The Illusory Middle
Comment
By Victor Navasky
August 26, 2008
AP Images
Think of the convention as a series of circles. At the center is the bull's-eye--the convention itself, the delegates assembled at the Pepsi Center, where the public action takes place.
-
McCain (Mis)Speaks
Victor Navasky & Christopher Cerf: How the Senator won the war of words on Iraq again and again and again.
-
The Experts Speak on Iraq
Victor Navasky & Christopher Cerf: To mark the fifth anniversary of the Iraq War, some daily inspiration from the experts who led us there.
-
Who Said the War Would Pay for Itself? They Did!
Victor Navasky & Christopher Cerf: Unwise words from the "experts" who promised a cost-free war.
-
Fourteen Little Words
Victor Navasky: First Amendment biographer Anthony Lewis brings glad tidings: despite Bush, US commitment to free speech "is no longer in doubt."
-
Hiss In History
Victor Navasky: Although many historians have condemned Alger Hiss as a Soviet spy, the facts of his story remain obscure.Victor Navasky: Although many historians have condemned Alger Hiss as a Soviet spy, the facts of his story remain obscure.
Among the circles, there are the funders (one of whom complained to me that "there is plenty of money at this convention--enough to make the difference in, say, twenty close Congressional races. The problem is, there are more than seventy-five close Congressional races, and there's no real forum here to work out a strategy on who gets what").
There are the protesters in the streets (some of whom were pepper-sprayed yesterday, outside the Sheraton Hotel where the New York delegation is staying, although it's still unclear who was protesting what).
There are the lobbyists (not all of them evil) with their receptions and free-flowing booze (like Planned Parenthood's "Sex, Politics, Cocktails Late-Night Dance Party").
There are the journalists (to be found, of course, at the nearest bar--the Ship Tavern in the Brown Palace hotel, opposite the Comfort Inn, where The Nation has put some of us up, isn't bad).
And then there are the policy wonks, who seem to appear at round-the-clock symposia on issues ranging from "Health Care, Not Warfare" to an afternoon of "Ideas on election 2008," in this case co-sponsored by Air America and Progressive Book Club, at a venue called The Big Tent.
"It's not left versus right," said Thom Hartmann, who hosts a show on Air America and was moderating a panel called "The Contest: Progressives vs. Conservatives." "The left is dead. I interviewed the head of the Communist Party and it only has 312 members. It's all-of-America vs. right-wing cranks." Arianna Huffington put it slightly differently: "It's not left versus right because left positions [like universal healthcare, global warming] are now mainstream positions. The problem is with the media, which presents 'all sides' when often there is only one side." David Sirota, author of The Uprising, argued that the key to electoral victory is realizing that "to harness all the energy out there, you have to deal with what pisses people off. Deregulation and NAFTA--which both parties are responsible for--have made ordinary people angry. You have to force the party to take progressive positions."
I agree with all of the above. But I also believe that Barack Obama, who ran a brilliant, bottom-up primary campaign, is so far making a big post-primary mistake. And it doesn't have to do with ideological flip-flops (like not fulfilling his promise to filibuster the FISA bill that gave legal immunity to telecommunications companies who facilitated illegal government eavesdropping, "refining" his position on Iraq, and such). Although the list is too long, he can justify each of these decisions case by case.
His mistake is the same one that the last two Democratic candidates for President--Gore and Kerry--made. The assumption (shared by too many campaign consultants) that the way to woo those in the center is to move towards the center. Arianna Huffington, I believe, has a point when she advises, "Instead of targeting the swing voters he should target the unlikely voters." But I would argue there's nothing wrong with targeting the swing voters. What's wrong is to pander to them on the assumption that the way to win them over is to move towards the center.
The reason they are undecided is precisely because they are not Democrats or Republicans, and they don't care about left vs. right. They care about finding someone they can connect with, a candidate they can trust. And as soon as they see a candidate who appears to be listening to his consultants and pollsters rather than being true to himself, they see a candidate who has betrayed what they care about most: authenticity.
Because this is so clearly a Democratic year, Obama may well win even if he persists in traveling down the illusory middle. But if that's the way he wins, it will be too bad, because he will be a President without a mandate--or with, at best, a diluted one.
- Get The Nation at home (and online!) for 75 cents a week!
- If you like this article, consider making a donation to The Nation.
About Victor Navasky
Victor Navasky, publisher emeritus of The Nation, was the magazine's editor from 1978 to 1995 and publisher and editorial director from 1995 to 2005. He is currently the director of the George Delacorte Center for Magazine Journalism at Columbia University. His books include Kennedy Justice, the American Book Award winner Naming Names and, most recently, A Matter of Opinion. more...- Copyright © 2008 The Nation
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.
No comments:
Post a Comment