ideas. If we do that, elections will follow.<\/p>\n
What does that mean for the left? We still lack an effective left counterpart to the Heritage Foundation and the Fox News Network; by which I mean, we lack effective institutions dedicated not to pushing our candidates but instead to pushing our ideas. And that’s killing us.<\/p>\n
Some lefty blogger just sent me an email saying that we should say “We’re preparing for 2006 and 2008 and 2010 and 2012 now.” To which I say, stop thinking in terms of even-numbered years. We need to build institutions that change the way our society thinks, and if that program doesn’t fit into a two-year electoral cycle, then throw away the cycle.<\/p>\n
Nader has the right idea – he’s out there running a campaign for progressive ideas. The problem with Nader is that presidential elections aren’t an effective platform for progressive ideas. By concentrating on being a presidential candidate, Nader guarantees that the only thing that anyone discusses about him is his “spoiler” potential. I admire Nader enormously, but we have to get away from thinking that elections are how we advance progressive ideas.<\/p>\n
I’m not saying people shouldn\u2019t vote for Nader, or for Cobb, or for Kerry. I’m saying we should stop thinking that “Nader vs Kerry” is a pressing issue for us to argue about. Elections must stop being the center of our political universe.<\/p>\n
Measure this fight in generations, not in elections. In 1984, marital rape was still legal in most states and not even Walter Mondale would have dared come out in favor of civil unions. In 2004, even with control of all three branches of government, pro-lifers are waging war on “partial birth” abortions because they don’t think they can win a fight against the other 99.9% of abortions. Massachusetts has same-sex marriage, and with the failure of the FMA that’s not going away.<\/p>\n
I’m still thinking about what this all means for reproductive rights, for lesbian and gay rights, for women’s rights, and for gender freedom in general. I’ll be posting more about this in weeks to come. But I remain confident that – despite hard times to come, despite Bush’s re-election, despite the loss of gay marriage measures throughout the country, and despite the Supreme Court’s likely change in the next few years from “bad” to “Holy Fuck!” – the momentum of history remains on our side.<\/p>\n
In 1986, Ronald Reagan won re-election, and the world seemed pretty hopeless. Look at all that’s happened since then – not all good, but real progress has been made. Not all of the next twenty years will be good, either – but that doesn’t mean that we can’t move forward a lot between now and 2024.<\/p>\n
Measure in generations, not in elections.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Let me admit this right up front: this sucks. It’s depressing. And it makes things harder for the immediate future. The big mistake the Democrats, and most of the left, made was to believe that by winning elections we will … Continue reading