Populism Redux

The third article in the American Prospect dedicated to analyzing the electoral fortunes of the Democratic Party, and where to go from here, is by David Sirota. Sirota's piece has become a real lightning rod of criticism and support, and has generated a debate I have discussed frequently in the past. Here I am just going to lay out the basic points that Sirota makes, and what I think are the strengths and weaknesses of his analysis.

Sirota wants to revive Democratic prospects in "red" areas of the country by reviving and reformulating populism. Sirota argues that Democrats should embrace economic populism directly be rejecting pure free trade dogmas and using a thorough-going anti-corporate rhetoric. Democrats can reach out to independent proprietors (small businesses and small farmers) by labeling big business as the source of their woes. They can appeal to the exurbs and hunters by re-framing environmentalism from one of pristine preservation to protecting use by ordinary people. They can also win converts by assailing corporate crime and business influence in Washington. By doing so, Democrats can reclaim their historic role as the champion of the "little guy."

There is a lot of merit in Sirota's piece: he has enunciated a specific strategy for creating an overarching narrative that connects political positions, and has identified constituencies for wooing: the white working class and the self-employed. It is a strategy which, if successful, would unite the Democratic coalition and divide the Republicans. It is also an approach very much in keeping with the liberal tradition.

But there are some problems. Sirota's attack on free trade would alienate a good portion of the upscale professional Democrats that Teixeira has argued are essential to future Democratic success. It is Sirota's position on trade which has so enraged the DLC wing of the party. In addition, it is a matter of dispute as to whether the culpability of the big-business/corporate lobby for America's problems is believed by enough people to constitute a real wedge issue. Sure people don't like corporations, but right now they seem to trust government less. Bashing corruption in government might actually make things worse.

Which brings me to the other problem, namely that the exclusive focus on economic issues neglects the continuing salience of cultural and foreign policy issues. Sirota has no real advice for how to deal with divisive issues like gay marriage except to change the subject, a strategy which didn't appear to work for Kerry. And given the continued importance of the so-called War on Terror, it seems shortsighted to neglect foreign policy considerations.

None of this is to say that Sirota isn't on to something. I think his New Populism is a key component of any successful Democratic strategy. I'm just not sure that it is enough.