March of the Birkenstocks
Phil Dillon, Emporia
Thursday, September 23, 2010
On a recent edition of C-Span’s “Washington Journal,” a young Democratic strategist named Dylan Loewe spent about 45 minutes pitching his book “Permanently Blue: How Democrats Can End the Republican Party and Rule the Next Generation.”
A snippet from Chapter 1 — “That’s the kind of permanent majority the Democrats are on the verge of building: a single party, democratically elected to control the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the White House without interruption for an entire generation.”
Loewe’s analysis is impressive.
As historian Doris Kearns Goodwin noted, “Combining passion and eloquence with deep research and sharp analytic skill, Dylan Loewe has produced a spellbinding book that should stimulate debate and provide hope to progressives everywhere.”
It seems to add up. A charismatic leader, shifting national demographics, strong political organization, millions, possibly billions, of dollars in the campaign coffers, and weak political opponents all point to the very real possibility of a permanent Democratic majority.
I considered calling in to the program to remind young Mr. Loewe that Karl Rove, George Bush’s evil genius, had predicted a permanent Republican majority a little less than 10 years ago. But, I decided against it. There was no reason to rain on a young man’s parade. Current trends may not be favorable, but political trends shift quickly nowadays. We may be heading for one party, progressive/Democratic Party rule.
Given that, I’ve spent the past week considering what the implications of Loewe’s thesis might be.
The most important feature of such a system would be maximum efficiency. There’d be no more blue state, red state nonsense. The Party of No would be eliminated. There wouldn’t be any need for problematic things like elections. If we held them at all, there would just be one choice on the ballot, named “the progressive of your choice.” The winners could claim 95 percent or better mandates. Saddam would glow white hot with envy.
The gridlock would cease. We’d all be blue; we’d all be Keynesians. The legislation and edicts could pour down in torrents. Every societal problem could be solved. Agencies could be created. Czars could be appointed. The Party faithful could start hoisting ladders to heaven.
There would be some knotty problems to solve on the way to a one party utopia, the principal ones being our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. For over two hundred years we’ve held that “all men are created equal and are endowed by their creator…”
But, with a bit of legal skullduggery it could easily be changed to read, “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”
Government lawyers could dance around, a la Napoleon, cracking whips and proclaiming “Four legs good, two legs better.”
It might be better to do away with our founding documents all together. Have you ever read such negative stuff in all your life? All the talk about “Governments deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed” or “absolute Despotism” and “usurpations.”
And, worse yet, all those negatively tinted amendments in the Constitution — “Congress shall make NO law,” “the right of the people … shall NOT be infringed,” “NO solider shall be quartered …,” “Excessive bail shall NOT be required,” “The right of United States citizens shall NOT be denied or abridged.”
The new ruling paradigm wouldn’t have the usual hallmarks of despotism. There’d be no goose stepping. We’d be treated to a new breed of despots, dancing around the halls of power in Birkenstocks.
I’m sure there would be dissent at first. But, given time and the judicious use of Conan the Barbarian’s principle to “crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women,” the complaint box would dry up.
If that failed to squelch all dissent, the legislative branch could re-invigorate the World War I Espionage Act, upgrade the Patriot Act and thereby make any opinion contrary to the ruling opinion illegal. Violators could be shipped off to Death Valley gulags, to be re-educated or fed gruel and moldy bread for the rest of their lives.
Seeing all the potential for progress, it makes me wonder what on earth our founders were thinking about. I sometimes see myself as a bit of a contrarian, but I couldn’t hold a candle to those guys. You’d think they’d have just gone with the flow. But no! They complained, in writing, about the taxes, plundering and suspending legislatures. Some of them even signed in quadruple font. When the time for fighting came they carried flags reading “Don’t Tread On Me” or “Live Free or Die.”
What on earth were they thinking?
Well, there you have it. In a little more than a month we might know whether or not Loewe is right. If he is, Birkenstocks may be “in” and our founding documents may be on the way out.
Phil Dillon writes a blog, “Fires Along the Tallgrass,” http://anothermansmeat.blogspot.com. E-mail him at phildillon@sbcglobal.net.
noel_stanton (anonymous) says...
Mr. Dillon,
There is not going to be any one party monopoly: this kid, Loewe, is about as serious as the fruitcake wanting to burn Korans. Loewe will get his 15 minutes with his fantasy and you got a weak column out of it by tagging along in his wind shadow. I'm sorry I took the time to read it.
September 23, 2010 at 6:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
Sometimes I wonder if Phil Dillon, (much like Doris Kearns Goodwin), should be living in the confines of the beltway along with other pundits.
noel_stanton is correct. This IS the weakest column you have written.
September 23, 2010 at 8:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Agreed!
September 24, 2010 at 12:23 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
I feel I should elaborate. Loewe's thesis is absurd on it's face. His book is probably catalogued under improbable theories in the Library.
So Mr Dillon's decision to hang a column on it looks very much like an attempt to find any obscure reason to justify his real agenda......denigrating the Democrats. Come on Phil, you are better than that. Your column also totally ignores the obvious that the same problems and challenges to the constitution would take place if the tea party (or any other party for that matter) were to gain unchallenged control. So why paint it as a threat from the Democrats to "destroy America".
I for one am getting tired of that song and dance no matter whether it is based on the obscure writings of some strategist trying to sell a book or on some gun-toting Tea Party member telling me he is going to take HIS country back.
Here's hoping for better from you in the future.
September 24, 2010 at 4:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
But I like Birkenstocks. In the wintertime, they can be worn with wool socks, even oudoors.
October 3, 2010 at 7:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
create....I must admit that I don't know what a Birkenstock is?
October 3, 2010 at 7:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
biscuit
A Birkenstock is a shoe or sandal that is manufactured in Germany !
And I think his reference " March of the Birkenstocks " was comparing Dylan Loewes" book “Permanently Blue: How Democrats Can End the Republican Party and Rule the Next Generation,” as being somewhat like Hitlers book " Mien Kampf " and the rise of the Nazi party as the one and only " Supreme Party " or the 1000 year " Reich " !
But of course I may be wrong, as this is JMO !
October 3, 2010 at 8:10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Thank You methusla
I knew what Lowes' book was proposing but without the connection to Germany made by the Birkenstock I had missed the connection to the Nazi's. But as I said in my earlier post, what Dillon conveniently left out in his rush to denigrate the Democrats, was total control by any single party would have all the same dangers.
In fact, the Nazi's were an ultra-conservative nationalistic party far removed from what the Democrats are in this country today. Knowing that makes Dillon's premise even more absurd on it's face. JMO
October 3, 2010 at 8:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
This description of the Nazi Party and what it stood for was offered by open_eyes on another thread. I thought it might bear repeating here.
"The German Nazi (National Socialist) Party was politically fascist, which is a corporatist, racist, overwhelmingly petty bourgeois pastiche of ideologies based on the supremacy of the state over the individual, the importance of tightly centralized power and the fetishization of national myths and heroes. Socialism is multinational and working-class in character, seeking to establish a fully democratic, classless society.
Confusion between, and the conflation of, Nazis and socialists is due to the Nazi Party's name, which was in full the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP). When Hitler joined the DAP in the early 1920s and quickly became its most prominent member and leader, the party's basic politics were not much different from those that later marked the Nazis' rise to power -- anti-Semitic, anti-socialist, anti-communist, opportunistic and wedded to violence -- but they were murky. The party was also quite small, one of dozens of right-wing populist formations at the time. By upping the nationalist ante, scapegoating national minorities and adding "socialist" to the party's name, Hitler found he was better able to attract disenchanted WWI veterans and workers left jobless during the hard economic times that followed the Treaty of Versailles. To better distinguish his party and its ethos from the more established socialist and communist entities at the time, and to reflect its intense nationalism, he also added "national" to the name.
Socialism was the Nazis' greatest threat to power. In the years before the fated election that led to Hitler becoming chancellor, the Nazis' SA brownshirts engaged in incredibly violent, sometimes deadly, attacks on socialists and communists, in addition to their favored Jewish targets. Socialists and communists were some of the first concentration camp inmates."
This myth that the Nazi party was a socialist party (because the word was included in its name) has been perpetrated largely by Glen Beck for his own self-serving reasons.
October 3, 2010 at 9:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
netloafer (anonymous) says...
Just to set the record straight.
Dylan Loewe is hardly a fringe player. He holds a B.A. in political science from U.C.L.A., a masters in public policy from Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, and a J.D. from Columbia Law School. He is a speech writer for prominent politicians and according to his bio he has worked on dozens of political campaigns. Folks like us are the fringe players. We're on the outside looking in.
The point of the piece was that any party that holds total control of government has an enormous amount of negative potential, whether it's a majority of the right, left, etc. The potential of a Republican permanent super majority was just as bad when Karl Rove espoused it as a Democratic Party super majority.
I don't need to spend a lot of time denigrating Democrats and Republicans. They seem to be doing a pretty good job of it themselves without my help.
There's absolutely no allusion to "Mein Kampf." I used Orwell's "Animal Farm" to allude to the truth that bad things all too often happen when people start out with what seem to be the noblest of reasons (social justice, equity, a purified national ethic).
Power is a very intoxicating thing. Even the noblest among us fall under its spell. A couple of days ago there was a news report about how American doctors, working for the U.S. Public Health Service, infected about 1,500 Central Americans with venereal diseases. Their noble intent was to attempt to find out how effective penecillin was as a cure. Of course, we "know" that we don't do those sorts of things. Right? We did apologize, so I guess that counts for something.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/10/01...
Most Birkenstocks are produced in Germany, but that certainly wouldn't make them Nazi products. There are a lot of things made in Germany, including good beer, Volkswagens, Audis, etc. As things stand now German products seem to be high on quality and low on politics.
We do have one thing in common. You're not a Glen Beck fan. Neither am I.
Phil Dillon
October 3, 2010 at 3:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Phil
If there was no intent to make a comparison to the Nazi's I apologize for making the comparison.
I certainly agree with your statement that any single party control would have a devastating consequence for liberty and freedom...and made that point several times in my post. I guess I just felt too many of your examples were party specific, especially in the beginning of your column. But perhaps you were doing that to cement the tie between the column and the book. Only you know your intent.
We do however agree on one thing other than Glen Beck. Despite my not knowing what a Birkenstock was, I agree with your assessment of German products.
I thank you for taking the time to respond to my rant! :-)
October 3, 2010 at 3:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
netloafer (anonymous) says...
Bisscuitboy
The reason the Democrats were prominent was because Loewe is a Democratic strategist and the Democrats now control the executive and legislative branches of government. If I'd had the opportunity to write about the same thing at a time of Republican majority I would have said pretty much the same thing, except that goose stepping might become the accepted practice.
The truth is this - tyranny is tyranny is tyranny and no attempt to justify it for noble purposes makes it any less tyrannical.
October 3, 2010 at 3:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Agreed!
October 3, 2010 at 4:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
I think the reason that someone like this Loewe dude thinks a Democrat(read left, moderate Democrats don't count remember they were the enemy during the hcr "debates") majority will or could happen for "a generation" is he can't imagine anyone of intelligence or sanity thinking differently from himself. Carl Rove had a similar delusion. You see it on the left, right and, center. When a person sees something from their own perspective it naturally makes sense to them so they figure it ought to make sense to everybody else the same way. Well it usually doesn't. This is something the left has railed on the right about for years. The left complained that the right just doesn't understand that people see things differently and everyone should get a say. LOL Now look at the left, when they took over the government Nancy Pelosi was going around saying "We won, we make the rules!" or some such thing. LOL It's not just her either, I remember left leaning folks wanting the Democrat majority to ram hcr through and not listen to the opinions of the minority. LOL I get a real kick out of watching the left these days. They are the ideologues that they always accuse the right of being. Pushing their form of morality down the throats of everyone("You better buy health insurance or we'll get you!" "Don't make too much money or we'll get you!" "Don't drink soda-pop or we'll get you!" "Don't own a gun or we'll get you!" "Don't be a conservative or we'll ignore you or say your ideas aren't valid!" "You have to love President Obama and agree with everything he says and does or we'll label you a racist!" ). LOL Different ideas same tactics. I would have an easier time excusing the left if I hadn't heard them complaining about the right doing what they are doing now.
More Parties, more ideas.
Seriously Reformed Folks
P.S.
Birkenstocks are very popular with left leaning college students. I'm pretty sure referencing them had nothing to do with their country of origin. I'll excuse your assumption knowing how old you are. :-)
October 3, 2010 at 5:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Thank you seriously for being tolerant of my senility....:-)
I can understand why you would be irritated with the left for having the audacity to think since they won the last election by a large majority that the majority of the people might be agreeing with them....
Unfortunately, it looks like you might have to remain upset for some time to come as the right wins back its majority and then immediately has the audacity to assume that a majority of the people agree with them. And I am certain you will be equally upset to hear the right start acting that way.......Won't you?....huh?.....LOLLOL
October 3, 2010 at 5:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Since I am close to the same age as biscuit . Apparently I also misinterpreted the reference to Birkenstock.
October 3, 2010 at 6:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )