These were the words of Dr. Howard Smead, a professor of History and Honors here at the University of Maryland. On April 30 in the Armory, Dr. Smead lectured to a group of about fifty students on “The State of the Democratic Party.” This event was sponsored by the College Democrats, and was effective in mapping out the evolution of a presently troubled political party. The discourse was designed to give Democrat faithful new directions in which their party could turn to improve their chances in the 2004 presidential race.
In the first part of his lecture, Dr. Smead revealed how the strength and unity of the Democratic Party has changed since the four-term Presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt. FDR was elected in 1932, during the darkest days of the American economy. Roosevelt’s New Deal was an innovative program designed to give the federal government an increased role in the distribution of American wealth. The New Deal was credited by many for lifting the United States from the depths of the Great Depression. Smead informed his audience that the Roosevelt Coalition, a racially and geographically diverse group of New Deal supporters, played a pivotal role in sustaining Democratic power for years after Roosevelt’s death. Smead argued that as the Roosevelt Coalition has shifted from an American reality to a part of American history, so has the political power of Democrats.
Professor Smead went on to discuss how the current party platform has prohibited Democrats from getting elected. “Class-based liberalism has given way to rights-based liberalism,” explained Smead. A party that once prided itself on protecting the lower and middle classes of America has become preoccupied with preserving the rights of various interest groups. Smead stressed the need for the Democratic Party to once again be viewed as representing all Americans, and not only special-interest groups which, alone, cannot provide enough votes to win elections. “The concept of civil rights is a noble one,” clarified Smead, “but when this drowns out a sense of community, the entire point is lost.”
The recent failures of the Democratic Party were held in contrast to Republican successes. “Because Democrats are so hamstrung into talking about individual rights,” said Dr. Smead, “Republicans, by default, get to talk about common goals and common dreams.” Smead asserted that Republicans do not stand for these ideals at all, and rather that they are in fact tied to “extreme interest groups.” Right-wing victories were summed up succinctly by Smead: “they’re just good campaigners.”
The second part of his lecture, and according to Dr. Smead the more important part, dealt with the problem of moral relativism in the Democratic Party. Moral relativism contends that our views on morality should be based on how people actually behave, and not on some unattainable standard for human behavior. The Democrats’ fear of offending people has created an environment where no established set of values is promoted or trusted. Thus it is no surprise that 63% of churchgoers voted for George W. Bush in 2000 as opposed to the 27% that voted for Al Gore. Smead labeled the Democrats’ disassociation from the churchgoing community as “political suicide.”
Continuing with the theme of morality in the Democratic Party, Professor Smead also touched upon the topic of abortion. Smead, after declaring himself pro-choice, said that it is foolish for Democrats not to acknowledge the moral issues surrounding abortion. To regard this issue simply as a matter of choice, as many Democrats have done, is not politically wise. “Even if Republicans have a wrong set of morals and values,” admitted Smead, “at least they stand for some.”
Throughout the lecture, Dr. Smead provided a candid assessment of the current Democratic presidential candidates, calling Al Gore “obnoxious,” Al Sharpton “a buffoon,” and the notion of “President Hillary Clinton” as “devastating to the party.” Smead was more enthusiastic about Congressman Richard Gephardt, who has recently proposed that the federal government provide every American with quality healthcare coverage. Smead called this proposal “encouraging” and believes that the implementation of such a program might bring back the ideologies of Democrat icon Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Dr. Howard Smead’s lecture could certainly be viewed as a wake-up call to the Democratic Party. While those in attendance may not have fully agreed with Smead’s pointed analysis, they definitely understood his message: only when Democrats acknowledge the problems that have crippled them in recent elections will they be able to prevail in future contests.
