In politicians, look for substance over labels by Matt Van Itallie

Nineteen ninety-six was a good year for me. I learned how to survive 20 below. I perfected the "oh ya, you betcha" of Fargo fame. I even ate hot dish at a bean feed. I was working, you see, for Senator Paul Wellstone, the "embarrassingly liberal, out of touch, far from the mainstream, WAY over to the left" Senator from Minnesota. Not only did Wellstone win two years after the Republican Revolution, but he won without denying he was a liberal. Far from it; he proudly proclaimed his place in the proud tradition of progressive, populist, liberal Minnesota Senators like Humphrey and Mondale. Wellstone admitted he was liberal. And he still won. In fact, of the six Democratic candidates who were the most frequently accused of being embarrassingly, foolishly, post structurally liberal, five won.   Wellstone won despite being a liberal   And I think they're wrong. They won despite, not because, of their liberalism. Liberalism has lost. Paul Wellstone was the perfect Swarthmore candidate: a popular poli sci prof at Carleton, he frequently used words like "community" and "standards of fairness." He would talk of students selling their plasma for textbooks. Wellstone was always ready to talk about identities. "When I talk to people in cafes," he would say, "they wouldn't tell me that they prefer the leftist position of the DNC or the centrist model of the DLC. They wanted to know about what government was going to do about health care, about whether medicare would be around for them, about whether their children could afford college. And that's what people care about." So it's not about being a liberal, he would say, "it's about doing right for people." On that account I think he's right. He just shouldn't couch it in the terms of liberalism. Because, while unnoticeable perhaps within Swarthmore, the world has moved away from "liberals" and towards "conservatives." The "Era of Big Government" is over, at least in people's minds- and that's where elections are won. This is not to say that progressives should lose heart. What matters is the substance, not the label. We may have lost a word, but we can still win the war. Progressives must beyond what we hear people say and listen to what they mean. Hey, Swatties, does anyone really believe that we should be spending more money than we're taking in? Do you, in your heart of hearts, think a balanced budget is wrong? I don't. What matters is who wins and who loses. It's wrong to balance the budget by destroying the programs that people need the most. It's not wrong to make the people who can afford to pay more to do so. Does anyone think that a big, centralized bureaucracy knows more about how to live our lives than we do? I certainly hope not. I believe people want government- they want libraries and schools and police officers and Medicare and Social Security. And, I believe people want an activist state that will stop egregious polluters and the increasing corporate control of America. Is that "big government?" Well, I'd stand up and defend it. And I would win. So here's what I'm saying: stop wasting our time defending labels like "liberal" and start attacking aggressively with substance. In our free time, sure, it's really interesting to ponder the connotations of "liberal" and "conservative." But I'd rather think about these things knowing the right people are in office. And if that means kissing "liberal" good-bye, then watch me pucker up. For those of us who believe that government has a role to play in fixing what ails us, and strengthening what makes us strong, let's get active. Put "social conservatives'" feet to the fire by offering laws limiting the difference between corporations' lowest and highest paid workers, benefits included. Let's try to enact a "Consumer's Rights Bill" for health care, and watch "free market conservatives" squirm. And, in the name of Theodore Roosevelt, let's put some oomph into the Federal Trade Commission. Where the heck are they, anyway? So, would I go back and work for Wellstone? Of course. But I'd rather never hear the L-word again and see progressive populists control the Senate, then worship the word from the basement of political insignificance.

Back to The L-Word