We need a new progressive third party. It would be a kind of Bizarro progressive third party, in that it would almost always do the opposite from what current progressive parties like the Green Party are doing today.
- It would not oppose the Democratic Party, but rather, serve as a kind of unofficial educational arm of the party.
- It would hold positions well to the left of the usual Democratic policies, but would not present its them in opposition to Democratic norms. Rather, it's framing would be: "Here are the ideal policies for our best ultimate future. Democratic policies are a good first step toward them that we can take right now. Republican policies are steps in the opposite, wrong direction."
- Its official recommendation to its members would be to always vote and work for Democratic candidates whenever one is in a race, but wherever there's a race with no viable Democratic candidate, it would recruit candidates to run against the Republican incumbents.
- There can be an enormous difference between messaging that will maximize your chances of winning an election and messaging that will educate the public about progressive principles. Free from any hope of winning (though ready to serve if they do), these candidates would always choose the latter. For example:
- Their ads would not be about building a positive image for themselves (or pushing a negative message about their opponents) but would simply feature them talking plainly about subjects like healthcare as a right and the dangers of extreme wealth inequality.
- Rather than hold rallies of progressive supporters, they'd seek opportunities to speak with conservative audiences, ideally through interactive forums like town halls.
- This new progressive party would not play the tactical games with issues that normal parties pretty much have to engage in to compete in the current political climate. For example, it would:
- Never go negative on an opponent. (Though it would diligently explain the factual and logical errors in most Republican–and some Democratic–positions.)
- Never demonize an Enemy. (e.g. the rich, or the oil companies, etc.) Instead, for example, it would speak in rational terms about the problems caused by wealth inequality, or an over-reliance on oil, etc.
- Address the usual progressive Enemies (the rich, the corporations, etc.) not in anger, but by appealing to their humanity, pitching the good they could do while still doing quite well for themselves. (Not in the hope of winning them over but, in the spirit of education rather than winning elections, with the goal of offering voters more rational and less tribal ways to think about the issues.)
- Always try to educate people to think logically and systemically rather than responding to emotional narratives.
- It would not condemn the other parties' use of such tactics. It would be pragmatic about the value of electoral victories and the necessity of playing the usual political games to win them. It would simply have a complementary mission that didn't require them.
- It would be willing to express divided opinions on tough issues, laying out for the public the pros and cons and degrees of certainty. It wouldn't need to frame every position it holds as an obvious slam dunk.
- By contrast, however, it would unabashedly preach the following positive values:
- The power of rational, systemic thinking.
- The patriotism of mutuality. (Not "us against them" or "we're #1" but "what we can accomplish together" and what any nation can accomplish if it holds to democratic values.)
- The progress of humanity as a whole through the centuries.
It might never win an election, but it would sow the seeds for future Democratic victories and allow future Democrats to be more left-leaning. There's a limit to how far the Democratic Party can go right now, because the GOP has won the PR battle on so many issues, such as taxation, crime, and health care. There are fundamental philosophical differences between the parties on these issues, but Democrats can only fight them on the GOP's terms. This can't go on forever.
We need to begin a long and difficult effort to engage our fellow Americans around truths that are no longer self-evident. The Democratic Party can't do this because it would cost them electoral victories which are just as essential for progress as any educational effort. Some other entity must take on this task, in an ego-free way that transcends conventional adversarial frameworks. For this, we need a new progressive third party unlike any other that's come before.
This is one of my suggestions for bridging the Blue-Red divide.