November 17, 2007
The Left’s Identity Crisis
Ken Brociner in In These Times:
“Love me, love me, I’m a liberal” was one of the most memorable protest songs of the ’60s. Written, recorded and performed by the late, great Phil Ochs, the song expressed the widespread anger that ’60s radicals felt toward mainstream liberalism during that tumultuous era.
Today, in the eyes of many progressive activists, a similar divide exists within the Democratic Party. According to this view, the Democrats’ intra-party struggle either pits the insider vs. outsider, grassroots activists vs. elites or sellouts vs. those willing to fight for what they believe in (or all of the above).
By setting up these misleading dichotomies, too many activists have contributed to the dilution of what was widely meant by the word “progressive” when it became the adjective of choice for the left sometime in the mid-to-late ’70s. The fact is, over the past 10 to 15 years, the label “progressive” has come to be used so loosely that it has lost much of the substance that it had in the ’70s, ’80s and early ’90s.
So what does it mean to be a progressive in 2007? What do we stand for? What do we believe in?
Posted by Robin Varghese at 11:45 AM | Permalink
Comments
Can you be a "good progressive" these days if any primary focus is not preceded by a demonization of the opposition?
The problem with that sort of polarization is that some folks will be driven to the fore, and then left out there to twist, their polemical vituperativeness once acclaimed, then outré and even embarassing. Sheehan is one such, but we all saw that coming, but Phil Ochs is certainly another. He ended his sad life abandoned by those who inspired his courageous stance and faded into other pursuits. Daring him to compromise the principles he articulated.
He even expressed THAT anguish better than anyone:
But by that time, no one was listening.
Posted by: Carlos | Nov 17, 2007 2:41:34 PM
How can you have an identity without any fundamental ideals?
Neither of the parties has any unmovable ideological roots. They take polls and position themselves over the population through marketing to capture as many votes as possible.
That's not a way to devolop an identity.
I think the parties belive the same things essentially, but like Coke and Pepsi, must find different ways of marketing themselves to create an "indentity".
Something is wrong with the left-right paradigm. There needs to be a new, fundamental redefinition of political paradigms. This old paradigm isn't useful, and it's a false dichotomy.
Posted by: J.M.M | Nov 17, 2007 11:02:48 PM
Post a comment