My health care reform reading of late has had a lot of mentions and examples of a so-called split amongst progressives aka liberals aka democrats (the whole big tent for the sake of discussion).
Several different terms have been tossed around as appellations for the two sides, but it's probably better to just describe them.
On one side we have the people disappointed with the compromises made to the likes of Lieberman and Nelson. People like Howard Dean who are really ticked off at how 'real' reform has been sold out to expedience.
On the other had you have people who are willing to accept the cutting of deals and who view the 'bill-killers' and public option die-hards as naive. This group could broadly be said to feel that even a modest amount of progress is still progress, and that shouldn't be jeopardized by idealism.
And to start I think that's the least loaded way to describe them. Some might call them idealists and pragmatists, though I think even those words might be a little loaded (since idealism usually implies an unattainable goal).
But what I found interesting about this split is that since I'm a progressive/liberal/Democrat, I must fall into one of these camps, yes? And yet I struggle to identify firmly with either one, and even to find a firm dividing line between them.
Looking at the republican situation there is a much clearer split between the three subgroups of conservatives: neocons, libertarians and the religious right.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment