The Democratic Party and the nation paid a horrible price for what transpired at the '68 Democratic convention -- a price we may be about to pay again.

::::::::

On August 25, Democrats will gather in Denver for their nominating convention. Ironically it comes precisely 40 years since the party opened it's 1968 convention in Chicago. The 1968 convention was the most significant in my lifetime - until now.

The Democratic Party and the nation paid a horrible price for what transpired at that convention, a price we may be about to pay again.

The Democratic convention this August faces many of the same issues as Democrats face in 1968. Change vs. same-old, same-old. Machine politics vs. people politics. The will of the people vs. the will of party insiders. They are all in play again.

I only mention this because the players are already setting up their plays for the August show down in Denver. Hillary Clinton has made it clear that, if Obama wins enough delegates to match her, she and her party surrogates will demand that delegates from Florida and Michigan be seated, even though she had agreed with the party's decision months ago to ban them if they moved their primaries up. They did anyway and their delegates were decertified. Now that she won Florida she wants to change the rules.

If that fight breaks out on the convention floor this August, get ready for trouble. What kind of trouble? Big trouble. That's what kind of trouble.

A brief history is required. Bear with me. Because, it's that important.

Flash Back:

Choosing a Presidential nominee in 1968 was particularly difficult for the Democrats. As today a profoundly unpopular war raged (in Vietnam.) President Lyndon B. Johnson, who had repeatedly escalated US involvement in Vietnam, had come under so much pressure from anti-war Democrats that he decided not to seek re-election.

Robert Kennedy was a controversial upstart, anti-war candidate hated by Johnson and unpopular with party leaders who saw him as too ambitious and too young. But Robert Kennedy was assassinated in June, nearly three months before the convention.

Senator Eugene McCarthy, D-MN, stepped up his aggressive anti-war campaign, calling for the immediate withdrawal from the region. Kennedy's former supporters flocked to McCarthy.

Copyrighted Image? DMCA

On the other side was the Democratic Party bosses' choice, Vice President Hubert Humphrey. Thanks to the oddities of Democratic primary rules back then, Humphrey did not participate in any primaries but still controlled enough delegates to secure the nomination if he wanted it. Unfortunately Humphrey had been an early supporter of the war and currently mirrored Johnson's strategy of continuing the war while trying to convince North Vietnam to negotiate a settlement. Anti-war Democrats had heard enough of such, "give-me-a-hamburger-today and-I'll-pay-you-tomorrow, nonsense. They weren't buying.

McCarthy's announcement re-ignited the hopes of a new generation of voters and political activists. A former academic and Washington outsider, McCarthy's nickname became "Clean for Gene," leading many students to cut their hair off and shave their beards and mustaches.

McCarthy's principled stand on the war faced it's first, the New Hampshire primary. Hundreds of students rushed to New Hampshire and campaigned door-to-door for McCarthy. McCarthy won a startling 42% of the vote, something that greatly upset and stunned party loyalists.

Meanwhile behind the scenes Vice-president Hubert H. Humphrey had been negotiating for delegates in non-primary states. The fix had been put in already by party bosses. Humphrey "won" the nomination in Chicago on August 25-29, 1968. Three-thousand anti-war demonstrators stood outside the convention hall in shocked rage. To add insult to injury the delegates to the Democratic convention voted down a Vietnam peace plan by a 1500-1000 vote. (You see, even 40 years ago, Democrats lived in fear of being painted as "weak on national defense," by their Republican opponents. If a few thousand more US soldiers had to die for Democrats to look tough, so be it.)

So, despite strong showings in the primaries, McCarthy was able to gather only 23 percent of the delegates -- thanks to the control over the delegates wielded by state party organizations. While Humphrey, was not clearly an anti-war candidate, some anti-war Democrats backed Humphrey hoping he might succeed where Johnson had failed in extricating the United States from Vietnam -- just as today some Democrats hope that Hillary, who was for the war before she was against it -- might just figure out how to extricate us from Iraq.

Copyrighted Image? DMCA

Young McCarthy supporters quickly figured out that Democratic party insiders had fixed the contest and vented their disappointment and anger through the streets of Chicago. The party's most experienced and notorious machine Democrat -- Chicago Mayor, Richard Daley -- was not about to allow his party's will to be thwarted by a bunch of "hippies." He turned the police and National Guard loose on the protesters.

I remember watching the carnage on my black and white TV. It wasn't a hippe/yippee riot, it was a police riot. As young people were clubbed to the ground the crowd chanted, "The whole world is watching. The whole world is watching."

Those scenes radicalized me then and there, and millions more were as well. We've never entirely trusted the Democratic Party since then -- and for good and abundantly obvious reasons.

(Chronology of Chicago protests here)

Party insiders "won" in 1968. The party nominated it's choice, Hubert Humphrey, as it had always intended to once Johnson decided not to run. Humphrey went on to lose the subsequent election to Richard M. Nixon by 500,000 votes. (Because of that, an additional 20,000 US soldiers would die before the war was finally brought to an end after Nixon was chased from office in 1974.)

Which brings me back to this coming August, in Denver. The similarities between 1968 and 2008 are startling:

In 1968 support for the Vietnam war had hit new lows. (Chart)

In 2008 support for the war in Iraq has reached new lows. (Chart)

 

In 1968 the Democratic Party insider candidate, Humphrey, had supported the war and, while public option was increasingly for withdrawal, he preached against a mandated withdrawal from Vietnam, deeming such a withdrawal as reckless and potentially dangerous to US security.

In 2008 the Democratic Party insider candidate, Hillary Clinton, who was for the war until she was against it, now argues against a rapid withdrawal or setting a hard timeline for withdrawal.

Copyrighted Image? DMCA

In 1968 an unconventional, anti-war candidate -- Senator Gene McCarthy, captured the imagination and rekindled the hopes of a new generation of voters, even bridging racial divides garnering support from civil rights groups including the Black Panthers.

In 2008 an unconventional, anti-war candidate -- Senator Barack Obama, has captured the imagination and rekindled the hopes of a new generation of voters, again bridging historical racial divides.

In 1968 Democratic Party insiders viewed newcomer McCarthy as an outsider and a threat to the party's pecking order. It was Hubert Humphrey's "turn" to be President, and besides, who was this rebel rousing outsider McCathy and his young hairy supporters anyway?

In 2008 the Democratic Party apparatus view Obama as an outsider and a threat to the party's insider pecking order. It's been an article of faith since Bill left office that the next time was Hillary's turn. Besides, who is this rebel rousing outsider Barack Obama and his children crusaders anyway?

In 1968 Democratic Party insiders brushed aside the hopes and aspirations for change from a new generation of voters. Instead they rammed through the nomination of the party's choice, Hubert Humphrey. How they did it is instructive -- they used their control over Democratic party state officials to swing their delegates to Humphrey.

In 2008 much the same dynamic will be in play. Already party chairman, Howard Dean (once an outsider himself) has indicated he's open to a deal that would avoid a convention-floor fight for the nomination. Welcome back to the smoke-filled rooms of 1968.

 

If Hillary wins fair and square, fine. I won't like it, but I'll learn to live with it.

 

But, if the party pulls a 1968, and rams Hillary Clinton down our throats, then the gloves are off. We need to let Howard Dean, et al, know that if they play that card all hell will break loose. Like my generation 40 years ago, a new generation has been energized ... energized by endless war, by growing economic inequities and by heavy-handed government intrusions into their private lives. They are smart. They are connected. And they will not go quietly.

My generation lost its fight, largely because we had virtually no access to mass communications or the mass media. When you told someone 40 years ago that your were "networking," it meant was that you owned phone and a phone book. All we could do to get our message on the evening news was to demonstrate, raise hell and shout insults at the police.

But this generation is all about networking and mass communication.

Sticks and stones didn't get it done for us in 68, but I suspect the tech-savvy, hyper-connected YouTube generation will make Democratic Party hacks long for those "good old days," if they cross them.

It's too soon to put out the call: "Denver. August 25-28. Be there, or be square." But be assured, we're watching.

Copyrighted Image? DMCA

_______

Stephen Pizzo has been published everywhere from The New York Times to Mother Jones magazine. His book, Inside Job: The Looting of America's Savings and Loans, was nominated for a Pulitzer.