Nine Months: New Birth or Slow Death?

While it makes sense at one level to identify the Democratic party in the United States with a more liberal perspective and the Republican party with a more conservative view, a more nuanced exploration finds that (any) one can hold a conservative, moderate or liberal perspective within either party--e.g. the current battle among the four remaining Republican candidates concerning who is the "real" or "most" conservative, and the less dramatic, but nonetheless engaged debate between the two Democrats regarding who owns the most progressive or liberal agenda.

Pundits from both parties have more or less agreed in recent days that there are greater differences of real substance among the four Republicans than between the two Democrats.

We can further nuance the candidates' stances on specific issues--e.g. one can be a fiscal conservative and social moderate or liberal: more and more citizens and even an occasionally courageous candidate are willing to break from traditional party stereotypes and distance themselves from their tribe on specific issues. It's worth noting that whether one claims a liberal or conservative worldview, the breaking (liberating oneself) from the party of choice is by definition, a liberal move.

Conservatism attempts to conserve--to keep safe what we have, to embrace tradition, what we know, and what brings us comfort. Liberalism attempts to liberate--to break our ties with the past, and venture forth into new ways of being. Healthy forms of both are essential; unhealthy forms of both are dangerous, regardless of the political party in which they emerge.

Another way to say this is that the liberal breakthroughs of the past become the conservative treasures of the future. Prior to February 1870, conservative views prevented black males who were former slaves from voting, but the 15th Amendment liberated us from that view. Prior to August 1920, conservative views prevented women of any color or previous condition of servitude from voting, and the 19th Amendment liberated us from that view. Here's the fun part: while liberalism made those two amendents possible in 1870 and 1920, respectively, conservatism, in the least ideological and most basic meaning of that word, is the power that in 2008 embraces, protects and honors the right to vote for all American citizens eighteen and older.

When Senators Clinton and Obama had their moment of warm, fuzzy mutual admiration in their first one-on-one debate last week, just their appearance on the stage--regardless of what each of them might say as the debate began in earnest, was an image of liberalism: a black man, who 138 years ago, would not have been allowed to vote, and a woman, who 88 years ago lacked that same right, now running for the highest office in the land. That same week the four Republican candidates looked and behaved like the white guys who have traditionally held that job.

Having written that, however, I believe it's important to move beyond the easy equation of "white guy" and "conservatism" (or "minority" and "liberalism"--note Clarence Thomas and Condoleeza Rice). Senators Clinton and Obama could relax a bit because those other two white guys, John Edwards and Dennis Kucinich, had dropped out of the race, and had taken with them some views that were even more liberating than any that the two senators proffered.

Reminders abound that values, ideology and perspective are neither skin-pigmentation nor chromosome-based. Among the important questions that every voter needs to ask--as the primaries continue and as November 4 looms almost exactly 9 months, a human gestation period, away, is this: What gives you more reason to believe in the best of what this country has to offer: a sharp departure from, or a subtle continuation of, the America we've been for the past eight years?

Do you prefer the labor required to nurture a new birth or the engaged apathy involved in continuing to abet an already emerging slow death?

Vote early and often!