Never having run for, much less held, elective office, I likely have no business offering unsolicited advice to either our governor or to the mayor of Minneapolis. Before attempting to do so, let me begin with this: good for them for being willing to put themselves before the voters. It’s never an easy thing to do. Then again, it shouldn’t be.
Nonetheless, if a representative democracy is to function well, it’s terribly important that good people are willing to do this difficult thing. What’s even more important, however, is that they do the right thing. This is especially so in the midst of difficult times — and especially times as difficult as those we face right now; hence this resort to what is probably not just unsolicited, but unwanted advice.
One more thing: It’s also terribly important that a) candidates be candid about what they propose to do once in office; and that b) voters then have real choices on issues of real importance. A two-party system may not be the ideal vehicle for accomplishing the latter, but it may well be the best vehicle for a representative democracy in a country as large as this one.
Our country and our state have each had two lengthy stretches of a generally stable two-party system. Following the Civil War the Republican party dominated the politics of the country until the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt. Then from the election of FDR until fairly recent days it’s largely been Democratic party governance and Republican party loyal oppositionism, save for the Reagan interregnum.
In recent years there has been an absence of such clear-cut dominance. Perhaps we are in the process of sorting things out, politically speaking, before there is a third lengthy stretch of stability. More on that shortly.
In Minnesota, Republicans dominated from statehood until the mid-1940s when Hubert Humphrey helped orchestrate the merger of the Democratic and Farmer-Labor parties. Since then this state has essentially been governed by the DFL, accompanied by an occasional Republican governor, save for the Ventura interruption.
By and large, the dominant party supported a larger and more activist government. That was true during both post-Civil War Republican dominance and post-New Deal, post-World War II Democratic dominance.
At some point this overall trend was going to need a serious course correction. Then add to this story an increasingly cosmopolitan Democratic party that at best downplayed, when they didn’t ignore or even flout, American national interests, let alone the interests of the American worker. In any case, the stage was being set for a Donald Trump.
Trump’s major domestic goal has always been to reduce the footprint of the federal government, especially the federal bureaucracy; his main foreign policy goal has long been the restoration of an American interest-based approach.
In pursuing both goals he has been trying to move the country away from big government progressivism. As such, he has been a challenge not just to Democrats, but to “me too” Republicans. At the same time he is highly averse to crusading, Wilsonian “make the world safe for democracy” wars. In more ways than one, he is the anti-Wilsonian, both at home and abroad.
What then should big government Democrats do? Here’s the heart of the advice: accept your new status as the party of the loyal opposition. If you do so, your time in the political wilderness may be minimal. If not, it might be very long indeed — and deservedly so.
Then again, maybe it ought to be quite long no matter what. After all, reversing Wilsonianism at home and abroad is both necessary and might take a good while to accomplish. And a governing party that is working to accomplish this could benefit from a loyal opposition. So could the country, for that matter.
Maybe, just maybe, we’re on the verge of a semi-permanent third era of one-party dominance, a third era that would gradually reverse the thrust of the previous two, meaning a third era that would feature a Republican effort to substantially reduce the clout of the administrative state at home and restore an interest-based foreign policy abroad.
What’s obvious right now is that Gov. Walz and Mayor Frey are having a great deal of difficulty accepting such an unwelcome role as that of loyal oppositioners. In fact, the party itself seems to be moving toward full resistance mode instead. This is both irresponsible and mistaken. Rather than demonizing Trump and rushing to the left, they ought to call off the anti-ICE forces, cut out the “ICE is Gestapo” rhetoric, lick their wounds, and jettison all Walzian talk of deploying troops against the feds.
Once they establish their loyal opposition creds, the party could play that same role as Trump takes on the federal bureaucracy. In sum, instead of charting a path that could lead to a new civil war, the party should accept its old post-Civil War role as the responsible “me too” party. It should then go about re-thinking its message and, dare I put it this way, re-imagining its future. To be sure, being out of power is never fun, but sometimes this fact of political life can be good for both the party and the country.
Whether it will do any good for politicians as out of touch with the general electorate as Walz and Frey is questionable at best. After all, most of the country understands that border control is a legitimate federal matter. The same goes for most Minnesotans. Therefore, the governor and the mayor should do something that, admittedly, will be very difficult for any current Democrat to do. First of all, they should begin by conceding that it would have been a good idea, not to mention much more honest, to have had a debate on immigration during the Biden-Trump presidential campaign of 2020.
But there was no such debate. More than that, there was no Democratic pledge or promise to, if elected, flood the country with unvetted migrants. But once in power that’s precisely what the Biden administration did — and in the midst of a lock-everything-down covid epidemic no less. Science proclaimers had science as an excuse and yet they ignored science. In sum, the candidate was far less than candid.
Now the Trump administration is in the process of carrying out a campaign pledge that it did make. Given the magnitude of illegal migration, it’s understandable that there would have to be action of some significant magnitude to deal with it. Given both magnitudes, it’s likely that mistakes might well be made. Therefore, a responsible role for a loyal opposition should have been Democratic cooperation to help assure that any such mistakes would be both minimized and rectified — and, yes, some Democratic criticism if they were not.
Instead, Democrats have done their level worst to obstruct the entire effort. Speaking of obstruction, Democrats should remind anti-ICE protesters and demonstrators that they have every right to protest and demonstrate, but that they have no right to obstruct or interfere, whether violently or non-violently. Moreover, if they do so, they will then be arrested and prosecuted by local officials. In this case that would mean Democratic local officials.
Not only is that not happening, but those same local officials seem to be intent on doing their level best to keep the pot boiling. Where will all this end? No one knows. But this much is predictable: If the Democrats persist with their current strategy, they will deserve to spend a good deal of time out of power. And the Republican party? It deserves an opportunity to carry out its mandate and fix a problem that it defined as a problem, not to mention one that it inherited.
What then does the country deserve? In the first place, it deserves to survive intact. Secondly, it deserves a serious national debate on and resolution of the issue of immigration. Without enforced borders and clear rules a country is not a country. Lastly, it deserves a vibrant, genuine two-party system grounded in differences that ebb and flow, but do not overwhelm.
“Me tooism” is not the end of the world, Democrats. Admittedly, you initially learned that lesson long ago, but it’s never too late to learn it again. In the meantime, Republicans, having learned the same lesson much more recently, deserve a chance to govern, aided, if not abetted, by a loyal opposition. That opposition should be helpful at times and, yes, critical at times. But it should never aid and abet what Walz and Frey are aiding and abetting in the streets of Minneapolis.
Once again, that leaves the country. Long ago German chancellor Otto von Bismarck pronounced that “God takes care of drunks, little children and the United States of America.” Well, assuming that the country survives — and that its ancient luck holds — the day might come when Republicans will also have to re-learn the same lesson. Holding political power for any considerable length of time inevitably invites corruption by the dominant party. Just ask U. S. Grant, Warren Harding, and our current governor.
In the meantime, Democrats, take advantage of your time in the wilderness, both for your sake and for that of the country. After all, you have an opportunity as the loyal opposition to engage in some important “me tooing.” Oh, and one more piece of advice: You should also take some time to think about your future as a political party. Who knows, but In doing so you might even wind up taking a page from Hubert Humphrey. That would be the same HHH who as a young politician had the good sense to help purge the left from a merged Democratic Farmer-Labor party, rather than coddle it and encourage it — and, yes, even use it while hiding behind it.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not represent an official position of Alpha News.
John C. “Chuck” Chalberg taught American history at Normandale Community College.
Chuck Chalberg
John C. "Chuck" Chalberg taught American history at Normandale Community College.
