In a time of American history where division seems to be sowed between every friend and neighbor, the need for compromise and unification is urgent and dire. While seeking for inspiration to discuss the divides in America, as well as the way to reunify our nation, I was reminded of Joe Sheperd, the founder and president of the United Rural Democrats (URD). URD works to resolve the feeling of isolation that rural Americans have regarding the policies and politics of the United States. Despite starkly different situations and circumstance, the fight for unification between rural America and the rest of the nation and the fight for unification between progressive and moderate Democrats can be analogized.
Joe Sheperd, President of the United Rural Democrats, discussed the divide and path to reunification with me. Our interview proved to be both informative and enlightening as Sheperd shared his wisdom and thoughts on the many complex issues in American politics.
Luke Netto: How would you introduce yourself and how did you get involved with politics?
Joe Sheperd: So my name is Joe Sheperd and I guess the way I’d introduce myself is someone who more simply, wants to make a change in this world. I don’t really consider myself an activist nor a political operative. That’s how I portray myself to anyone who I speak to out in the field. I got into the political world in 2018 just because after Donald Trump was elected, it was pretty clear. That the institutions our country has were weakening and in potential trouble. I am, before politics, a history nerd so that kind of fed into it.
LN: What is the United Rural Democrats and what is your history as an organization?
JS: URD was founded after I ran a couple of congressional campaigns in Iowa and Wisconsin. The genesis was that there are a lot of people who feel left out of the equation, not just by the political world, but just by society in general, and because of this feeling of isolation or feeling left behind. A lot of people, especially in places like Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, looked to people like Donald Trump for answers about half a decade ago. So, you know that’s why we exist. You know there are a lot of people who feel left out. We want to reach them. I think this is why we are able to unite in a way that many on the left are unable to do because we focus or at least try to focus more on the psychological end of politics. Our history over the last year has been mostly organizing for candidates in special elections for Congress, State Boards of Education, and some legislative things, and in the future, we are going to be doing fundraising and other things for candidates as well.
“We need to figure [the progressive and moderate divide] quickly.“
LN: In your words, how would you explain the current standoff between progressives and moderates over the bipartisan infrastructure package and the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill?
JS: I’m going to be entirely frank with you. This question doesn’t actually come up very much on the trail for me, but I’m happy to answer it. I think that to a more common audience, this is all seen as cockamamie machinations of Washington that they don’t understand. But my opinion on the progressive and moderate divide is that we need to figure this out quickly, regardless of the resolution, because a President has one year to really enact their agenda. They have one year to enact it and one year to defend it in the midterms. And oftentimes the President loses that majority in Congress. Especially in a hyper-partisan era as we are in. Now my focus is really that we just need to get things done. So I think the real divide is based on a lot of people, especially younger people, who feel like the world has made progress too slowly and in some regard they’re right. There are reforms and investments that should have been made in the past but are only being made now or proposed now. And if you were to, you know, parse that out over the course of 30 or 40 years. It’s not that much, but because we’re trying to do so much and Build Back Better, now it looks like a lot more than it actually is or could be. Healing is always a little more expensive than preventative care, so that’s kind of my perspective on it. I think that we just need to get it together.
LN: Do you think this divide between moderates and progressives can be related to the divide between democratic policies and culture and rural policies, and the people there?
JS: Oh yes, absolutely. It’s not just rural, I think it’s a common occurrence with many Americans that Congress operates in such a way that it’s very hard to grasp all the little machinations of Congress, like the reconciliation of the budget. So if you’re not paying attention to it fastidiously, this could all look like just partisan games, as usual. But I think that ultimately, one of the reasons Democrats have waned in rural areas in my lifetime, and I’m only 20, is because there’s a cultural difference. Now I consider myself to be relatively progressive, but at the same time, I understand that it’s not about what you say, it’s how you say it. I think that because in more urban areas and more traditionally liberal areas, you can package an issue and the people there will vote for it. But if you package that issue the same way, you can find very quickly that you will find opposition in more rural areas, more kind of culturally conservative areas. So, I think that a lot of policy can be promoted to most Americans, but I think the way we go about messaging is the key.
“If everyone is willing to lose a little bit, we can gain a lot.”
LN: This whole talk of division within the Democratic Party leads me to think about what URD means, you know in there, United Rural Democrats, standing for the unification of rural culture, rural voters, just rural Americans with, you know, the general culture and politics and politicians. Thinking that we often have excludes rural people, and the same fight you guys have could also be applied to all the different caucuses of the DNC or of all these different organizations that are trying to unify these different cogs within the big machine of America. What do you think must be done for greater unification among all these different sects and cultures and ideologies within the Democratic Party and America as a whole?
JS: I think those are kind of two separate questions where I’m happy to answer both. I think that with rural areas, one of the reasons we have to as Democrats is because, quite simply, we’re not going to get the resources that other areas are going to get. So, if we’re going to win, if we’re going to make positive change, we have to simply do it with less, and if we’re doing it with less, that means we need a more cohesive team. You know? I don’t know where you stand. Obviously, you are interviewing me so there’s going to be some neutrality there, but you know, we may disagree on something, but sometimes you have to set disagreements aside where you can get the wider agenda through. Now, obviously there are some red lines you can’t necessarily cross, but I do think that if Democrats see that we have an opportunity here to really make a positive change. I think if everyone is willing to lose a little bit, we can gain a lot. That’s similar to how I would describe the country as a whole. I think that the division is that a lot of people either feel that the country is going in a way that they don’t think is good, which is more conservative, and which is a different issue in itself and then you have the people who we’re targeting, who really want to be reintegrated back into wider society. So, I think nationally we just need again to get back out there again and say you know you matter to people.
LN: It’s really interesting you say that “you matter”. I mean, I feel like it does get kind of lost. There are times where you forget about how policies will impact all these different groups.
Is it you or your organization’s opinion that the Democratic Party is either moving too far left, too progressive, to where we’re ignoring moderates, or that it’s being too spread out to where we’re creating this chasm in the middle?
JS: I think that’s a false choice, and this is both my opinion and my organization’s opinion. I think that the key is that we need messengers in these communities who can actually explain various policies and ideas in a way that maybe your general run-of-the-mill Democrat or liberal cannot, so I do think that in some areas you are going to need a candidate who is a little more culturally conservative. That doesn’t mean they’re going to be conservative on issues, but we need people who can reach those in their community, and I think that’s critical. For example, in Virginia, we supported a candidate by the name of Sam Rasul, for Lieutenant Governor, who I believe was the most progressive on the primary ballot, and one of the things about him that I found really interesting was that he did very well in coal country, despite being the most anti-fossil fuel candidate on the ticket. And the reason he did so well out there is because he was the only candidate out of probably 10, to my knowledge, who went out there and said, “Yes, the economy is changing. Coal is going away, but if I’m your guy in Richmond, we’ll make sure as the economy it changes you won’t be left behind. Just trust me.” I think that’s critical, and I think because of that kind of focus on politics, we are going to inevitably have candidates in some areas, especially in places like Indiana, where it is going to be a little more on the conservative side, at least in affect and tone.
LN: Do you think that, rather than focusing on the politics, that politicians in office, as well as young politicians and activists and organizers, we should be focusing more on the people rather than the policies?
JS: In some ways, yes. I think that a lot of people feel like policy is being pushed on them now. The interesting part about that is a lot of the people I talked to feel like policies are being pushed onto them and although but they support those policies because they feel like they’re being put upon, they go back to not supporting it. It’s a very interesting dichotomy that I outline here and the way I’ll put it to you is that I think we need to focus on what people want. I think what somebody wants here in Ames, Iowa is going to be different than what people want in New York City or rural Wisconsin or Alabama. It’s going to be different in different places. So, I think that what we really need above all is candidates and leaders who have their finger on the pulse of various regions that they want to represent. So, I think that’s kind of where the policy and the people meet the road in the rubber. I am not the biggest fan of Joe Manchin. I think that he is obstructing a lot of things that truthfully, he shouldn’t be doing. He should be getting with the program on this, but at the same time I understand that given the history of West Virginia and the history of his electoral career, it makes sense why he’s objecting to a greater degree than others would be. That’s what I mean.
LN: Representative Ocasio-Cortez said that in a region like Europe or Japan or a place that has multiple parties, she would never be grouped together with politicians like Joe Biden and Joe Manchin. So, what’s your opinion on the two-party system? Do you think that there are opposites, as far as what politicians are willing to support, especially within the Democratic Party? Do you think that the two-party system is bad for keeping these very starkly different viewpoints grouped together?
JS: This is interesting. I think this: I am a supporter of the two-party system as long as the other side (Republicans and conservatives) is as crazy as it is right now. I think that given the fact that Donald Trump and his cadre are openly denying that the election was fairly won. It’s a little too dangerous to be having the discussion of multiple parties right now, but in the wider concept, I don’t think it’s a terrible idea in the future. The fascinating thing about the Democratic Party, as a whole, is that if you go back into the history of the Democratic Party by a century or more, it’s always been the party that’s been the big tent. It’s been the party with competing interests, but at the end of the day, in most cases they’ve been able to rectify those competing differences. If you look at Franklin Roosevelt, his Democratic Party was made up of progressives, but also some of the most reactionary Southerners we have ever had in Congress. But we were able to rectify those two to get things done. Despite the horrific nature of some of those representatives and senators, I think that you know if we look at history as sort of a road map to the future, then the pattern would go that eventually there will be some sort of reckoning within the Democratic Party, and it’ll either move left a bit or continue as is as this kind of big tent, but once this kind of tide of Trumpism is gone, I do think that there will be interest in more parties rising, especially when it comes to progressives or local interests.
“The way the Republican Party is operating… is fundamentally unhealthy to our Republic.”
LN: When do you think the tide of Trumpism will end?
JS: I couldn’t give you an answer to that one. I have no idea. I think that way the Republican Party is operating right now is fundamentally unhealthy to our Republic. As to when it will end, I just hope that by talking to more people on the ground who voted for Donald Trump once or twice, or maybe even Republicans before that, we can sort of rebuild a majority or a supermajority of people who believe in this Republic’s values of democracy. I’ll give you an example I agree with (Republican Representatives) Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger on next to nothing. But I agree that they are an ally in keeping our democracy a democracy, if that makes sense, so when we get a little farther away from right now, I think we’ll have a better idea of when.
LN: What is the role of youth in unifying the Democratic Party across ideologies, geographical barriers and demographics?
JS: Bluntly spoken, we are the future. I know that’s a generic, cheap phrase that comes out a lot, but it’s true and a lot of local democratic organizations in rural and urban areas are run by older people. The political world as we know it, both Democrat and Republican is older than it’s ever been. The average member of Congress is in their 60s. This is unheard of so as our generation becomes the generation that’s holding the levers of power, it’s critical that we maintain a lot of the systems that have been built. I have met with county chairs in various states who are above the age of 85. I think that’s a serious problem. I think we need young people to sort of be ready to inherit this country. I know some people our age think they’re ready now, but when the time comes where the older generations can no longer run things we have to be ready to be leaders. So that’s kind of my opinion on it. I know that’s kind of vague, but I think there is no one size that fits all for that answer.
“[Youth] are the future”
In this interview with Joe Sheperd, I received wisdoms and insight from a seasoned organizer. While American liberals can always apply a message of unity to their own organizations, I do believe that our international liberal coalition should remember that despite small variances in our ideology, the global fight for equality and liberty is strengthened by our unity.