Progressives (Liberals)

Incrementalism is the opiate of the party, an excuse for failure.

@edgarblythe,

America is a giant among nations. Giants and baby steps don't belong together.

@edgarblythe,

"Incrementalism" is not really an explicit policy, though. It's a descriptive term. Presently it's more aptly illustrated by the piecemeal destruction of liberal democracy, death by a thousand cuts. It's not inherently "liberal" or "conservative".

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

Follow the money when congress counts their votes. Corporate wins nearly every time and public goes begging.

Do you imagine that I might be in favor of how big money wields power and influence over governments and citizens in the US or anywhere else? In the 30s, John Dewey wrote, "Politics is the shadow cast by business". That was an observation, not a statement of approval. Are you aware of some nation somewhere which disallows business entities from exerting any political power?

There's probably no bigger task for a leftist leader/party than to temper corporate influence and the role of money in national policy. I would agree with you, Edgar, if you held that citizens must move overwhelmingly in the direction values and policies such as you and I support. Where I really don't agree is in your positing that "Sandersism" is the singular way we can get there. That's cult thinking.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Giants and baby steps don't belong together.

Even giants can stumble and lose their way. In such cases small steps are the safest way for them to get back on their feet and reorient themselves before resuming their flat-footed stride and strutting arrogantly over the poisoned earth.

2 Replies

@hightor,

Quote:

There’s probably no credible toggle toward the center for her, no ready bridge to a messier but potentially bigger mainland.

If Bruni hadn't used the modifier "probably", I would have punched him in the nose next time I see him.

Warren has been inspiring many for a long while. And I think she can inspire women, particularly, to activism in voting and in political engagement. And I deem that acutely necessary - and, given Trump as opponent, an enormous opportunity.

1 Reply

@hightor,

Quote:

Well then [Sanders] should have little difficulty securing the nomination and winning the presidency. Then what?

Yes. Everything of importance hinges on those last two words.

0 Replies

@hightor,

Quote:

Quote:
@Olivier5,
Quote:
Incrementalism may have been a noble idea decades back, but it has long been groomed into a form of immobilism, a systematic resistance to meaningful change.

I think it's been forced into that posture by the obstructionist wing of the Republican Party.

Yes. Since the early 70s, the left has been deftly out-maneuvered in many aspect of American political culture.

As to "incrementalism", that is now a term that has taken on, for some, connotations not much less smelly than commie or child-molester or gluten. As the definition of "progressivism" I posted earlier demonstrated, incremental betterment is a/the foundational methodology of going where we wish to go (if we actually believe in citizen-led government). I confess that there's something briefly appealing about the image of street-corner guillotines and blood running through the gutters but overall, I think I wouldn't approve.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

Incrementalism is the opiate of the party, an excuse for failure.

I would be interested in hearing you name or list any democratic nations now or at any time in the past who managed to create a relatively free, healthy and prosperous society using some strategy not incrementalist in approach.

1 Reply

@blatham,

They didn't do incrementalism here until after they frittered away the gains made in the recent past.

1 Reply

Jeremy au Barca
@ProgDownTicket
·
28m
"I can't think of a country that has two languages as their accepted languages that is doing all that well, including Switzerland and Canada"
Joe Biden

1 Reply

@hightor,

The way I see it, we're doomed by climate change if we don't do some radical change asap. So we can either quit and let our kids fry, or try something more radical.

1 Reply

https://scontent.fhou1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/67406923_347250066194508_8006123660299468800_n.jpg?_nc_cat=111&_nc_oc=AQnT1JgxEeEQCf-5zqp-rr-pAbpOLps-a0RLvqv__exnZqDAopa2QSs6E9krC7cETIVFCf8dTHYAIkhLrFqB9nnE&_nc_ht=scontent.fhou1-1.fna&oh=659edb9cc4b2cfffb771d69685ac3ee1&oe=5DA7DDF1

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

They didn't do incrementalism here until after they frittered away the gains made in the recent past.

Civil rights movement gains happened overnight?
Blacks' right to vote?
Women's right to vote?
Women's acceptance in the professional sphere?
Workplace safety?
Gay rights?
Unionism?
The creation and expansion of educational institutions?
The judicial system with its protections?
Environmental protections?

There's a very long list of cultural and legal gains which arrived over long periods of time, citizens pushing for these gains and continuing that push over, usually, many decades.

I can't imagine what it is you might be thinking of which came about suddenly with the stroke of some legislator's pen. Perhaps the New Deal or Johnson's Great Society legislation. But each of those were preceded by decades (or centuries) of struggle and both arrived in political and social climates different from now.

As Hightor noted earlier, you could have any dream candidate come to the WH as president but if the modern GOP continues to hold the Senate, that shiny new president is going to change almost nothing.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

"I can't think of a country that has two languages as their accepted languages that is doing all that well, including Switzerland and Canada"
Joe Biden

He's wrong. But the fellow you are quoting should have given further context and date. Lousy scholarship. That leads to lousy thinking.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

The way I see it, we're doomed by climate change if we don't do some radical change asap. So we can either quit and let our kids fry, or try something more radical.

I think we're all agreed that rapid reduction in greenhouse gases is crucial. We're in a very dangerous period but one those potential dangers is the temptation towards authoritarian solutions. I'd prefer that liberals do not become another version of the modern right. Thus my prior allusion to the guillotine.

2 Replies

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

Quote:
They didn't do incrementalism here until after they frittered away the gains made in the recent past.

Civil rights movement gains happened overnight?
Blacks' right to vote?
Women's right to vote?
Women's acceptance in the professional sphere?
Workplace safety?
Gay rights?
Unionism?
The creation and expansion of educational institutions?
The judicial system with its protections?
Environmental protections?

There's a very long list of cultural and legal gains which arrived over long periods of time, citizens pushing for these gains and continuing that push over, usually, many decades.

I can't imagine what it is you might be thinking of which came about suddenly with the stroke of some legislator's pen. Perhaps the New Deal or Johnson's Great Society legislation. But each of those were preceded by decades (or centuries) of struggle and both arrived in political and social climates different from now.

As Hightor noted earlier, you could have any dream candidate come to the WH as president but if the modern GOP continues to hold the Senate, that shiny new president is going to change almost nothing.

There is that kind of evolving and the ridiculous counterproductiveness of today's incrementalism. The first had good results at times. What they do now is like rowing a boat that goes backwards. It is in fact partly what keeps the far right expanding in size and power practically every go round, including the times Democrats have the helm. In short, equating what happened then with what is happening now is bogus.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

In short, equating what happened then with what is happening now is bogus.

In some ways, that is so. In other ways, not so. Earlier I asked you to identify some nations that successfully do it in the manner you hope to see. Can you spot any?

And another relevant question is, What do you imagine Bernie will be able to accomplish in the present environment? What levers can he pull that might change the dynamics of modern US politics? Fox is going to stick around. Russia and others will do their thing. The Koch brothers aren't about to quit. How does he get past the Senate if it remains in GOP hands (which it will unless there is a serious wave election)?

2 Replies

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

I think we're all agreed that rapid reduction in greenhouse gases is crucial. We're in a very dangerous period but one those potential dangers is the temptation towards authoritarian solutions. I'd prefer that liberals do not become another version of the modern right. Thus my prior allusion to the guillotine.

I agree with your sentiment here with respect to authoritarian solutions. However I also have the very strong impression that most of these "authoritarian solutions" today come from progressives advocating expanded government bureaucratic control of broad areas of our lives. Individual freedom is more threatened threatened by the venality and chicken **** associated with increased government management of our lives and the even greater social and economic adverse side effects associated with it.

Judging individual people based on the largely superficial elements of their so called group identities also indirectly adds significantly to the fast growing authoritarianism of contemporary progressive values. The usual rationalization for this is enforced programs to "equalize opportunity (or outcomes) for the various groups without regard to the effects it has on among individuals of all groups. In the recent past they have been mostly bad, creating dependency instead of responsibility or achievement, and failing even to achieve their stated goals. Worse many have had truly destructive effects on the subcultures they were intended to aid. One of the best ways to destroy the people of any organization is to give them an excuse for their failures.

Individual people in all of the various groups and communities that so abound today often vary far more than do the largely nonsensical identities associated with these groups (protected or otherwise). The freedom (and associated responsibility) of individual people to live and improve their lives as they choose is , or should be the object .

The guillotine was the favored execution/extermination device of the radicals of the French Revolution, particularly under Robespierre. They were not conservatives, movement or otherwise.

3 Replies

@blatham,

Once you take the office, the best way to effect change is to get the public on board with your aims. It can't happen immediately, when centrists resist positive change as hard as the Republicans. If you can martial public sentiment well enough, the midterm election would sweep out enough centrists and Republicans to give two years to get it started. Even then, it would likely take another term with a progressive majority to get where we have be.

1 Reply

Progressives (Liberals)

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know