|
I Am No Longer A Liberal Democrat
BUZZFLASH READER COMMENTARY
by CR
Dear BuzzFlash:
If it's one thing republicans can never be accused of, it is that they do not understand the power of propaganda. After waging their eight-year campaign of the politics of personal destruction against President William Jefferson Clinton, and suffering the political backlash of the war they waged to overturn the will of the People, they knew full-well that the sermons they offered from the self-imposed morals pedestal from which they preached, could be used against them, and that the consequences would be devastating for their party. The hypocritical Newt Gingriches of their party were viewed as being extremists, and the republicans immediately launched a campaign of damage control. Their chosen weapon was propaganda. The republicans knew that they needed to define democrats as being extremists, and their objective was twofold: to deflect the public from focusing on their own extremism, and to divide and conquer the Democratic Party.
Because President Clinton's leadership appealed to moderates within the Democratic Party, and the republicans had been whipped so soundly by that appeal, the Republican Party's efforts at damage control would have to rely heavily on propaganda. They rationalized that since Newt Gingrich’s fight was viewed as being extremist by moderates, that if they perverted the right words, and that if they repeated them often enough, that they could convince those same moderates that anyone in the democratic party who spoke out against the opposition could be viewed as partisan extremists.
The republicans then took the word 'liberal' and perverted its meaning. Liberalism was no longer defined by ideology, rather by outspokenness. The republicans played on democratic leadership's weakness -- that it is necessary to appeal to moderates -- and it wasn't long before even the Democratic Party distanced itself from those from within their own party who dared to criticize the opposition. Soon, those democrats who spoke out were called 'partisans,' or even worse, 'liberals.' Being 'moderate' soon meant being 'bipartisan.' It meant squelching criticism, even to the point of capitulation. In other words: liberals and moderates were no longer defined by ideology, but by demeanor.
Democratic leadership now believes that only 20% of democratic grassroots are liberals. After the propaganda engaged in by both parties, it's no wonder that most democrats do not define themselves as being liberals -- but it's not because of ideology -- it's because of an effective propaganda campaign waged by the republicans to demonize the word, and democratic leadership's being suckered in by it. Is it any wonder, then, why dissent is viewed as being unpatriotic? Liberals are, after all, extremists now. This is a view apparently embraced by both parties. Democrats who are so frightened by being labeled as ‘liberals’ remain silent, while a one-party system takes over. The republicans no longer have opposition.
Because I believe dissent to be patriotic; because I believe in a two-party system; and because the Republican Party has effectively demonized those democrats who speak out-- equating them with extremist tendencies, and calling them 'liberals,' I am willing to give up the 'liberal' label, but not the demeanor.
I am no longer a liberal Democrat -- I'm a Patriot Democrat. And so, the death of the liberal Democrat lends rise to the Patriot Democrat. I can live with that.
CR
Oklahoma
BUZZFLASH READER COMMENTARY
Articles in the BuzzFlash Contributor section are posted as-is. Given the timeliness of some Contributor articles, BuzzFlash cannot verify or guarantee the accuracy of every word. We strive to correct inaccuracies when they are brought to our attention.
