Archives for 2008

Dredging up what is now ancient history, I think one of the funniest aspects of the Beauchamp spectacle from last year was the way the New Republic became branded as a hard left, America-hating magazine for the dirty fucking hippy set, when in reality it is a center left magazine (and many times marginally that) that was pro-war and has featured as editor such left-wing luminaries as Andrew Sullivan and Michael Kelly. The whole thing was absurd.

The reason I mention this is because today, by way of discussing the Democratic cave-in on FISA, Glenn Greenwald talks about the TNR’s past pro-war support and names a new disease:

More importantly, it’s a perfect museum exhibit to illustrate how the Democratic Party failed completely to provide any meaningful opposition to the extremism, excesses and abuses of the Bush years, instead enabling and endorsing those abuses when they weren’t standing by meekly and quietly allowing it all to take root. Throughout the Bush era, the Democratic Party has been dominated by The New Republic Syndrome — Democrats who are either petrified of meaningfully opposing the right-wing agenda that has dominated our country or who support virtually all of it, while eagerly volunteering to serve as the most vocal demonizers of those who want our country to have a real opposition party.

Despite those forced mea culpas and reversals, TNR never actually learns. Today — in a post bearing the very sensible and Serious title: “Keeping FISA in Perspective” — TNR is here, via Josh Patashnik, to tell you that there’s nothing truly disturbing about the FISA bill that is about to pass…

***

The reason these posts are worth noting is because they so perfectly capture the mindset that needs to be undermined more than any other. It’s this mentality that has destroyed the concept of checks and limits in our political system; it’s why we have no real opposition party; and it’s why the history of the Democrats over the last seven years has been to ignore and then endorse one extremist Bush policy after the next. It’s because even as The New Republic Syndrome has been proven to be false and destructive over and over — even its practitioners have been forced to recognize that — it continues to be the guiding operating principle of the party’s leadership.

The defining beliefs of this Syndrome are depressingly familiar, and incomparably destructive: Anything other than tiny, marginal opposition to the Right’s agenda is un-Serious and radical. Objections to the demolition of core constitutional protections is shrill and hysterical. Protests against lawbreaking by our high government officials and corporations are disrespectful and disruptive. Challenging the Right’s national security premises is too scary and politically costly. Those campaigning against Democratic politicians who endorse and enable the worst aspects of Bush extremism are “nuts,” “need to have their heads examined,” and are “exactly the sorts of fanatics who tore the party apart in the late 1960s and early 1970s.” Those who oppose totally unprovoked and illegal wars are guilty of “abject pacifism.”

It’s exactly that mentality that has brought us to where we are as a country and a political system today.

In that light, it is easier for me to understand why many think Obama has cut and run on FISA, despite maintaining he will work to remove immunity. From my perspective, I don’t see much of a capitulation, but more of a recognition of the realities, but if you look at what Glenn and I are both arguing (and neither one of us supports the FISA bill), it seems like the difference between the two of us is really in what we think of as the long-term strategy. For me, the long-term is in the context of the election, and November is the end-game. With my mindset, you look at the political realities, realize you are right on the issue but the politics are against you, cut your losses and keep working towards changing the game in November. I just don’t see anything in the works that will be game-changing regarding this piece of legislation- it is going to pass, no matter what Obama does.

For Glenn, the long-term means the fight must start now, and if you fight now, the election will turn your way, as it will be a reflection of the public’s embrace of your willingness to fight. Any of the short-term political concerns that I noted here are of little relevance, and your larger message will carry the day. In essence, Glenn is arguing that the reason Democrats keep losing is because they refuse to fight, and I have to admit, there is a helluva lot of truth to that. With that in mind, I can fully understand why many feel let-down by Obama’s “capitulation.” Again, I do not see it as a capitulation, but a recognition that the fight is lost and there is no point wasting political capital on the issue, but if you work from Glenn’s frame, anything other than a barn-burning rebuke of the FISA garbage that just passed the house is capitulation.

In short, in my way of looking at things, nothing changes if we lose in November. Glenn believes nothing changes unless we change the way we fight, and it will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next week with FISA being presented in the Senate. The bill is going to pass, but how Obama fights the immunity provision will go a long way to demonstrating what he thinks the best general election strategy will be for his team. Personally, I think Obama has already shown a willingness to fight and to engage, and that he realizes this issue is lost, but it remains to be seen if that will satisfy those who want a bolder strategy.

This post got a lot longer and much more rambling than I had intended…

The Hard Left <i>New Republic Syndrome</i>Post + Comments (98)