Postpartisan, not Bipartisan

One of the most intriguing aspects of the current debate on the economic recovery act is the strange way the terms "postpartisan" and "bipartisan" are being thrown around by both politicians and the media.

President Obama campaigned as a postpartisan candidate.  Postpartisan means that politics must move beyond the current party structure.  A postpartisan vision recognizes that there are many voices in the larger body politic--and that a good number of those voices have never been heard in the American process.  Thus, postpartisan, a sort of generational mantra for those under 40, is an attempt to create new relationships, draw diverse people and perspectives to a table, and develop innovative possibilities to address social and political issues.

In case no one in Washington has noticed, postpartisan does not mean bipartisan.  Yes, the root word--partisan--is the same, but the prefix is different.  "Post" means "after, beyond, or subsequent to;" "bi" means "two."

Now, folks in Washington are a very smart group--they attended lots of private schools and good colleges and most of them probably studied Latin.  Yet, every time the new President says "postpartisan," they substitute "bipartisan."  For nearly two weeks now, pundits have been fuming about the failure of "bipartisanship" on the recovery package.  Republican politicians have asserted that because they didn't vote for the act, President Obama's attempt at bipartisanship has failed a mere ten days into his administration.  "He's just like Bush," some say.  "Bush came to office calling for bipartisanship, but he was really just the old politics of division."  In other words, bipartisanship can never work in our political system.  Someone has to take charge--be a leader--and enforce their party's will on the other side.

The new progressive vision is not based in the idea that there are TWO parties.  "Progressive" is not simply a linguistic find-and-replace for "liberal" as in "liberal" versus "conservative."  Emerging progressive politics--and religion as well--insists that there are more than two voices.  The voices of the common good and the voices of vibrant faith come from multiple traditions and perspectives, and all of these voices matter.  Progressives, unlike old-style liberals, approach this multiplicity with a certain degree of modesty.  Progressive politics isn't about winning nor is it about balancing two agendas.  Progressive politics is about setting tables, about hearing and listening, about constructing new possibilities where none currently exist.  It is pluralistic and adaptive, not dualistic and winner-take-all. Progressive politics is not a zero-sum game.

President Obama has long recognized that politics is not about two parties.  More than a year ago, he said: "I think the American people are hungry for something different and can be mobilized around big changes, not incremental changes, not small changes. I think that there are a whole host of Republicans, and certainly independents, who have lost trust in their government, who don't believe anybody is listening to them, who don't believe what politicians say. And we can draw those independents and some Republicans into a working coalition, a working majority for change."

President Bush promised "bipartisanship," a bringing together of two parties.  That failed.  President Obama never promised bipartisanship.  He promised a new era of moving beyond the old two-party politics--he promised "something different" around "big changes."  He promised to create something "after, beyond, or subsequent to" the two-party divide that would include those who have been excluded.  He is trying to forge a post-partisan path to an innovative future. 

But he is trying to do that with a Congress that doesn't understand the language he speaks.  The congressional Republicans and Democrats have something profound in common.  They are stuck in a dualistic world.  How can they move forward? A good first step would be to remember first-year Latin: postpartisan does not mean bipartisan.  Sometimes a world of new possibilities turns on a phrase.