How the Democrats became 'the party of freedom'

Depending on your age, you probably remember when the Republicans owned the meaning of freedom. They fought virtually everything in the name of individual liberty. It didn’t matter how good a government program was, the fact that it was a government program at all meant Americans were less free. And most people, most of the time, agreed.

My, my – how things have changed! When the US Supreme Court struck down Roe, it badly undermined the Republicans’ reputation for being “the party of freedom.” But fumbling the ball, to use a football analogy, is one thing. It’s another when the other team picks it up. That’s what happened at the Democratic National Convention last night. Vice presidential nominee Tim Walz ran 95 yards to score.

And spiked the ball.

When Republicans use the word freedom, they mean that the government should be free to invade your doctor’s office. Corporations — free to pollute your air and water. And banks — free to take advantage of customers.

But when we Democrats talk about freedom, we mean the freedom to make a better life for yourself and the people that you love.

Freedom to make your own health care decisions.

And yeah, your kids’ freedom to go to school without worrying about being shot dead in the hall.

…

That’s what this is all about: The responsibility we have to our kids, to each other and to the future that we’re building together, in which everyone is free to build the kind of life they want.

The Republicans had been losing their grip on individual liberty since going all-in with a lying, thieving, philandering sadist. Donald Trump purged “the party of freedom” of high-minded principles. His demand for loyalty, and suppression of dissent, led to mass conformity. Over time, each and every Republican was trained to say the same thing at the same time for the same reasons, all in the service of Dear Leader.

This Borg-like groupthink is typically underrated, but real conservatives understand it. They still believe in universal democratic freedom, though the Republicans no longer do. And I think Walz had them in mind when he spoke. His message: You didn’t leave the GOP. The GOP left you. There’s room for you among the Democrats.

I don’t mean to suggest a one-dimensional meaning of freedom. Walz offered a mix of negative and positive liberty. Negative: get the government out of your bedroom and doctor’s office. Positive: get the government to take more responsibility for public health and safety. Walz is not the leftist the Republicans want voters to believe him to be. But his speech does represent something new to voters who are just tuning in. It represents a kind of rebalancing of the national consensus.

This process of rebalancing has been ongoing for some time. I would say the beginning was Barack Obama’s second term and the end is, well, I don’t know. More certain is this: Joe Biden is the bridge. He spanned the gap between two Democratic Parties: One that was “neoliberal” and one that restored the class-warrior spirit of Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson. Kamala Harris’ presidency would be a continuation of that process, but Walz’s speech is probably the most dramatic portrayal of it so far. (I say this now, but I might change my mind tonight after watching the vice president’s acceptance speech.)

As I said, most people, most of the time, used to agree with the Republicans. That consensus empowered them to resist virtually any government program. But that power had a necessary subtext, which was the presence in most people’s minds of a government that really did grind individuals to dust, namely totalitarian Russia. The Cold War ended in 1989, but its vestiges remained here for decades.

It’s because of that subtext that the Republicans could credibly accuse anyone who favored good government programs of being communists, socialists or Marxists. Though the “Evil Empire” is gone, they still do this. They said Harris’ plan for “price controls” is tantamount to a communist takeover of the food industry. “Price controls” is a lie. She is proposing a ban on price-gouging, which isn’t the same thing.

But to be credible, the Republicans needed their reputation for being the party of individual liberty. They also needed to avoid appearing to become what they accuse others of being. The Supreme Court undermined the first, but not enough attention has been brought to the second. The Republican Party has become a communist party.

This is why I think Ana Navarro’s speech given earlier this week is a natural companion to Walz’s last night. As a journalist and co-host of ABC’s “The View,” she is his target audience: a real conservative who has been alienated not only by the Republican Party’s abandonment of individual liberty, but also by its descent into totalitarian politics.

She said:

Donald Trump and his minions call Kamala a communist. I know communism. I fled communism from Nicaragua when I was 8 years old. I don't take it lightly. And let me tell you what communist dictators do. And it's never just for one day.

They attack the free press. They call them the enemy of the people like Ortega does in Nicaragua. They put their unqualified relatives in cushy government jobs, so they can get rich off their positions, like the Castros do in Cuba. And they refuse to accept legitimate elections when they lose and call for violence to stay in power, like Maduro is doing right now in Venezuela.

Now you tell me something. Do any of those things sound familiar? Is there anybody running for president who reminds you of that?