|
icantfindaname posted:Yeah the basic problem is just that a huge number of liberals really truly deep down believe that the policy status quo of the George H W Bush administration was optimal. This is maybe changing a tiny bit but that lasted an incredibly long time. Obamacare was just Clintoncare which was literally just a personal mandate fig leaf on what was assumed to be a basically well functioning private insurance market in a mental image of 1991 What you're describing is the period of time in which the Boomers have had full and complete control of the levers of power in this country. That isn't going to last forever, and our generation and the one that follows see the world very differently.
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2020 21:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 17:47 |
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:At a certain point, we are going to need to define what "progressive" means in such a way as it qualifies some things and disqualifies other. As it stands, "progressive" implies progress towards a goal, but that goal has never been identified. I think the desire to create strict definitions and then exclude people who fall ever so just out of them is an issue on the left. I'm very content that progressivism is more of an amorphous cloud of diverse people.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2020 18:02
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:When that amorphousness primarily functions to allow rich chancers to surf by on the cloud of vague positivity and then turn around and say "oh you idiot I never specified that I was going to anything" it is, perhaps, a bit of a weakness. I dont think so. The progressive movement is growing in a way that I find extremely positive and hopeful. We are headed the right direction and I'm not going to quibble as much over the details.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2020 18:09
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:In order for it to achieve anything, though, at some point it is going to have to coalesce into some, or multiple, thing(s) more concrete. Medicare for All, UBI, free education k-uni, etc. That's all stuff that Progressives want and are working towards. I'm happy to work out the details when, you know, we have a government that is at the point where those policies are being written up in Congress. No need to work hard to find splits and fractures before then.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2020 18:22
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:The point I and others are making is that you are not likely to get to that point without honing down the label. Bernie and the Progressive Congress critters like the squad members are running on those issues and winning elections without narrowing down the definition of their cause with laser-like precision. They're running on broad, broadly understood platforms of social and economic justice. That's Progressivism. It's also the politics of my generation (and yours, assuming you're a millenial like me) and those that follow us. It's up to the voters to decide whether a politician who claims to be progressive is actually so. Voters are people and they have agency.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2020 18:36
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:And the process of voters deciding what "actually is" progressivism is the process of narrowing the label. If such a thing is to occur at all. Ok, great! If voters do it by default then why should we start narrowing the label right here in this thread?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2020 18:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 17:47 |
|
|
I'd never say that Biden is a Progressive. He's a Democratic Party institutionalist through and through, as far as I can tell. I hope that the fact that the Democratic Party has moved left over the last 20 years will influence his policy making decisions. And activists in the streets.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2020 18:45
|
|