The sport of politics. The politics of sport.

Jump to Comments

The Democratic primary/caucus election results last Tuesday point to a divide in the Democratic Party: a divide in thinking about politics between cautious “old school” and dynamic “new school.”

Many Democrats may be starting to worry that their team won’t be able to score enough points with so-called “swing voters” to beat an aging dude named “John McCain” in November.

I believe that the Republican Party has a better chance of beating Hillary Clinton than it does Barack Obama. But in order for Obama to rise to the challenge he faces in winning his party’s nomination, much less the presidency, I suggest it is a good time for his campaign to address some of the issues that lie at the root of cultural conservatism on race and culture within the Democratic base.

Here, I offer readers an excerpt from my book, “Democrats in the Red Zone: an Independent voter’s take on the game ov political perception.” In this excerpt, I discuss the perceptual burdens of political correctness in terms of appealing in particular to the white mainstream voters the Democratic Party in general and Obama in particular need on their side.

Democrats have been asking voters to open their minds and embrace each other’s differences since the cultural chaos of the 1960s exposed America’s crisis of social conscience. But over time, that request came to seem like insistence thanks to the imposition of “political correctness” — the movement within public and private institutions to ensure that the sensitivities of women, gay people and members of minority groups were respected (see Chapter 6).

Despite its good intentions, P.C. eventually took on a militant tone that inspired an equal and opposite backlash by two shades of straight, white America:

• Average white people, especially men, who got tired of being treated like society’s default bad guys; and

• Those who actually sympathize with racially and culturally segregationist views and who continue to influence public policy in opposition to the efforts of social progressives.

I think people across the political divide got frustrated with P.C.’s unspoken assumption that it was off-limits for anyone — especially straight white men — to criticize women, gay people or members of minority groups when they engaged in irresponsible behavior.

That double standard, in which some were free to speak their minds without fear of censure while others were not, left P.C. proponents open to charges of stifling freedom of speech. After all, plenty of women have sexist attitudes toward men, plenty of gay people are disdainful of straights, and no racial group is free of racist attitudes.

So for P.C. supporters to pretend that some groups were more immune than others to their own prejudices began to look like a ridiculous, and possibly unconstitutional, exercise. P.C. proponents neglected a very important task at the outset of their crusade: they should have made it clear that everyone, not just straight white men, needed to be culturally sensitive.

Democrats have something to gain from the lessons of P.C., because the Democratic Party over time came to be increasingly viewed as a place where it wasn’t safe to be white, male or culturally traditionalist (despite the nearly all-white male faces at the top of its political structure).

Republicans took advantage of that cultural disconnect while Democrats remained blissfully unaware of the tidal wave of resentment coming at them.

One of the biggest strategic problems for Democrats has been their apparent confusion about the difference between traditionalists and conservatives. While conservatives may largely be a lost cause for Democrats, traditionalists should be a key target audience. Yet traditionalists are often in conflict with Big Three constituencies in terms of both style and substance.

In terms of style, the Big Three tend to express themselves in big, loud, public demonstrations. But traditionalists don’t like yelling unless it involves cheering for their favorite sports teams. They also don’t view demonstrations as an effective way to accomplish political change.

In terms of the substance gap, all we need to do is look at the response traditionalist Bill Cosby got from black liberals when he started to get real about how inner-city parents weren’t raising their kids (see Chapter 13).

The animosity of the Party’s liberal base toward those who point out the excesses and failures of social liberalism is a political liability. While many conservative voters seem programmed to reject progressive ideas, liberals need to open their own minds if they want to help Democrats win more elections.

Traditionalists are often willing to accept progressive policies as long as those policies are not about condoning what they see as irresponsible or reckless behavior. In the traditionalist view, progressive means change for the better, and that means ditching outdated policies — including liberal ones — that have failed to accomplish positive change.

The book is available online and at select bookstores. Visit www.redzonepolitics.com for more information.