> I think there is a schism in people holding left-of-center (US context) views. I see liberals as placing a higher value on a consistent application of values

> I think there is a schism in people holding left-of-center (US context) views. I see liberals as placing a higher value on a consistent application of values and less emphasis on outcomes. I see progressives as more focused on outcomes than the means used to obtain them. > Cynically phrased, a critique of liberals from progressives would be that liberals are okay dithering and letting injustices stand. A liberal criticism of progressives is that they have adopted an “ends justify the means” philosophy. Additionally liberals might question whether the “ends” are good and on what authority that determination was made. I think this is a very clear and succinct summation. It shows that both sides aren't exactly wrong, but they aren't exactly right either. That's what makes politics hard. I'm kinda reminded of something I was taught about English Common Law: hundreds of years ago, it was basically the law in England, but it became so focused on consistent application that it ossified and failed to provide legal relief for many clear injustices. When that happened, someone could directly appeal to the King for relief, and out of those appeals developed a Equity, a whole different body of law. There's nothing wrong with consistent application of a process, but I think sometimes some people get so focused on it that they loose sight of the actual goal the process was meant to achieve.