Does the good old Democratic Party still exist?

Carol Iannone writes:

Last night I had an epiphany. I saw the Democratic Party of old—the party of Roosevelt and Truman and Kennedy. When I was growing up, my extended family included both Republicans and Democrats. The Republicans were probably closer to me, but—as a child of the Sixties—my first vote was for McGovern and my second was for Carter. By the third I’d already started migrating away from the Democrats and voted for Anderson. By the fourth I’d given up completely and went with Reagan, even gaily announcing, “One more for the Gipper,” as I exited the booth—a fairly daring thing to do in a crowded polling place on the Upper West Side, I think. I imagined that I’d never look back, that I’d vote Republican for the rest of my life. The Democratic Party—the party that various relatives told me about when I was a girl, the one they were so loyal to and so proud of throughout the middle of the twentieth century—that party seemed lost in the mists of time. In the ensuing years I wrote the party off as a noxious void and wondered how any thoughtful person could vote their way.

When people I liked and respected would tell me that they were still Democrats, I would wonder what they were thinking, what they were seeing. Weren’t they dismayed at the virulent anti-Americanism, the elitist disdain for the (mainly white) middle class, the unwillingness ever to use force to defend American interests, the fury at the contingencies of ordinary existence, the social engineering, the race-baiting, the identity politics, the feminization, and on and on.

But occasionally I would wonder about the old Democratic Party, that my relatives used to tell me about. “My first vote was for Roosevelt,” my well over-ninety aunt still remembers with warmth and affection. Or my mother’s cousin who told me of the advice of Mama—go with the Democrats, children, they care about the workingman, the small businessman, the forgotten man.

It was a sentiment I could no longer understand logically, the entry to which had closed with the end of my girlhood. But last night, a window opened up and I saw it again. I think it started opening when in the video prior to Biden’s acceptance speech, he mentioned how back in the day where he grew up, the women didn’t work, and the men all had jobs, many of them factory jobs, but if you had called them working class, they wouldn’t like it, they were middle class. I thought YES! That’s how I remember it. This “working class” thing started much later. We all felt we were part of the middle class, all equal, not in income, we knew some had more money, but in status, in worth, in importance, in opportunity, we were all the same in being part of the great wondrous United States of America in mid-century. We met as equals, we felt as equals, nobody had to make us equal. And Biden brought out much of this in his speech. I understood Biden in this. In this he understood me. I saw the old Democrats standing behind him. Had they always been there?

I don’t know where I’ll wind up with all this, but the sudden flash of insight into a better past has been dazzling and something to cherish in and of itself.

LA replies:

I think that in her sudden glimpse into a forgotten past, Miss Iannone is missing something crucial. Far from believing in that equal America of the past, when her relatives felt that “in status, in worth, in importance, in opportunity, we were all the same in being part of the great wondrous United States of America,” today’s Democratic party sees America as a vast collection of victims. I personally can’t stand listening to the speeches at the convention because of the constant victimology.

- end of initial entry -

Mack writes:

I would add that Miss Iannone might be remembering things from her past correctly—but when she talks about the general population she’s gotten things turned about.

If you go back four decades or so, more people self-identified as “working-class”—the trend has been for people to increasingly self-identify as “middle-class.” The ultimate cause of this shift is uncertain—I have read several academic papers on the topic and besides being in agreement about the general trend, there is no unanimity regarding the cause.

LA replies:

Yes, I also wondered about that. It seems to me that this business of everybody being middle class is a a post ’60s or post ’70s development. It’s often been commented on: there used to be an upper class, a middle class (divided into upper middle, middle middle, and lower middle), and a working class. And then somehow the working class disappeared. Everybody had to be middle class. So I am a little doubtful of Sen. Biden’s and Miss Iannone’s recollection of things.

Irv P. writes:

Please let Miss Iannone know that I hope she gets well!

Carol Iannone replies:

I feel great.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 28, 2008 12:05 PM | Send