In 1986, Democratic political commentator Sidney Blumenthal claimed that the GOP was entering a new phase of power and hegemony and criticized the rise of what he called the conservative "counter-establishment." This was shown, he claimed, by Ronald Reagan's two presidential wins, his premiership over the GOP and a newfound sense of conservative belonging-ness in America.
It would seem today America is witnessing the rise of another counter-establishment -- this time led by progressive liberal Democrats. One can characterize this new emergence of liberal progressivism as a movement attempting to reverse the entrenchment of conservatism in American politics.
Today the liberal establishment is showing signs of unification and increased strength. While politicians including Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton showed their support for Kerry last week, left-leaning organizations and individuals such as the Brookings Institution and Paul Krugman stepped up their subtle yet sharp criticisms of conservative practices. Elements of the conservative establishment -- from the American Enterprise Institute to Republican politicians -- continue to remain on the defensive.
With the 2004 election, this trend is becoming more and more apparent. Howard Dean proved in his campaign that a radical liberal voice is gaining ground in America. His staunch anti-war platform and liberal domestic policies won over many supporters and lent a renewed progressive voice to the Democratic Party. John Kerry welcomed Dean's voice to his campaign last week, understanding the importance of appealing to this growing base of neo-progressive liberals.
The conservative establishment is understandably very worried about this liberal resurgence. Last week's poisonous attacks against former administration official Richard Clarke by Republican politicians showed the fear they have of losing political ground. Not only do they understand that their current political dominance is fleeting at best, but they understand that even the smallest change in voter perceptions could cause a shift towards the Democrats. Certainly the conservative establishment is not on solid ground as they would like to think. Republicans ought to ask themselves why voters are still split 50/50 today as they were in 2000, despite their wartime leadership.
The liberal establishment will have to answer to two subjects this year: terrorism and economic policy. Democratic liberals have a history of good economic policy and good economic results; FDR and his New Dealers took America out of depression, and Clinton presided over a huge a economic expansion. Certainly liberals ought to remind voters that Democrats will manage the economy with better results. Democrats such as Kerry and Senator Tom Daschle must prove to voters that the policies they propose will indisputably strengthen America's economy and that conservative economic policy has been and will continue to be destructive.
Republicans piggy-backed to power in 1980 and 1984 by arguing that America was still vulnerable to an ailing communist Russia. Defense issues were at the top of voter concerns. The coming election will be the same. If Democrats want to overthrow the conservative monopoly on war and defense issues, they must first prove they can act with the same decisiveness as Republicans. This means merging Dean's anti-war voice with Kerry's "just-war" voice -- that the war on terror can be pursued by means less spectacular than preemption. Perhaps a return to Clinton's "muscular multilateralism" would ground a Democratic foreign policy agenda.
But as conservatives swing America further and further right, they run the risk of fueling the growth of reactionary liberalism -- Dean is the most recent example of this phenomenon. Another example is New Labour in Britain, which is partly the child of Margaret Thatcher's intense and prolonged conservative political reign. One might even argue Spain's election surprise is another example of reactionary political left-turns.
If Republicans win the presidency once again is almost certain liberal Democrats will have enough political capital to undo the conservative lock in 2008. Ironically enough, most of this capital will be the blowback from conservatism's own radical agenda and ideology. The goal should not be to wait until 2008, however -- there are still eight months left until November.
Michael Huerta's column appears every two weeks.
