On the American political spectrum, am I a radical leftist, a progressive, a liberal, a
centrist, or what? As a Democrat, what way forward should I urge on my party?
I’m for a robust welfare state. I favor redistribution or predistribution of wealth and income. I say that nothing can justify a condition in which some people corner enormous amounts of money while others, through no fault of their own, must spend their lives struggling to make ends meet. What I advocate is not socialism with a human face, but free enterprise (including its manifestation in capitalism) harnessed to the common good.
In principle, I favor a single-payer health insurance system. In practice, I approve of a universal multi-payer system like Germany's or Japan’s. No one should remain uncovered for lack of money.
I advocate a universal basic income, primarily because robotics and artificial intelligence are slicing through the traditional discourse of economic injustice. Blue-collar, white-collar, even white-coat jobs are in line for automation. Societies will need to pay their members a dividend out of the profits derived from productive activity. No, this is not tomorrow’s full-blown reality; but the bud is opening, and we’d better pay attention.
If I ruled the world, there would be no guns. Since I don't, I desire thoroughgoing gun control. Aim to repeal the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Implement tight regulation of the ownership of firearms. Drastically restrict the types of firearm that may be owned, and aggressively confiscate all others now in circulation.
What am I, so far?
I see immigration as a boon to American society, even apart from its economic value. I also think immigration needs to be regulated on principles that are both humane and realistic. Give DACA Americans a path to citizenship. Don't separate the children of aspiring immigrants from their parents. However, no political party should simply put its imprimatur on illegality. Require all immigrants to meet legal requirements or face deportation. Drastically reform U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or abolish it and start over. There are no contradictions here.
All things considered, I think abortion should be available at the woman's discretion. I wholeheartedly advocate access to safe means of contraception.
I oppose any restriction on sexual relations or marriage between consenting adults on grounds of sexual orientation.
Though racism, being a fundamental evil, has no rightful place on the political spectrum, it does intrude. I say racial discrimination is not merely wrong. If we fully grasp our own humanity, we feel racial discrimination to be unnatural; and yet not merely that, either. The notion of race itself evaporates, leaving behind only people. Let's rid society of racial injustice and go on to rid ourselves of any mental habit of racial discrimination. Let's awaken to our humanity.
Climate change is another strange subject to find in a discussion of political persuasions. There was a time when prominent Republicans understood it and worried about it as much as Democrats. It's been decades since scientists began warning that action was urgently needed. Dire consequences are now assured. To avert the very direst ones, we must bring enormous resources and rigorous compulsions to bear on this problem without delay.
What am I, then?
I'd say that in a vacuum, alone with my ideals and a political agenda, I'm progressive bordering on outré. Amid the hurly-burly, however, I'm a bit pragmatic -- more serious about progress than about progressivism. Consequently, I’m at odds with the type of progressive who seems to belong atop a barricade with feet spread and arms akimbo, or one arm akimbo and the other pointing into the future. This progressive type is the bane of progress.
Liberals in America achieve the most for the cause of social justice when their politics are rooted in the cause of economic justice and governed by consensus-building. The factor that's defeating their potential today is the influence of academics. Outside of academia, people of different colors, ethnicities, sexual identities, and ages may see the path to a better day leading through consensus and cooperation, but in liberal circles they find that path beset by marauding theoreticians.
Why theorize conflict instead of building power through concord? To secure one’s position in the sociopolitical vanguard. It’s an old story. Ambitious progressives want to be not just more advanced than common liberals, but every bit as advanced as any other progressive. They’re competing to catch the wave of the future. For the Democratic Party, as other observers have pointed out, the problem with this competition is that it's essentially internal. Starting from progressive assumptions, it proceeds to over-theorization and ideological rigor, thereby rarefying the Democratic appeal instead of expanding it.
Those of us with visions of progress should focus not on ruling the Democratic ecosystem, but on developing it as the main habitat of American political life. So squelch the morbid tendency to biological class warfare. Discourage academics from trying to turn the struggle against racism into a proprietary concession based on a pedagogical relationship with the rest of society. Reject flamboyant slogans. Don't dream of normalizing the word socialist. Give up arguments like "Nowhere else in the world is this kind of talk considered radical." Nowhere else in the world are Democrats charged with winning hearts and minds. They'd better get used to dealing with America, where much is possible in the way of progress if it’s not impeded by performative progressivism.
The elections of 2020 (setting aside the unique presidential contest) gave Democrats a chance to recognize a problem which they can solve without sacrificing anything of value, one that's independent of issues: the problem of political tactics and attitudes that repel many Americans. One can work for every kind of justice without lobbing verbal cherry bombs, propagating taboos and shibboleths, or conceptually demolishing the nation that is to be improved. These are procedural choices, not integral parts of any progressive agenda. It's true that some voters, while economically progressive, are culturally conservative and therefore challenging to reach. Many others, though, are open to progressive policy across the board but can't abide an overbearing presentation of it. We progressives must stop gratuitously making it hard for those people to join hands with us. More than that, we must allow our political selves to evolve in new directions.
