The Zeitgeist & The Donkey

There are Holocaust deniers. There are Creationists. There are people who see no discernable reason to stop the extinction of species. There are people who think homosexuality is a choice. Global Warming? A lie. Imperial war? The divine right of America.

Here's a thought: such views are not inherently political or even religious – they're cultural. The key distinguishing characteristic when examining the American population in relation to such notions is geographic. A secondary identifying characteristic is education-level, and education is a culturally inculcated value, not a political one.

Direct attacks on cultural customs (be they baptisms or NASCAR races) will almost always fail; likely serving no lasting purpose but to calcify and harden pre-existing prejudices. A group of Evangelical Christians facing off against a Gay Pride parade does serve one useful purpose: entertainment.

However, there are some areas of public discourse that can truly be called political insofar as they transcend (or merely sidestep) the often contradictory cultural dispositions of a geographically diverse populace. Principally, economic issues fill this role. Beyond Wall Street, opinions on the management of the Federal Reserve or the disbursement of federal tax revenues can hardly be classified any other way.

And yet, we appear to be fueled by an emotional need to confront (or, more cynically, to "educate") those who share cultural values that are anathema to our own - and we frequently do so at the expense of our political goals. When cultural values are influenced and do change, they change largely by inclusion and assimilation. They change slowly. Woodsy Owl did more to curb commonplace littering (by individuals) than any politically active environmental alliance has ever done. Why? Culture, not politics. Similarly, Hollywood has done more to advance the cause of gay rights than any law passed in Massachusetts - or subverted in San Francisco. By slowly introducing innocuous and stereotyped gay characters in television and movies, they got the ball rolling (not unlike how Stepin Fetchit did several years earlier). On these types of issues, government rarely leads.

So here's my next thought: don't make culture off-limits to attack, rebuke and disdain, but don't chain such cultural arguments to a political ideology. Compartmentalize. The Democrats need people in their party who are pro-war, pro-Jesus, and pro-life; not because they are these things, but in complete disregard of the fact that they are these things. We can not (must not) pander to the Christian right, but we need Southern Democrats and Western Democrats and Northern Democrats: howsoever they may differ from one another culturally.

If this seems improbable, perhaps its because modern Democrats have become too closely attached to their cultural base; we identify ourselves almost exclusively by our cultural issues. And maybe…just maybe…this is why the Republicans found it so easy to make us look like caricatures of ourselves.