Democratism

The link goes to a discussion thread at DailyKos where I posted a diary indicating why Dean's comments were boneheaded. Unfortunately, the responses to the diary increased my suspicion that the polarization of our politics has produced all too many people on the left who simply want to replace the GOP, not defeat the underlying dynamic of poisoned politics.

Defeating GOP extremism is indeed the paramount concern. In that respect, I fully understand Matt's and Jeremy's prioritizing. But Republicanism is today's problem; Democratism is potentially tomorrow's. I will be looking in 2008 for a leader who will eschew the path that leads to Democratism rather than the one who is saddled with its baggage.

Howard Dean spoke during the campaign of a unified politics, based on principles and honesty, and promised that such a course would lead to electoral success. It is deeply ironic that Dean's defenders today are the ones who explicitly disavow those principles - and don't even appreciate the irony.

Comments

Nonpartisan said…
Aziz, I still disagree with you here. Democratism is not the problem of tomorrow because Republicanism is not the problem of today. John McCain, Chuck Hagel, Lindsey Graham are not the problem. The Radical Right is the problem.

If you see a sign that the Radical Left (people like Ralph Nader et al.) are taking over the Democratic Party, then I will begin to worry about Democratism. But I don't think Hillary Clinton and Evan Bayh are nearly so scary as Rick Santorum -- simply because they are respectable people espousing a respectable ideology. There are Republicans like that too, but they are marginalized at the moment.

Popular posts from this blog

A fair solution to Jerusalem

Conservatism's shari'a, liberalism's ijtihad