Lefties: Shrewd Pragmatists VS Pie-In-The-Sky Idealists
From an interesting article in Salon. Compare and contrast the descriptions of two sides on the Left:
It's true that Pariser, a 26-year-old who has worked for MoveOn since 2001, looks at the Iraq supplemental bill with a shrewdly pragmatic eye. ...
MoveOn is now one of the largest activist groups in the country, but its popularity is more a consequence of its organizational savvy than any pie-in-the-sky plans. Peace groups believe in the grand possibilities of the firm, principled stand. But MoveOn has never had much truck with idealists. ...
But whatever the mainstream impression of MoveOn may be, it has never been a lockstep member of the idealistic, activist left. It may have seemed that way during the years of one-party GOP rule, when MoveOn and other progressive groups fought a common enemy.
I'm all for being smart and pragmatic (who isn't?) in achieving progressive goals. But what if the goals are compromised by the methods? What was achieved with the House passage of the Iraq supplemental?
The legislation will either be watered down or rejected in the Senate, and if by some magic it goes to Bush he will veto it or signing-statement-away the parts of it he doesn't like.
So as far as outcomes, what have the pragmatists achieved? It will make no difference as far as the carnage in Iraq goes.
What it does achieve, potentially, is scoring political points for the Democratic party. That's it. This could be good towards the goal of getting out of Iraq, if (and it's a big ol' if) Dem Politicians will actually get us out of there.
Hillary seems to have no intention of doing so even after she gets elected. If things turn out this way, which side was really the pragmatic one?