Wow, that was quick; we're barely open for business and already we've been tagged as insufficiently progressive - not based on anything we've written, mind you, but on what we might write. Only, can we really not work together first and feud later? Are we so overstaffed in the fight for fundamental change that none but the perfect need apply? Are conservative purity tests so alluring that we've got to have a piece of that action? Must we play the secular version of "is he Catholic enough?' And what, you wanna send the progressive answer to Monica Goodling over here to ask us a couple of questions? (You know, like when we first knew Obama was the one, and why.)
Growing up in a very conservative family in a very conservative area of the country, one of the many things I never got or signed off on was how it could be that one side was right about absolutely everything while the other - the "damnDemocrats'' - were more like poor old Goofus in Highlights for Kids, who never managed a smooth move in his life. This did not make sense to me then, so why would I want to flip the labels and carry on that same way now? A nice liberal lady I interviewed for a story once told me about how she'd grown up in a Right-thinking milieu, and when I said yeah, same here, she said, "But from the time you were little, you knew that wasn't you, didn't you?'' Her theory was that "same as you're born gay or straight, you're born liberal or conservative.'' I wouldn't swear to that, though it was true enough in my case to make me laugh. But whatever we call ourselves and however we got here, aren't labels a luxury we can't afford?
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Somehow I thought that to be progressive was to mean that you were not stagnant in you views but open to change and progress. I did no thing it was to be a word substitution for "Liberal" or Right Wing.
I expect to hear view points that will tend to be conservative on some issues and liberal in others. As my faith is that of one who seeks Unity with Christ, I have found that the Gospel of Jesus is progressive in nature yet still maintains a conservative viewpoint in our relationship with God. I have also found that if you walk on one side of the road, you may fall into a rut. Also, if you Walk on the left edge, everybody else seems to be on the "Right" and visa-versa.
The best way to make progress is to walk straight down the center of the road. This applies to all aspects of life, religious, political as well as on the job and parenting.
I have to admit, Paul, I don't view the Gospel as progressive. To me, "My Kingdom is not of this World" and "Render unto Caesar" carry a potential rebuke to anybody who seeks to politicize the Gospels.
I think Jesus was radical in ways that would make progressives, liberals, conservatives and reactionaries today equally ill-at-ease. But not radical in a political sense.
That's not what pastordan was saying. If you want, I guess I can be that progressive answer to Monica Goodling only I actually am progressive and I am not illegally trying to hire anybody to work in the federal government.
There is an identifiable group of religiously affected Democratically leaning folks who want to advocate for accomodation with the right and even the religious right. The argument goes that we should find common ground, find a new "center."
There are also many religiously affected Democratically leaning folks who see things having progressed beyond accomodation. To further accomodate the religious right is to compromise our core values and not only ours, the majority of Americans are known to stand with us as demonstrated in many polls on many issues such as stem cell research, women's reproductive rights, gay rights, end-of-life rights, minimum wage, and the death penalty.
So, the "centrist" approach to progressive politics is not something that is actually very progressive for us. I can't speak for pastordan but speaking for myself I think that centrists should self-identify as centrists and not try to pass themselves off as progressives. It confuses people who are trying to organize with like-minded others. Triangulating may work to a certain extent but that is not what progressives ought to be trying to do. We ought to be standing for our values and the values that most of the American people believe in.
There is room in the Democratic majority for many ideologies. Everybody doesn't have to be progressive. The progressive brand stands for things. Centrist views and accomodation with the right are not among them.
I think George Lakoff defines Progressive, Centrist, and Conservatives in an authoritative way.
linkage
This seems like an interesting blog to me. I already like and admire Brian Mclaren, Welton Gaddy, Michael Lerner, and Kathleen Kennedy Townsend. You have an interesting mix of people and religious traditons. Why should you care if you don't pass Pastor Dan's ideological litmus test? He likes to kick around Jim Wallis, Amy Sullivan, Mara Vanderslice and anyone who isn't "left" enough for him. He's seems kind of nasty, but then again Daily Kos can get a bit vitriolic from time to time.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.