Broken Pottery

It's easy to start casting blame. It's easy to despair.

It's better to think what we can do next. The consequences are not trivial.

First, yes, we must play out the string in Ohio, make absolutely certain that no ballot is left unturned, no disenfranchisement unexamined. The odds are clearly not in our favor, but at the least we must not make the same mistake as in 2000. We must not go gentle into that good night. (Update: Kerry's concession, I'm sure, was made because his staff had the numbers, and they looked impossible. I'm glad they waited until today to be certain.)

Second, whatever the outcome, we must analyze what it is that 51 percent of American voters find attractive, or at least acceptable, in George Bush and his dangerous, radical policies. I remain baffled why so many vote against their own best interests. The economy, the war in Iraq, terrorist threats, civil and legal rights, the environment, wealth transfer to the rich—any one of these seems to me an issue that would turn a strong majority toward a different course. But the sum of all the suicidal policies created to deal with all these issues, even when implemented with incompetence and excused with lies, is not enough. Three and a half million more Americans found that course acceptable than unacceptable. We must determine why.

Third, we must launch a 20-year plan to take back the country for the people who live in it, to reestablish fact-based rational discourse, to make clear the profound moral values that underlie progressive policies. The right started their campaign many years ago with Goldwater the extremist, then elected Reagan the simplifier and now Bush the Manichean, by creating a reactionary universe of discourse that masked their retrograde policies. Our job is easier, because the alternative universe of discourse we must create is based on reality, pragmatism, self-interest, and true morality.

In the midst of this wrenching reexamination and movement-building, it is important that we progressives not turn on each other. Kerry was a smart, tenacious candidate, and he made very few missteps. He should be honored for his valiant effort. So should we all, the contributors and organizers, bloggers and canvassers, voters and get-out-the-voters. Unity is essential. We must all keep our eyes on the prize.

In the meantime, as Mark Schmitt astutely notes, if Bush is in office for four more years, he will be the one to face the consequences of his disastrous policies. At least we avoid the pitfall of a President Kerry and the Democratic Party being blamed for the catastrophes that loom. Schmitt writes:

One important thing to remember: Now Bush is fully responsible for the consequences of his mistakes. He's responsible for Iraq, he's responsible for the budget, for Medicare, etc. What Colin Powell called the Pottery Barn Rule applies: He broke them, he owns them. That's not good news for the world, because Bush wasn't competent to deal with the situation of peace and prosperity handed to him in 2001; he certainly isn't competent to handle a mess. The dangers are profound.

 

But politically, it at least avoids a situation where Kerry would have borne the responsibility and blame for Iraq or for raising taxes. All accountability now rests with Bush and his party. Everything that's been swept under the carpet until after the election will come creeping out. And the best use of all the resources of people, brains, money, and coordination that's been built this year, in addition to developing a stronger base of ideas, is to find ways to hold Bush, DeLay et. al. absolutely accountable for their choices. I really believe that this will be like Nixon's second term, and thus the seeds of a bigger long-term change than could have occurred just by Kerry winning the election.

Small comfort for us, and none in the short term, but a hopeful long-term perspective nonetheless. This will be an opportunity to build the movement on a new foundation and create a new America, free, egalitarian, and fearless.

Comments

[Chris]

Thanks.

[Jo]

It is absolutely necessary to examine this election, however painful, to understand exactly who voted yesterday. I would like to point out that, in Missouri, while the voters preferred Bush for president and a novice Republican for governor, at the same time they gave the acidic, reactionary Catherine Hanaway the boot in favor of a more liberal Robin Carnahan for secty of state. This is inconsistent, and implies that a matter as simple as personality plays a major role in the decisions people make at the voting booth. That this might be the case even at a time when other matters are critical (war, economy) suggests a remarkably uneducated public. Do we also need a folksy front-man?

[me]

Collectible Pottery