Too many voters have attached themselves to the pleasant fantasy that an Obama White House would bring far-left dreams long deferred to fruition. If this were to occur without regard for the complete coalition, Obama and those who voted for him could harm party gains and the viability of liberal ideals in the eyes of many Americans.
In 1964, Lyndon Johnson presided over a complete Democratic sweep against a Republican opponent outmatched in political skill and mobilization. The former "Master of the Senate" had retained control of the White House and Congress, including a filibuster-proof Senate. What followed was the establishment of a new era of social welfare initiatives known as the Great Society, providing needed assistance to millions of Americans. Johnson achieved major civil rights accomplishments with the Civil Rights and Voting Acts in 1964 and 1965, respectively. Unfortunately, while Johnson reached these goals, other aspects of his administration's policy left both blacks and the educated far-left of the party alienated.
Jim Crow's legacy of economic disenfranchisement caused blacks to riot across the country, and a deep distrust of America's war in Vietnam shut down college campuses from Berkeley to New Haven. By the 1966 midterm elections for Congress, Johnson had alienated many white working class voters afraid of the instability shaking the nation. The Democrats lost control of the House of Representatives, which slowed down progress on civil rights and the Great Society for the rest of Johnson's term. Johnson grew so frustrated and disheartened by his dwindling political capital that he decided not to attempt a second term in 1968.
It remains to be seen whether the country's current anger and disillusionment will manifest into violence, but the circumstances of Obama's ascent would be eerily similar to LBJ's 1964 victory. Like LBJ, Obama would enter office with enormous political capital, which will bring with it a discordant symphony of demands. Individuals from the far-left will scream for fully mandated health care, and fiscal conservatives will decry any hint of tax or spending increases. Obama and his supporters on college campuses like Princeton must balance these divisive issues while maintaining a civil atmosphere.
Because they have the upper hand, liberals will have to take the lead in assisting Obama. Otherwise, it is a sure bet that political isolation will follow. Instead of joining a long-lasting centrist or center-left coalition, disillusioned young conservatives will build on existing right-wing institutions and thought as a refuge from the onslaught of a Democratic tide. We saw this in the 1960s as young conservative college students turned to William Buckley and the right-wing Young Americans for Freedom. They established their principles outside the public eye while John F. Kennedy and LBJ carried the torch of leadership. Instead of a Democratic era, these conservative outcasts emerged from the intellectual wilderness and seized that torch.
The Ivy League tends to be well represented in our national dialogue, and that alone should give Princeton students a special sense of urgency. We have all met enough brilliant conservative students on this campus to know that the intellectual firepower is there for such a backlash to happen again. To avoid a repeat of Reagan Era excesses, liberals and conservatives of all persuasions should be given ample space to share and collaborate on questions of ideology and policy.
The Princeton Tory should ask the Princeton Progressive Nation editor to write a guest column from time to time and vice versa. More courses guided by scholars with divergent intellectual traditions like the Robert George/Cornel West GS '80 freshma seminar should be offered. The College Democrats and Republicans should continue hosting events that combine their membership for the sake of political engagement. And no matter where you are, keep your disparaging remark about Obama or Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to yourself if you cannot express it respectfully.
An Obama landslide would not signal an era of total liberal dominance; it's better to think of it as more of a test run. Americans care mostly about their security and stability at the expense of ideology. They look to their leaders to work together on major issues, not to be wedded to one side of the political coin. They will trade one party for another if do not get what they want. So starting on Nov. 5th, it's best for Democrats and Republicans to give teamwork a try.
David Smart is a history major from Los Angeles, Calif. He can be reached at dsmart@princeton.edu.
Read More
Keep academic authority in human hands
Lily Halbert-AlexanderThe Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
The Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
What do we owe society for a Princeton education?
Jia Cheng ShenThe social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
The social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
Notes from a so-called enemy’s classroom
Jennifer JenningsIt wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.
It wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.