I posted the following to a discussion on Ed Cone's blog about the legacy of John Edwards' campaign, particularly the emphasis on fighting poverty. Ed started with a quote from Edwards' final speech: "Do not walk away from what's possible, because it's time for all of us, all of us together, to make the two Americas one."
Many commenters claim Edwards is simply a hypocrite, an "empty suit" who cares no more about poverty than anyone else, and was simply using the issue to preen and enhance his own reputation. But I pointed out:
John Edwards recruited hundreds if not thousands of people to join him on Habitat for Humanity volunteer rebuilding projects in the Gulf Coast. Indeed, after he withdrew from the race, he spent a good part of the afternoon rebuilding a house in New Orleans. Members of his "One Corps" participated in canned food collections for the poor, and were encouraged to set up and work in food pantries for the hungry.
He and Elizabeth set up a "college for everyone" program in two North Carolina communities with their own money.
So, his commitment to the poor wasn't just grandstanding, he actually did tangible things. Even if you cynically assume he was simply image-polishing, it was image-polishing with far more positive outcomes than the other pols who simply talk about helping the poor.
The Edwards campaign pioneered the notion of supporters using online organizing tools for real-world action, now. Though his campaign never really got off the ground with a single primary win, I do hope other candidates will utilize his model to organize people for social good. That, to me, is potentially the true legacy of his campaign.
I wrote about this more than a year ago: http://jimbuie.blogs.com/journal/2007/01/on_building_onl.html
Edwards never "clinched the deal" with me in terms of his presidential candidacy, never persuaded me that he would be the best president, but I'm sorry these ideas didn't catch fire. I do hope there's still a chance they will.
Sam, a conservative commentator, replied that Edwards is simply "a limousine liberal, do as I say, not as I do," which misses the point. Fighting poverty is much larger than liberal politics vs. conservative politics. From a religious perspective, many people believe it's a commandment. If Edwards quietly, secretly gave away all his money to fight poverty, yeah he could have placed maybe a drop in the bucket of fighting poverty around the world. Maybe he will still do that as a private citizen, I dunno. But he was trying to create a movement, focus national and even international attention on the issue. That is the only way the systematic issues are going to be addressed -- if millions of people focus attention on it.
Related:
Recent Comments