whyroots

 
 

Let us not forget that "progressive" was the word liberals chose after the word "liberal" was so thoroughly vilified by all the Limbaughs and Coulters.  We liberals were constantly portrayed as 'effete academics' with our arugula and espressos and for some reason our mascot was little Michael Dukakis in his stupid little tank.

But now we are not liberals, no, but progressives. Liberals believe in what's right, but they are whiny and have weak biceps and therefore don't actually do anything. But progressives! Progressives are driving a steam-powered locomotive through the dark heart of the country, hauling a load of Change in its cab. Yes, the word choice is much, much better. Progress intimates movement, action while liberal is now just a conversation over white wine. But what kind of 'progress' is to be made? We must look at the word in terms of application, of how best to act, and quick! Or else Coulter will condemn our shiny new rubrick before we've used it!

Martin Luther King, Jr. famously said, "Let us realize the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice." Really, Martin? Because until last week it seemed the arc of history was actually a straight line bent towards conservative Armageddon. I had resigned myself to the idea that each liberal state would eventually secede and become part of Sweden.

It's ironic that King believed this, given all he did to ensure that arc stay bent. 
There are moments when, as progressives, we must lead the country to better itself, not simply wait for it to change, when it's our moral prerogative to accelerate the rate of progress with a little nudge. In the Brown v. Board ruling, Chief Justice Earl Warren did not simply rule against segregation but added that is must happen "with all deliberate speed." Was he the kind of "radical judge" the Bush administration is so fond of condemning?  In their eyes, perhaps. Because he did not wait for the wrong to be righted. He chose his position of power to change that. Years after his decision, Warren explained his choice: "There were so many blocks preventing an immediate solution of the thing in reality that the best we could look for would be a progression of action."

A progression of action. Yes.

So the party of Dukakis and Carter are now "progressives." What does that mean? We are looking to the future. We are not content to rest on the laurels of our backwards and bigoted past. Unlike conservatives, who preach about so-called non-interventionist government (except of course when it comes to marriage and abortion and sending citizens to die in needless wars), we view the government as a machine that can protect and improve the lives of our citizens. And for once progressives are in charge of that machine. Let's see what happens.

 


Comments

Nathan Huttner

Tue, 11 Nov 2008 08:24:42

It is pretty amazing the degree to which the use of the word "progressive" today is like a re-branding campaign of "liberal." I'm not sure I even really know the concrete differences between a "liberal" and a "progressive." They definitely feel different, but how much of that is the "Dukakis effect" on the word liberal?

 

Ottavio

Tue, 11 Nov 2008 10:40:59

While reading your piece, the Martin Luther King quote reminded me of a line in Obama's acceptance speech. "It's the answer that led those who have been told for so long by so many to be cynical, and fearful, and doubtful of what we can achieve to put their hands on the arc of history and bend it once more toward the hope of a better day" (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96624326). It seems that you are both in agreement.

Also, in reading the speech again I found many lines that reminded me of King's speeches. "The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year, or even one term, but America — I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you: We as a people will get there." Where is there? The promised land maybe? I am just glad he didn't say "I may not get there with you."

 

Tue, 11 Nov 2008 15:26:01

Ottavio -- But didn't he effectively say "I may not get there with you"? That's how I read "We as a people will get there"...

And I agree: where is there? I referred to this notion as a 'hopeful asymptote' on my blog, a hangover from the Enlightenment when Reason reigns supreme and joy and productivity are scientifically maximized for all. I don't know where there is now. I think it may be the same place, we've just lowered our standards as to its realizability. Maybe it's just a metaphor now.

 



Leave a Reply