Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Where Is the Democratic Party’s Clarion Voice?

Opinion

Where Is the Democratic Party’s Clarion Voice?

Democratic Donkey with megaphone

Editor's Notes: below is a new version of the article published earlier today (2:13 pm EST, 8/9/25)

The Democratic Party is in disarray, trying to determine how best to defeat Trump and the MAGA movement in the next midterm and presidential elections.


Their disarray is unfortunately not new. After the 2004 election, Vice President Mondale said, ""Unless we have a vision and the arguments to match, I don’t think we’re going to truly connect with the American people.“ They still have no vision, yet it is there for the asking.

The Pledge of Allegiance says, "with liberty and justice for all." It's about equality. The pledge and the concept of preserving American values should be the rallying cry of Democrats.

Yet when doing a Google search for “preserving American values," not a single Democratic Party organization showed up. But many state and local Republican Party organizations did because they use that phrase in policy documents.

Then last week, looking for a new platform for my blog, I entered the title "Preserving American Values" and the tagline: "Our nation stands under attack ... from within not without.." One platform, using AI, designed a new blog for me, but AI had assumed because of the words I used that I was a MAGA adherent. Talk about proof for the following argument.

I have for the past 2 decades—since writing the book, We Still Hold These Truths—argued that the Democratic Party should embrace America’s founding document—the Declaration of Independence—as the basis for their policies, making it their Mission statement. They should rightfully wrap themselves in the flag.

But they have not followed my advice. Instead, it is the MAGA Republicans who have embraced, deceitfully, the phrase “Preserving American Values;” deceitful in that their take on the values is always self-serving, it's about their rights.

By Democrats not tying their policies to our founding documents, they have left themselves open to Republican criticism for being “elite”, un-American, and not supporting the working man.

Whereas in actuality, it is the Republicans who have always sided with the true elite—large corporations and banks—and against the working man. Trump talks rousingly in support of the working man, but he has in fact done little. Democrats must expose Trump and MAGA Republicans for what they are … hypocrites masquerading as the party of the people.

Why have Democrats not claimed the provenance of our founding documents for their policies? Everything the Party has worked for since the turn of the 20th century derives from the Declaration of Independence: the right of all people—including women, workers, the poor, and people of color— to equality, to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.. Yet they never talk about the Declaration.

Democrats must fight for the hearts and minds of the American people by adopting a vision that resonates with the people. A centrist liberal vision that speaks to all Americans, that does not pit one segment against another, and promotes economic well-being for all. And this includes corporations; they have a vital role to play, but they cannot to be allowed to control government or act against the greater good.

Luckily, there is a vision at hand that is as American as apple pie—the words of the Declaration of Independence. You couldn't draft a more appropriate mission statement for the Democratic Party.

I therefore proposed in 2004, and have often since, that the Party adopt a Mission statement based on the words of the Declaration:

“To build a country of greater opportunity where:

  • each and every American has a real chance to experience the promises made in the Declaration of Independence: 'that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness' ;
  • government meets its responsibility as set forth in the Declaration—‘to secure these rights’—; and
  • all citizens have a shared responsibility to support the government’s efforts to secure these rights and promote the public good, each according to his ability.”

These words from the Declaration of Independence are the moral philosophy, the heart, the soul of American democracy. This is, or at least until recently was, America’s common faith. Democrats must restore that faith.

True, there were aspects of the American experiment that went against these values—slavery and the continuing inequality of women—but the exigencies and mores of the time do not negate the aspirational nature of the words, and indeed they have proven to be the light that has guided us.

Besides the concept of equality, the role of government noted in the Declaration and implemented in the Constitution is critical. That role is "to secure these rights."

What does that mean? It means that government must do what is necessary to insure that all Americans—whether White or people of color; whether rich, middle class, or poor; whether male or female—have a truly equal opportunity to pursue the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

And the government insures that opportunity by enacting policies that promote the education, jobs and economic stability necessary to allow people to advance themselves and feel financially secure. Once the government insures equal opportunity, it is the individual's responsibility to take advantage of it.

For example, welfare is not charity, but an example of the government's providing support so children have an equal opportunity to have a good education. You can't do well in school if you're hungry, if your housing is not secure. But it is then a child's and his parents' responsibility make the most of that opportunity.

But beyond the problem of not having a vision, another major problem is that the Party sees itself one way—the party of the people, the average man—while a large number of those very people—the White middle class worker—see the Party differently. What happened?

The Party must understand its role in this, Yes, the Party worked hard during the 20th century to increase people's rights and their standard of living, first for the American worker and later for the poor and people of color.

But it must realize that in the last decades of the 20th century, it was so focused on righting the discrimination that people of color and the poor suffered historically, that it didn't notice the depths to which the formerly middle class worker sank during the following decades They must do a mea culpa and insure those worker that they are now, once again, whole-heartedly included in the Party's vision for all Americans.

And they must show all Americans that their interests are not really separate or opposed. That by enacting policies that ensure all citizens—White and people of color, the poor and disadvantaged as well as the middle-class worker—have a realistic opportunity to pursue their rights, all benefit. All benefit, even the rich and corporations, from policies that move all people forward because it will create a more prosperous country. Democrats must counter the prevalent us v them attitude.

It is past time for Democrats to regain the rhetorical upper hand and reclaim their position as the party of the people, the party of America’s historic values.. Democrats must go on the offensive.

Ronald L. Hirsch is a teacher, legal aid lawyer, survey researcher, nonprofit executive, consultant, composer, author, and volunteer. He is a graduate of Brown University and the University of Chicago Law School and the author of We Still Hold These Truths. Read more of his writing at www.PreservingAmericanValues.com

Read More

Communication concept with multi colored abstract people icons.

Research shows that emotional, cognitive, and social mechanisms drive both direct and indirect contact, offering scalable ways to reduce political polarization.

Getty Images, Eoneren

“Direct” and “Indirect” Contact Methods Likely Work in Similar Ways, so They Should Both Be Effective

In a previous article, we argued that efforts to improve the political environment should reach Americans as media consumers, in addition to seeking public participation. Reaching Americans as media consumers uses media like film, TV, and social media to change what Americans see and hear about fellow Americans across the political spectrum. Participant-based efforts include dialogues and community-based activities that require active involvement.

In this article, we show that the mechanisms underlying each type of approach are quite similar. The categories of mechanisms we cover are emotional, cognitive, relational, and repetitive. We use the terms from the academic literature, “direct” and “indirect” contact, which are fairly similar to participant and media consumer approaches, respectively.

Keep ReadingShow less
The American Experiment Requires Robust Debate, Not Government Crackdowns

As political violence threatens democracy, defending free speech, limiting government overreach, and embracing pluralism matters is critical right now.

Getty Images, Javier Zayas Photography

The American Experiment Requires Robust Debate, Not Government Crackdowns

The assassinations of conservative leader Charlie Kirk and Democratic lawmakers in Minnesota have triggered endorsements of violence and even calls for literal war on both the far right and far left. Fortunately, an overwhelming majority of Americans reject political violence, but all of us are in a fight to keep our diverse and boisterous brand of democracy alive. Doing so requires a renewed commitment to pluralism and a clear-headed recognition of the limits of government, especially when proposals entail using the criminal justice system to punish speech.

Pluralism has been called the lifeblood of a democracy like ours, in which being an American is not defined by race or religion. It requires learning about and accepting our differences, and embracing the principle that, regardless of them, every person is entitled to be protected by our Constitution and have a voice in how we’re governed. In contrast, many perpetrators of political violence rationalize their acts by denying the basic humanity of those with whom they disagree. They are willing to face the death penalty or life in prison in an attempt to force everyone to conform to their views.

Keep ReadingShow less
A woman sitting down and speaking with a group of people.

The SVL (Stories, Values, Listen) framework—which aims to bridge political divides with simple, memorable steps for productive cross-partisan conversations—is an easy-to-use tool for making an impact at scale.

Getty Images, Luis Alvarez

Make Talking Politics Easier and More Scalable: Be SVL (Stories, Values, Listen)

How can one have a productive conversation across the political spectrum?

We offer simple, memorable guidance: Be SVL (pronounced like “civil”). SVL stands for sharing Stories, relating to a conversation partner’s Values, and closely Listening.

Keep ReadingShow less
St. Patrick’s Cathedral’s Mural: Art, Immigration, and the American Spirit

People attend a mass and ceremony for a new mural dedicated to New York City’s immigrant communities and honoring the city’s first responders at St. Patrick’s Cathedral on September 21, 2025 in New York City.

(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

St. Patrick’s Cathedral’s Mural: Art, Immigration, and the American Spirit

In a bold fusion of sacred tradition and contemporary relevance, artist Adam Cvijanovic has unveiled a sweeping new mural at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City—one that reimagines the historic narthex as a vibrant ode to peace, migration, and spiritual continuity.

In an age of polarization and performative politics, it’s rare to find a work of art that speaks with both spiritual clarity and civic urgency. Yet that’s exactly what “What’s So Funny About Peace, Love and Understanding” accomplishes. The piece is more than a visual upgrade to a “dreary” entranceway—it’s a theological and cultural intervention, one that invites every visitor to confront the moral stakes of our immigration discourse.

Keep ReadingShow less