Democrats Risk Becoming Merely 'Opposition Party'

Susan Estrich is actually one of the smarter Democratic pundits, and this time she managed not to blow her cool completely. And after all, she predicted--correctly--that in this election, we would not see a repeat of Florida in 2000.

Here is a salient excerpt from her remarks now:

But don't minimize defeat, either. Look at the map and you're looking at two Americas. No campaign consultant is this good. Guys, and women, who are making $40,000 and voting to approve an increase in the minimum wage are voting for Bush. It's also about values, about an electorate where according to one exit poll, four out of 10 voters believe God created the world in seven days.

The registration war was won not on the college campuses but in the church halls. Karl Rove's intensity strategy worked.

Well, first of all, no one ever said that God created the world in seven days, but rather that He created the world in six days and rested on the seventh day. Ms. Estrich, who is a lawyer herself, usually has better attention to detail than she just showed.

More to the point, Kerry was in the church halls, too--and indeed, in their sanctuaries--where any Republican doing the same thing would have gotten himself and the church involved in big trouble with the IRS. Furthermore, the college campuses are now "in play" and are no longer the exclusive preserve of liberals.

But then Professor Estrich makes this point:

For better or for worse, call it what you want, the values agenda is also on the table. For Democrats, it offers the road across the two Americas. But as this election reveals, there is a lot of building to be done. Young people don't get it, at least not yet. The gay rights work hasn't been done. The taste/culture/porn/violence agenda has no center. Many Democrats would like nothing better than to run away from these issues and go back to talking about the minimum wage.

Well, of course most Democrats would rather run away from the hard reality that nearly every motion picture made today is in execrable taste, and that "surface pornography", in the form of Janet Jackson-like "fashion" that needs no "malfunction", is all over the place. And she's right, in spite of herself: that debate has no center. If you're a man, you either cast your roving eyes at all the Janet Jacksons out there, or you don't. If you're a woman, you're either imitating Janet Jackson, or you aren't. It's that simple. Moreover, Jesus makes it quite clear: "Any man who looks at a woman in a lustful manner has already committed adultery with her in his heart." [Matthew 5:28] Yes, and any woman who deliberately sets herself up to attract lustful attention has already prostituted herself in her heart.

But don't expect a Susan Estrich ever to get that. In a way, this surprises me. I remember Susan Brownmiller, who is still around. If you want a sample of truly consistent feminism, check out her September 11 essay and this reprinted essay against pornography. Her opinion of Bill Clinton (not flattering) itself is worth the time to visit her site.

If she could understand, even a little bit, what pornography represents, then why can't those Democrats get it, either? Were they to recast pornography as a demonstration of hatred of women as people--and these days, that's exactly what most pornography amounts to--they could take that issue off the table. Nothing would please me more than to see the pornography industry get no solace from either party.

But that's the real trouble with the Democrats: they have no unifying belief system. They are a totally ad hoc alliance of often competing special interests. I've been waiting for that alliance to fracture for many, many years--and it might yet happen. What will then remain of the Democratic Party, I have no idea.

Nor would I want my fellow conservatives to remain complacent. The war of ideas never reaches an armistice--and will never, until the Second Coming. The campaign to write the 2008 platform and select the 2008 nominee begins today, not two years from now. And part of that campaign is to evangelize your neighbors--all fifty-five million of them--or at least those who do not decide to go to Canada to live.