a progressive manifesto?
NYCO at DailyKos bemoans the lack of a unifying Manifesto under which to unite the progressive movement.
The problem with a manifesto however is that a manifesto is usually a statement of principles, followed by a statement of intended action or desired goals guided by those principles.
The principles that tie together the progressive movement are very general, universal ones. If I were to reduce it to a single sentence, I might say, "all people have an inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." But what are the roadblocks to these things?
a conservative will argue that government is the oppressor and that the market is the liberator. A liberal actually extends that, saying that govt and the market can both be oppressors, and both can be liberators. In essence, liberals allow for double-edged swords - which means now we have to take care which way we swing.
And in the decision to swing our swords of govt or markets, we will disagree. Consider the Euston Manifesto, deried by most proressives as a tool of neoconservative imperialists. I am a signatory. The principles underlying the Euston Manifesto are essentially liberal ones, not conservative ones. How then do we reconcile ourselves when we interpret the end products of the shared principles so differently?
At Nation Building I am an advocate of principled pragmatism and liberal interventionism. note the qualifiers: liberal, pragmatic. Therein lies the rub. I think that we need to focus on the principles, and recognize that they are universal enough to lead us on different paths. But as long as the tent is a big one, I dont think a true manifesto can ever be drafted. Nor does it necccessarily need to be if instead we think of the progresive movement as an encouragement away from mono-thinking and conventional wisdom and towards the grecian ideal wherein we are all philosopher kings, and the wisdom of the majority is fueled by the wisdom of the individual.
The problem with a manifesto however is that a manifesto is usually a statement of principles, followed by a statement of intended action or desired goals guided by those principles.
The principles that tie together the progressive movement are very general, universal ones. If I were to reduce it to a single sentence, I might say, "all people have an inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." But what are the roadblocks to these things?
a conservative will argue that government is the oppressor and that the market is the liberator. A liberal actually extends that, saying that govt and the market can both be oppressors, and both can be liberators. In essence, liberals allow for double-edged swords - which means now we have to take care which way we swing.
And in the decision to swing our swords of govt or markets, we will disagree. Consider the Euston Manifesto, deried by most proressives as a tool of neoconservative imperialists. I am a signatory. The principles underlying the Euston Manifesto are essentially liberal ones, not conservative ones. How then do we reconcile ourselves when we interpret the end products of the shared principles so differently?
At Nation Building I am an advocate of principled pragmatism and liberal interventionism. note the qualifiers: liberal, pragmatic. Therein lies the rub. I think that we need to focus on the principles, and recognize that they are universal enough to lead us on different paths. But as long as the tent is a big one, I dont think a true manifesto can ever be drafted. Nor does it necccessarily need to be if instead we think of the progresive movement as an encouragement away from mono-thinking and conventional wisdom and towards the grecian ideal wherein we are all philosopher kings, and the wisdom of the majority is fueled by the wisdom of the individual.
Comments
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7v1c0smq-us