Comment 50746

By Undustrial (registered) - website | Posted October 28, 2010 at 14:23:07

Marvin, like most centrists, fundamentally misunderstands what it means to be "progressive" (or whatever label you want to use, I certainly am not fond of that one). It's not just considering the opposition opinion on things like Red Hill or Aerotropolis, it's actually opposing them. It's when those type of issues are a fundamental part of your platform. I would never even consider something as silly as paving the valley - it's baffling to me, as it is to most progressives.

Being "radical" or "progressive" isn't about being "in the club". You don't just buy a membership then do what you wish, like with a political party. It's about actions you take and statements you make. Just because you agree with radicals on an issue doesn't mean that we're compelled to support you in perpetuity (something Bratina is reportedly a little sore about). It isn't about influence peddling, it's about principles and worldview.

The political "centre" is a myth, as is much of the traditional understanding of the "political spectrum". Political 'moderates' in Europe would come off like old-guard communists here, and 'centrists' from the US would make Harper look progressive. Whether somebody is right or wrong has nothing to do with where they stand on some imaginary line and everything to do with the facts. These myths are used by the media and politicos to set the terrain for political battles ahead of time, so that anybody who's willing to simply state the facts gets portrayed as some kind of "extremist" (another meaningless label).

For what it's worth tho, I know some LIUNA/Liberal insiders, and they were very involved with Jason Farr's campaign. So Marvin does have a point.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds