Published by mistake: "Friday reflections"
Note to readers
This early draft of a column was published by mistake. It was written about a month ago. It is merely the adumbration of an article never written. With so much else going on, it is not clear if or when it will ever be fully developed and published as a complete column.
Many ideas pass through a writer’s mind. Not all of them are fully developed and reach the finish line for publication. Occasionally some are publised by mistake. This is one of those.
***
The big column of the week was “ Is it too soon to speak of removing 47?”
There, the idea is out there.
Remove 47. That should perhaps be the goal of the Democrats and others interested in defending our democracy and its achievements.
Yet the Democrats need to do move than remove 47.
They need to clean up their own act, and abandon policies and positions that are clearly rejected by a majority of the voters, including many Democrats.
Where should they start?
First, they need to jettison their support for DEI policies and initiatives. The Supteme Court has rejected Affirmative Action in college admissions but with broader implications. DEI is viewed by many as a not so subtle attempt to circumvent that decision.
Most Americans appear to oppose the use of race or ethnicity to favor some candidates over others. A majority of Americans appear to favor meritocracy, though many look the other way when meritocracy is tossed aside by a Republican president who doesn’t hesitate to dismiss civil service employees chosen and advanced on the basis of merit, replacing them with individuals whose main qualification is personal loyalty to him.
The Democrats could make a powerful argument that hiring and allocations of opportunities should be made on the basis of merit. To do that, Democrats would have to overcome the entrenched positions of powerful groups within the party. However difficult, such steps must be taken if the Democrats are to strengthen their appeal to broad classes of voters in future elections.
The critical dividing line is between equality of opportunity and “equity” of results. Few oppose funding programs to strengthen the qualifications of minorities. Many, and probably a significant majority, oppose programs that seem or are used to ensure “equity” of results, which is understood by many as results determined by the application of racial and ethnic preferences.
***
Second, [woke] — to be provided
Third, [LGBTQ and trans—continue support for, but don’run on as major campaign isse. Drop “latinx”] — to be provided
Fourth, [open up the the Democratic Party to democratic procedures for the selection of candidates] — to be provided
***
Reform of the Democratic Party and its processes should begin now.
Democrats should also begin building the record for the removal of 47.