3 ms·

Democrats just passed the largest infrastructure spending bill in ages (including a huge push to get everyone broadband, among other great programs), are active

• dragonwriter 5y ago
  > Democrats just passed the largest infrastructure spending bill in ages The Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal is not progressive; the progressive goals were either in BBB and require both BBB and BID, and center-right Democrats (including the leadership, by accommodating the more visibly hostile party members) threw away BBB by pushing BID separately contrary to commitments to do them together. > But I am starting to be really frustrated by the progressive meme that democrats haven’t accomplished anything Democrat have accomplished a lot recently that would have been no controversial during the peak of the bipartisan center-right neoliberal consensus, but very little—and arguably negative value—from a progressive standpoint. They’ve been significantly less negative than Republican domination would be, but even with the “significantly” qualifier, “not as bad as the people who goaded, aided, and continue to pander to the mob who stormed the Capitol chanting for the head of the VP from their own party for not being sufficiently supportive of arbitrary authoritarianism” is a pretty low bar. I mean I am a progressive Democrat whose first election was the first one Bill Clinton one, so I have the perspective of having seen quite a significant erosion of the power of the center-right power bloc in the Democratic Party in my period as an active participant in the process, so I am not going to argue against electoral engagement by progressives. But I am also tired as fuck of the center-right corporate conservatives in the Party trying to sell every success in advancing their agenda won by pulling the rug out from under progressives as somehow a win for progressives.
  • clairity 5y ago
    the build back better (bbb) act is decidedly not progressive. it aims to spend lavishly, entirely funded by debt with no hope of positive return, so that that spending can be captured by the already wealthy. the only bit of that bill that could be considered progressive is the change in tax rate for the wealthy/corporations, but that's such a tiny band-aid on a huge gaping wound, that's it's not even really worth mentioning.
• clairity 5y ago
  none of that is progressive. progressive policies would increase fairness, first and foremost, rather than simply spending lavishly to buttress a top-heavy, growth-at-all-costs economy. all of those Democratic bills worsen fairness, often intentionally and deceptively. you've been entirely captured by mediopolitical propaganda if you believe that's what progressiveness looks like. real progressivism would dismantle policies that serve to concentrate money and power (like our highly regressive tax policy), because progress depends on dynamism rather than ossification, and none of these blls even pretend to do that.
  • netizen-936824 5y ago
    Including getting rid of the insane drug laws and regulating substances for use rather than putting shitloads of people in jails or prisons
  • n8cpdx 5y ago
    Real progressives don’t agree on what progress means. No amount of progress is ever enough. If no amount of progress is enough, no progressive politician is enough. Progressives then don’t show up at the polls for anyone who isn’t a “real progressive”. And then progressives have the gall to complain that the few progressives who do manage to get elected are fighting for table scraps. I’m becoming convinced that the true definition of a progressive isn’t based in any specific ideology, but in a refusal to acknowledge the constraints of politics. And the result is progressives would rather compete to have the best idealistic vision for utopia than actually do what is needed to win elections and make progress.
    • clairity 5y ago
      i specifically used 'progressivism' rather than 'progressive' to avoid that exact identity issue. identifying with an ideology, particularly with an amorphous one, devolves into tribalism and partisanship. progressivism in US politics is largely defined by mediopolitical interests anyway so it's entirely detached from any principled stance. Democrats now tend to use this term because 'liberal' has gone out of fashion, so they co-opted another term that had less existing baggage. for politicians and political parties, principles are simply tools to be wielded and bent in the service of power, not the other way around. that's why there's no agreed-upon definition. but none of this has to matter at all for the majority of voters who have little power outside of their tiny vote. if such voters would stop identifying with ideologies, parties, and especially politicians (and ignore media who push this upon us), we'd actually collectively have more sway over the platforms they ran on, because we'd be resistant to being railroaded mindlessly into sets of policy positions shaped by more highly motivated (but numerically tiny) moneyed interests. we'd make amassing and deploying power harder that way.
• dillondoyle 5y ago
  I agree! Also look at your city, school board, and state level. That's where a ton of real impact happens and people don't even know it. And unfortunately the Republicans are amazing at taking our accomplishments, twisting them into a lie based fervor for their gain. Obamacare is a great example before these bills. a more pessimistic viewpoint is that they go further and force bad situations to help win elections by causing or extending pain (default drama, covid, state benefits) On potential Build Back Better bill, it won't be 2T not even as drafted. I would bet just over 1T if it even passes at all. AND it will be paid for if it passes. But all the news reports lead with 2T massive spending bill. Mitch McConnell refuses to help increase the debt limit and they are messaging that Dems are have caused all this debt and forcing all your home costs to skyrocket. Despite the fact the transportation bill was bipartisan and so was all the covid stimi. that message is SUPER effective. inflation is a tough topic but the debt is a flat out lie. A ton of our debt is from Republican tax cuts. THEY should be helping pay that bill!