Roddey Reid
Source: U.S. Congress, photo via Wikimedia Commons; Indivisble.org;
photo via Wikimedia Commons (BY SA 4.0)
Article also available here on Medium .com.
In the wake of the publication of my last blog posting, “We Have Been Here Before: Political Violence’s Transformative Power” (Medium.com, Oct. 27, 2018) that was prompted by acts of domestic political terrorism just before the elections, a fellow member of Indivisible San Francisco asked me to flesh out my call for “a robust and courageous counter-strategy, which is what is needed to anticipate and combat the growing waves of right-wing and white nationalist violence in our country that has acquired a momentum that now feeds on itself.”
Today, in light of the electoral Blue Wave that caught most observers by surprise, and the release last week by Indivisible.org of its new activist guide (Indivisible on Offense: A Practical Guide to the New Democratic House), I want to offer several ideas about not only how to anticipate and counter political violence but also how over the next two years Democrats — and liberals and progressives generally — should confront Republican acts of intimidation. This is no small task as Republicans — now more than ever — have undergone accelerated radicalization over the last 10 years at the hands of first the Tea Party and its funders, then Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, and finally Donald Trump. They do not hesitate to deploy all manner of political intimidation and public bullying against their opponents including publicly encouraging violent acts by supporters or otherwise unstable citizens and residents through straightforward racist and anti-Semitic appeals.
I want to argue that confronting the aggressive tactics of such remorseless opponents will require a transformation of the Democratic Party in terms of its self-image, public postures, and overall approach to political conflict in governmental institutions and the public media. As a Hungarian colleague, who has watched apprehensively as the U.S. has edged closer to the kind of legal authoritarianism or illiberal democracy already in place in his home country, put it, thanks to the Blue Wave “democracy in America is now back on life support.” But absent changes in Democratic politics and a strategy for countering political intimidation and violence, the best efforts of Indivisible and other new activist organizations to “pave the way to the post-Trump era” (Indivisible on Offense, p. 2) may well founder. I worry that Democratic leaders, under the pressure from a rush of events (domestic terrorist attacks, a constitutional crisis, what have you) will revert back to their old strategies that met Republican aggression with tepid responses that command the respect of no one. Remaking the country entails, I argue, remaking the strategies of the Democratic Party and its allied organizations.
As I wrote previously, there are now signs of a new awareness that the GOP’s rightwing violence is not just an ethical problem or one of “civility” but a political one as well. It has often worked for them very well but now poses a threat to our democracy. After the discovery of mail bombs targeting Democratic politicians and Trump critics, for once Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer cast aside their reflexive expressions of hopeful bipartisanhip and issued an aggressive rebuke to Trump and Republicans for creating the harsh national climate that enables such heinous actions. They finally seemed to realize that even-handed, bipartisan approaches meant to reassure the public in the past are simply not equipped to deal with the roots and methods of contemporary political violence. But one statement, however strong, does not constitute a robust strategy, which is what is needed now, all the more so in that acts of political skullduggery and intimidation continue to occur almost daily as the firing of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and GOP attempts to discredit and stop the Florida recount make clear.
Most likely, things will only get worse over the next two months during the legislative lame duck sessions before Republicans cede control of the House of Representatives and seven state legislatures to victorious Democrats. The Blue Wave did not come as a surprise to the GOP although its very depth most likely did. But I doubt it will destabilize or paralyze them in any way (the case may be different for Trump). Let’s not forget: the Republicans are masters of the long game, and they probably made the cold political calculation that achieving a hard-right majority on the Supreme Court for thirty years via the Kavanaugh appointment would cost them the majority in the House and some state legislatures in 2018, which they could always win back in 2020 or 2022. It was a price they were willing to pay.
Countering the Republican Attack Machine and the Threat of Political Violence
By now political intimidation and public bullying have become a well-oiled — and successful — political tool that in the hands of the current administration and its right-wing allies is no longer a reprehensible method of campaigning but has become a form of daily governing. To be effective it entails an element of surprise that pre-emptively seizes the initiative, dominates the news cycle, and throws opponents off-balance by virtue of its aggressive timing, speed, and volume (streams of tweets, disciplined talking points, Internet bots and trolls), and extreme content (saying and doing the unthinkable). It can even incite people to cross the line and commit outright acts of terrorism against opponents.
So what are Democrats and their liberal and progressives allies to do?
Many of the answers lie right before our eyes. In a sense they are simply extensions of what activist groups like Indivisible.org, Swing Left, Sister District Project, and Democratic Socialists of America have been doing all along over the last two years, which have been largely ignored by the press and mainstream media. They performed the patient, detailed work of nuts and bolts policymaking, lobbying, stiffening liberal politicians’ resolve, holding them accountable, promoting new candidates, registering new voters, and turning out the vote. They also joined the more public, direct actions of Black Lives Matter, #TakeAKnee, Muslim ban protests and the massive Women’s March and March for Our Lives meant to restore a sense of dignity and safety to public life, and supported the work of these groups’ fearless organizers.
Both kinds of aggressive responses to the new administration’s agenda created the groundwork that made the Blue Wave happen. But it is not clear that the lessons of their dogged and courageous political actions were fully appreciated by the Democratic Party leadership, although recent concessions made by Nancy Pelosi to the House’s growing Progressive Caucus is a good sign, at least of a shift in internal party power dynamics if not in the leadership’s fundamental approach to the political challenges facing us all.
So here are a few ideas in the form of suggestions for fresh — and perhaps more effective — approaches to the ongoing political crisis. They are divided into two parts to be published separately: Part One below is devoted to renewing the Democratic Party as an effective force in the current harsh climate of political intimidation and public bullying; and Part Two formulates suggestions of how to deal with the threat of rightwing domestic terrorism as a political problem and existential threat to democratic institutions and progressive values. The suggestions in Part One provide the basis for and lead to those in Part Two in a follow-up posting.
Part One: Robust Strategies and Counterstrategies
This involves good defense but also good offense now that Democrats will control the House and seven additional state legislatures starting next January. I want to argue that the most robust strategies will continue to include both the nuts and bolts legislative and electoral activism outlined in great detail in Indivisible’s original and new guides and the pressure of numbers outside of the ballot box as in the mobilization of citizens and residents in politicians’ offices, legislative chambers, and in the streets.
Good Defense
· Exit the fixed practice of silence: simply ignoring Republican and right-wing provocations and aggression or greeting them with enunciations of lofty principles not backed up by meaningful action hands the political field — and the news cycle and its dominant narratives — to the perpetrators. Examples go as far back as the racist Willie Horton ads that helped destroy Michael Dukakis’ candidacy in 1988 and up to Brett Kavanaugh’s and Lindsay Graham’s recent denigration of the motives of their Democratic colleagues in terms of wild conspiracy allegations reminiscent of the worst days of McCarthyism. In the face of endless baiting by Republicans, choosing whether and how to respond is no easy task, but a rigid policy of non-response is self-defeating.
· Drop a purely reactive stance. Waiting for Republicans to act again leaves them with the initiative and makes Democrats and their allies look weak, a fatal flaw in the current gladiatorial theater of dominance.
· Develop a nimble politics of anticipation:
o Think of this as the political equivalent of earthquake preparedness.
o Take seriously right-wing violence in all its forms because it has often worked — from smears and character assassination, disinformation and “gaslighting,” and fear-mongering to verbal threats of physical assault and assassination and actual acts of violence. Think through how politically damaging they have been
o Develop a rapid response infrastructure for if and when you decide to respond in the form of not only political messaging and talking points but also mobilization of supporters to gather in offices, halls of government, or on the sidewalk to put pressure on right-wing politicians and their allies. This is something that Indivisble.org, Black Lives Matter, Democratic Socialists of America, and other groups have excelled at and from which the Democratic Party could learn. Such an infrastructure would have perhaps come in handy two weeks ago when the GOP sent hundreds of operatives and supporters to Broward County, Florida to help block and discredit the recount. One striking example of a successful rapid response is Black Lives Matter’s reply to a video released by the NRA June 2017 featuring Dana Loesch who accused Jews and Blacks of fomenting violence and threatening them with retaliation. Displaying a mastery of quick response, Black Lives Matter issued a powerful video that countered slander within the same news cycle and demanded that the NRA retract the inflammatory tape.
o Examine points of vulnerability. In other words, look in the mirror and review past and present statements, policies, and actions — and even personal biographies — for potential weaknesses (misleading appearances and associations, ambiguities that need clarifying, inconsistencies, etc.) that political enemies can seize upon and exploit. Remember there is no psychological, social, or ethical boundary that can’t be violated. The essence of intimidation is doing the unthinkable to destabilize an opponent. For that reason alone, intimidation is hard to live with and hard to anticipate. Sadly, in today’s politics appearances — and their manipulation — are everything, and we can’t afford to overlook them.
o So, spend some time imagining the unimaginable from the point of view of a hostile and ruthless opponent and sensationalist mainstream media that are quick to indulge in cheap cynicism and skeptical hearsay and take steps to pre-empt or ward off such attacks. In 2016 Hillary Clinton ran a defiant campaign but she failed to take seriously how vulnerable her candidacy would be to issues concerning her private email server, hacked emails, speeches to the Wall Street firm Goldmann-Sachs, and dysfunctional campaign staff until it was too late.
Good Offense
As Indivisible on Offense writes, “Offense is exciting, but it’s more complex than defense” (p. 2). Why is that so? In part, the document seems to suggest, because we now have the opportunity of defining the issues, setting agendas, and initiating action instead of simply responding to Republican policies and legislation. But in order to do this, Democrats have to abandon past ways of dealing with the harsh climate of political intimidation infecting our public life:
· Break with traditional Democratic cautiousness that seems to come into play whatever the electoral outcome: lose, party leaders preach “caution” and win, they still urge “caution.” The caution is always directed at their liberal/progressive base, never towards the centrists that have populated the upper ranks of the party and who are responsible for many of the electoral failures of the past 30 years. Such Democratic actions reveal a fundamental commitment of energies and resources regardless of circumstance to a narrow strategy of predictable electoral outcomes and, it must be said, internal control. It has not been an expansive, risk-taking approach but rather one based on a zero-sum model of political authority and capital that are viewed as always prone to atrophy: if you use it or share it, you lose it. It can never truly grow. In this view, additional investments and expenditures in the way of adopting new narrative frames or themes, pursuing new strategies, appealing to disgruntled or apathetic never-voters, expanding its voter constituency, or opening up party echelons to new blood, can only deplete the party’s strength, never increase it. It would seem that its political capital must be saved for a future time — a time that is almost always deferred and rarely materializes.
· Adopt a no-nonsense posture and take the offensive. This is probably the toughest task awaiting party leaders and their allies, especially since they have shown themselves to be invariably risk-adverse. Just recently, they wrapped themselves in the mantle of “civility” without explaining what they mean. Thus they left it up to the media and the Republicans to define it for them in a way that always discriminates against progressive causes and deems any form of non-violent direct action illegitimate. Even Hillary Clinton now has expressed doubts about the wisdom of civility as a political stance. And given news media outlets’ tendency to apply a double standard to Democrats (when they attempt to occupy the “higher ground” in the face of smears and intimidation) and to engage in staging superficial, false “equivalences” between the parties, powerful messaging is all the more needed. The goal is to render a more offensive political posture entirely reasonable and legitimate to the press and the general public and, last but not least, positively feared by Republicans.
o To do this Democrats have to prepare their supporters, the public, and the media for this new, more energetic profile. This will require no small effort, for the image of past timidity and inaction weighs heavily on any new Democratic initiative. As any good sociologist or business consultant will tell you, in large organizations in decline, a sclerotic, risk-adverse leadership generally is incapable of renewing itself on its own, committed as it is to past policies, strategies, personnel, methods, etc. It will be no less true of Congressional leaders, the Democratic Leadership Council, and the Democratic National Committee. It will take pressure from younger, newly elected officials, Democratic voters, and liberal and progressive activist groups whose unstinting efforts helped create the electoral Blue Wave.
o This also involves new narratives and rallying cries on issues that voters care about and will continue to care about for years to come. It also includes a new combative tone that goes beyond outrage to communicate firmness and resolve as well as an unwavering commitment to protect and take care of their constituents and vulnerable citizens and residents generally. The backbone of this new combativeness is more than attitude: it involves pursuing set of policies about issues citizens and residents hold dear: a living wage, defending Obamacare and extending the healthcare protections of Medicare and Medicaid, a secure retirement, a robust infrastructure, access to public services, and a humane immigration policy. Instead of following the script adopted by the mainstream media and Republicans, Democrats, liberals, and progressives must constantly re-write it themselves and flood the Internet and cable outlets with it seizing control of the news cycle and talking points. Call it Indivisible’s “agenda-setting power” on steroids (pp. 5–6).
o This fearless posture will thrill the base and put the opposition on notice not to mess with you. It will also impress onlookers. People are attracted to dynamic, self-confident, and active organizations that appeared poised to get things done and stand ready to take care of their own. Nothing elicits more contempt than failed paternalists who demand all control but take no responsibility and leave their members unprotected in face of the assaults by their opponents.
· Cease issuing automatic calls for bipartisanship. This is especially important when such calls are publicized without making clear that there would be political consequences for the GOP for not accepting them. As Indivisible on Offense aptly puts it, “No one from the Senate Republican caucus is going to save us, so Democrats must refuse to ‘go along to get along’” (p.19). Make bipartisanship conditional, not an inflexible principle or identity. Standard Democratic boilerplate for years, appeals to bipartisanship now seem tired and empty, and in light of the Party’s record of ineffective responses to GOP’s scorched-earth tactics, weak:
o These tactics do not reassure liberal and progressive voters who thirst for inspiring, courageous leadership willing to take chances
o but they do encourage Republicans who know they do not face determined opposition
o they tie the hands of Democratic politicians and their allies for when the time comes to push back against the GOP and go on offense
Absent a robust defense and offense, I fear that the Democratic Party will continue to be the largely ineffective force it is today in Washington and state capitals.
Conclusion
Being subjected to daily barrages of political intimidation is exhausting. For many it has even been traumatic. Such political violence is meant to drive us from the political arena and keep us home, off the streets and away from the halls of power. It will surely continue. And possibly so will acts of domestic political terrorism that pose an even more existential threat to our institutions and progressive values (see Part Two). So we shouldn’t let the success of the Blue Wave delude us into thinking that the national nightmare is almost over. Rather, “democracy is now back on life support,” and we could still lose it. Thus there is a lot of work to do. That is one of the points of Indivisible’s new guide.
In the end, it’s about converting some of the style and substance of new activist groups and public marches into tactics and strategies of Democratic politicians and their allies. It’s about combining passion with craftiness, energy with strategy, in other words, developing political street smarts that invest as much in meaningful actions as in a lofty self-image.
The point is to re-galvanize our sclerotic political process, take back our stolen future, and restore dignity and safety to public life.
UP NEXT: “Creating Courageous and Robust Political Strategies, Part II: Countering Acts of Political Violence and Domestic Terrorism”
Roddey Reid is Professor Emeritus, UC San Diego (rreid@ucsd.edu) and author of Confronting Political intimidation and Public Bullying: A Citizen’s Handbook for the Trump Era and Beyond (2017). He is a member of Indivisible San Francisco.
No comments:
Post a Comment