In challenging political times it can be difficult to get one’s bearings. For me, it helps to consult the classics. In the political science world this can mean The Semisovereign People, E.E. Schattschneider’s 1960 book on democracy in America.
Schattschneider was critical of the expectation so widely held by “thinking people” that citizens needed to be knowledgeable about policy and history in order to participate in democratic politics. After all, he suggested, people are by and large much too busy with their jobs, their families, and their communities to know the ins and outs of the issues of the day.
Perhaps his pithiest line: “Democracy was made for the people, not the people for democracy.” He went on to say that democracy is for “ordinary people … regardless of whether or not the pedants approve of them.”
The linchpin in a democracy, he wrote, is a system of competing political parties: “Democracy is a competitive political system in which competing leaders and organizations define the alternatives of public policy in such a way that the public can participate in the decision-making process.”
The purpose of parties is “nominating candidates and electing them to office; the object is to get power by winning elections.”
Democrats search for their soul in the 1980s
Make no mistake, deciding on candidates and positions can be a messy process. Even in what was a dreary decade for the Democrats, the 1980s saw spirited battles at the presidential level over their nominees and the party platform.
In 1980 Edward Kennedy went after incumbent Jimmy Carter in an effort to bring the party back to its liberal, labor roots. Even in defeat, he eloquently laid out his program during a rousing convention speech. In ‘84 former vice president Walter Mondale prevailed after a tense primary campaign, beating back the legendary astronaut and Ohio senator John Glenn, up and coming “New Democrat” Gary Hart, and others. And in ‘88, after a similarly spirited campaign, nominee Michael Dukakis gave a surprisingly strong speech at the Democratic convention, coming out of it leading Vice President George Bush by 10 points. In the end, he lost by almost that much.
Ultimately, Democrats settled on a new approach as represented by the Clinton-Gore ticket in 1992. It turned the tide.
Wither the party establishments?
In a previous post we looked at the total eclipse of the Republican establishment by the Trump movement in 2016. But, we argued, the Democratic establishment lived on:
“[W]hile not as strong as it once was, [the Democratic establishment] still retains its hold on presidential and congressional politics. Witness the consensus that formed around President Biden — you can’t get any more establishment than him! — in the 2024 primaries and the continued dominance of establishment leadership in Congress with Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer.
“At the same time, there is something fundamentally wrong with a party that is at best competitive with a Republican Party that has coalesced around a multiply-indicted presidential candidate and might benefit from advice from the Keystone Cops in running the House of Representatives. It’s not clear the Democratic establishment recognizes it has a problem.”
So here we are, the party is at a crossroads. It has a presidential candidate who was a good bet to lose before a disastrous debate performance, which may have extinguished his prospects altogether.
The good news: the national convention, by vote of some four thousand delegates from the states and territories, decides the nomination. The party makes its own rules in this regard not subject to laws or the Constitution or any other higher authority. It doesn’t have to nominate President Biden.
The wisdom from across the pond
To say that the Labour Party in the UK has been in a bad place the last several years is an understatement. Its last Prime Minister was Gordon Brown in 2010.
Current Labour leader Keir Starmer made the following point in reference to the 2019 Conservative landslide — no less significant for being so obvious. “When you lose that badly you don’t look to voters and say, ‘What on earth do you think you were doing?’ You look at your party and say, ‘We have to change.’” Labour is favored to win the July 4 election easily.
Democrats have been insisting for months that people just don’t understand that the economy is great and that Biden is a strong president. Maybe the party could benefit from reviewing Schattschneider on the purpose of parties and consulting Starmer on political strategy.
Concur!