Progressivism isn’t a collection of policy positions. It’s a narrative about politics. One can support a bunch of “progressive” policies yet not be a progressive, especially if one is doing out of a pragmatic desire to get elected by supporting popular ideas.
Ultimately, progressivism in an American political context is an ideology whose opponent is neoliberalism more than conservatism. Neoliberalism seeks to maintain the status quo on market capitalism while being concerned about deficits. Though Buttigieg has been critical of neoliberalism, he doesn’t seem to stray too far from it. He is, arguably, an example of progressive neoliberalism that melds social liberalism with new economy capitalism, but which isn’t really progressive at its core.
Progressivism ranges from strongly-regulated capitalism to outright socialism. The former manages to be scary enough to some alleged moderates that they see it as indistinguishable from socialism. At the core of progressivism is a skepticism of market capitalism, although not always hostile anti-capitalism.
Buttigieg gives the impression that he thinks that American capitalism is fundamentally sound in theory and that there just needs to be some fixing around the margins, like giving more power to unions and indoctrinating blacks into the capitalist order by fostering black entrepreneurship. Progressivism believes that American capitalism is fundamentally broken and needs either a massive overhauling or full replacement.
Whatever Buttigieg may say about "democratic capitalism:, it feels like he still operates instinctively within a capitalist narrative.
In the primary, “M4A” came to mean “Bernie’s plan/proposed bill.” I thought his specific plan was promising the moon, and that it was not practical. I was told that I wanted poor people to die because I thought this.
I do not think that UHC is promising the moon. I thought that eliminating a trillion dollar industry that employs a million people in 4 years was promising the moon. I thought there were more practical and realistic ways to achieve universal health care. Ergo, I wanted poor people to die.
I’ve told you before that “Medicare for All” originated with John Conyers in 2003, long before Bernie Sanders ever ran for president. Bernie’s plan is a continuation of what Conyers started. M4A always meant that plan. Other candidates tried to leech from the popularity of that plan among the Democratic base by coming up with lesser proposals with similar-sounding names.
The primary was in 2019-2020. That is what I am talking about. I did not support Bernie’s solution, which in common parlance became defined as “M4A,” because I felt it was impractical.
Do I want Medicare or something like it to become available for all people? Yes.
Do I think that 4 years to completely transition is feasible or practical? No.
Do I want poor people to die? According to many people, apparently yes.
Let me be clear: I am not angry that Bernie, et al. are proposing these new solutions. I agree with them! I am angry that I got excoriated for supporting these things that are now just fine.
Either I don’t understand your analogy or it doesn’t hold up at all.
The Sanders/Jayapal proposal is better than the status quo. I agree with Conman that I hope it passes, but means testing it is a bad idea.
Pete’s proposal of MFAWWI is also better than the status quo. If it were presented today as a bill, I would also hope that it passes, even though I think that better ideas exist.
The difference here is that Pete went out of his way to attack more generous proposals with a GOP talking point. Unless Sanders/Jayapal are attacking the authors of a bill proposing free college for all by asking “how will you pay for it?”, your analogy doesn’t work. Either that or I’ve completely missed your point (I’ll concede that both are possible).
Free college and m4a are not winnable right now because Joe Biden is president. Not because they are fundamentally unachievable. Congrats on the victory lap of things that are way worse than they need to be because we elected Joe.
Seriously holy shit. You’re coming in here doing this bit where you’re like “see, the good people in congress are proposing watered down bills” and acting like Bernie fucking Sanders now believes that gradually lowering the Medicare age is the just way to expand healthcare and we were all naive starry eyed children for supporting the actually good bill.
They’re doing these things now because Joe Biden literally promised to veto m4a and backed down from his already modest college debt proposals that he claimed to support during the campaign.
If there was a way to bet on it I would honestly bet my net worth on Biden signing both a free tuition and M4A bill if they ever made it to his desk. Yes, I know he said he would veto M4A.
Do you mean that his secret inner heart wants m4a or that for an m4a bill to make it to his desk so much pressure would have to have been exerted that he’d sign it despite personal inner heart reservations?
Think of what would have to happen for a bill to get to his desk. It would have to get the approval of several people significantly more conservative than Biden. No way he would veto it if the political winds were blowing that hard.
Biden has enough power to make sure those bills never make it to his desk though. That’s exactly why Bernie and company are pivoting to this. It’s their only chance to accomplish literally ANYTHING on these issues now that the neo-libs once again have pretty much complete control of the Dem party.
Also haven’t the various free college/m4a/gnd type bills already been previously drafted and introduced by these same people? They were roundly rejected by the Biden/Pete wing of the party. Pete wasn’t right then and he isn’t right now. The fact Biden won and Pete gets to play his errand boy has no bearing on the merits of their positions either and acting like it does is ridiculous. It does however have bearing on what is possible to accomplish once they hold the levers of power though.
To show how ridiculous that line of thinking is imagine we had 50 AOC/Bernies elected in the Senate, a majority in the House of AOC/Bernies and Bernie as president. You don’t think they would be passing M4A/free college for all/etc? Of course they would. They can’t because of Biden/Pete and the rest of them.
I agree but those bills won’t get there precisely because Biden is president. I suppose with the current makeup of Congress they wouldn’t make it there with Bernie either though.
Some of all this is the Dem primary voter’s fault of course. Maybe more than some.
I’m speculating based on what we know. It isn’t like Bernie is going to come out and call Biden a neolib and the reason why things have to get watered down. He did actually say those types of things in the primary though so I think we know what he thinks to some extent.
What gets passed with Bernie as president, a majority in the House of AOC/Bernies, and a Senate with 50 Republicans, 48 AOC/Bernies, 1 Sinema, and 1 Manchin?
