Thank you for this! I've recently decided I identify as a humanist, rather than a progressive or Democrat or leftist. Humanism puts people first, always. And humanism sees the very real human emotions that underpin people who push policies that I fundamentally disagree with. Acknowledging that others' fears and concerns exist and feel very real, even if they're not true, prevents us from becoming what we purport to hate. We recognize the humanity of all and work towards a future where equity can become a reality.
exactly, i feel like the point just went right over their head and just bc it wasn’t specifically mentioned by name they didn’t register that they’re falling into the same trap. i also dislike when ppl r like “im not this im this” when being either doesnt even change how they see and interact w the world just falling into semantics and projecting their own black and white thinking and misunderstanding on those concepts thinking their superior in some way
Practically speaking, I usually vote for the candidates endorsed by NY's Working Families Party. I believe that policies that are enacted have to work for people first, not corporations or ideologies. I think a "people first" mindset has shifted my thinking more when talking with other folks who support politicians and policies with which I strongly disagree. I think it's important to listen for what's not being said, the emotions underpinning the political beliefs. I've got a bunch of family who support Trump, and if you listen carefully, there are real fears behind their words. We are not going to get anywhere without addressing those fears first.
how u describe it is exactly the same as how a lot of leftists describe it. i think the point is more what are you going to do about it rather than label wars
There are those who see being on the Left as an end in itself, taking part in a game of tribal politics, and those who see being on the Left as a means for a better world. We should ignore the first ones; we should listen, be inspired by, befriend the second ones.
At least for those who sincerely police the correctness of others' beliefs, I think there is an underlying understanding that doing the actual work is always more complex than theory. That is why they stay away from it. The second you start to interact with real people, you must "compromise" some beliefs to do real work
This mindset paralyzes people though. There is nothing more freeing than actually working toward a better world with others and seeing how messy the work is. No one is perfect. There's no use pretending to be
Thanks for putting this in writing. Being labeled as a leftist has always felt uncomfortable to me. I've never understood how Democrats could accept the word 'progressive' being used pejoratively without pushing back at every opportunity- use the OED definitions: "Progressive" ("in favor of new ideas, modern methods, and change") and message that the opposite is 'retrogressive'--("returning to old-fashioned ideas or methods instead of making progress")-Why is this language not being used by candidates, journalists, etc. 'Leftist' has too much baggage, but to be a 'Progressive' equates to exercising simple common sense. That messaging is beginning to appear in the Harris speeches- moving forward...but to me, there should be constant emphasis on the clear difference between the definition of 'progress' ("the process of improving or developing, or of getting nearer to achieving or completing something") and its opposite. It's no news that the Good Old Days were not-- but the whole MAGA platform is built on that premise- and the debunking of the myths is not loud enough. DO you have ideas for how individuals can work on spreading information outside our own bubbles?
Just thought of this too: DC DSA had an initiative called Stomp Out Slumlords where people regularly canvas and talk to people who are on the court docket to be evicted to make sure they know their rights, what resources are available, and see if they need help. This also gets you to talk to a lot of different people, both at the apartments and just while you're walking around. Hopefully other chapters do similar things
You make many good points. I personally am wary of the word progressive because of the last several decades of technological progress being many people's only idea of progress. I think Silicon Valley became way too good at co-opting the language of progress for their own gain. But like Joshua, I think it's better to put more stock in actions than words, and I think it's precisely because of the different meanings words have to different people.
To your final question though, I have found that a lot of people who volunteer for organizations that I volunteer for do so for very different reasons than I would have expected and often have different politics than me. It may only be a slightly larger bubble I'm going into there, but it's at least something. Also, I read about the idea of deep canvassing in The Persuaders by Anand Ghiridaradas, and it sounds like a good way to get outside of our bubbles (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/oct/09/the-persuaders-winning-hearts-and-minds-in-divided-age-by-anand-giridharadas-review-why-it-pays-to-talk-in-a-polarised-world). This is something you can do not just for politicians too. People often canvas for specific causes or advocacy groups. And there's even a group in Maryland that canvases just to try to connect with neighbors, share information, and connect people to help if they need it (https://everydaycanvassing.org/).
I firmly believe canvassing about and for issues/policy is BRILLIANT. No labels. No “conservative”, “liberal”, “Progressive”, “Libertarian” need be mentioned.
Simply research a topic dear to you, find out “best policy practice”, engage, educate, urge others to demand good governance and hold elected officials accountable for such.
By definition “Universal Healthcare” a great example.
Why did I qualify? Because M4A is more money, less quality of care and a gigantic corporate donor class boondoggle.
Finding unbiased sources can be tricky. Find out who funds the source. Do your homework before you do your homework, so to speak…lol
This reminds me of debates I've heard over the "horseshoe" theory of how you can get so "left" you start running into right-wing beliefs (also characterized by the adage, "You can go so far left you get your guns back"), which I think isn't wrong so much as looking at all of these questions in ways that don't get to the core issues. I try to think less of left vs. right, than of how deeply someone wants to control or have power over other people. Thinking about it that way helps me reframe a lot of these questions.
Perhaps you won’t disagree but I don’t think it’s necessary or likely to be effective to ask people to surrender leftist as an identity in order to prioritize action. I think leftist identity is important. I also think it’s slippery to imply that identity is limited to something immutable or innate.
Leftist identity seems to me to be a useful precursor to action. It helps people find their people to do things. I don’t think it’s identity that’s at issue as much as it is feelings, such as being threatened, powerlessness and/or hopelessness, turned into gatekeeping. As you said, there’s an important reason for gatekeeping. There are ways to help people self-select into and out of what matters or doesn’t matter to them, particularly the work they want to do. Bad gatekeeping turns people off even when they might otherwise want to work for the same cause. More nuanced gatekeeping helps people realize this isn’t what they want and more importantly to me, can make that work safer for more vulnerable people doing it.
This is such an important subject to talk about, thank you for writing it! I think also when we identify too much as a right/leftist we equate sides of the spectrum as either moral or not. This by default would mean the other side is inherently immoral, which isn’t really accurate and turns us into enemies. This framing means we become susceptible to alienating and condemning those that disagree with us instead of engaging in constructive dialogue about policy change. If we’re always attacking each other for not being left enough or right enough we’re also in danger of falling into groupthink.
But as you say, if we prioritize kindness and humanism over political spectrum labels, we’re more likely to be able to both be free to be individuals, and also create positive change through constructive dialogue and debate.
“I want a world filled with justice, a world where no one is hungry or homeless and where people are able to thrive and explore and turn their dreams into reality. I want a world where we, humanity, can explore in every way, thrive, and not be burdened by the daily struggle to survive, by the fear of violence and war, by scarcity.”
Your wishes are undoubtedly well-meaning, but the road to fulfilling them seems horrific when you think about it.
I used to be a leftist who was not an organizer, because I didn’t really know how to get involved. But eventually I figured it out and then I got really deep into organizing. Now I’m letting most of it go, because I realized it drained me and despite all my efforts I didn’t have a real community from it. In a lot of your pieces you call people to organizing — I wonder if you have anything to say to those of us who are/were organizers who burned out or lost faith in it. Now I feel like I want to go back to my old individualistic mindset of just focusing on making money, because if no one is really there for me or cares about me at least I can be there for and care about myself — which I kinda need to do anyway because I’m a queer person with mental health issues. :(
I would also like to hear more about organizing as an actual practice. I was trained in the IAF model and also worked with a PICO group. Although we occasionally achieved a big win, I did not experience community being built. I once complained to a lead organizer that IAF has been organizing in this country for 50+ years and people are still struggling for stop signs and soccer fields. I concluded I don't have the patience. My organizing now is small scale and focused on producing art events that build political imagination. I hope you can find ways to act strategically that also bring you into real community. 🌼
Appreciated what and how you wrote this piece. I remember opposite political sides with the main speakers -who each voiced a common theme albeit at different times. One said we are to be ‘beacons of light’ and the other political side said, ‘It takes a village…’ .Both were basically speaking of being the help the encouragement of being part of this world as human beings first. We all breathe the same air, have families or know of families and must do what we can where we are planted to make this a better world. It starts at home- when children are young- if no parents are able- then a teacher, neighbor- reach out to help. Don’t wait for a committee or an organization; just do what you can. This is what I do, have done and will continue to do. Wherever I see a need and I can help/ then I do. I don’t care who what where if someone is in my path, there’s a reason and I want to be one of the lights.
Love the focus on action via organizing and other stunningly beautifully inventions. But think the worry over terminology is a bit of navel-gazing. When words have absolutely no meaning for the looming political threat, I don’t care what you call or think of yourself as long as you’re doing the good work. I think we agree more than my comment might hint.
Thank you for this! I've recently decided I identify as a humanist, rather than a progressive or Democrat or leftist. Humanism puts people first, always. And humanism sees the very real human emotions that underpin people who push policies that I fundamentally disagree with. Acknowledging that others' fears and concerns exist and feel very real, even if they're not true, prevents us from becoming what we purport to hate. We recognize the humanity of all and work towards a future where equity can become a reality.
Okay but.. what do you actually do 😅
exactly, i feel like the point just went right over their head and just bc it wasn’t specifically mentioned by name they didn’t register that they’re falling into the same trap. i also dislike when ppl r like “im not this im this” when being either doesnt even change how they see and interact w the world just falling into semantics and projecting their own black and white thinking and misunderstanding on those concepts thinking their superior in some way
Practically speaking, I usually vote for the candidates endorsed by NY's Working Families Party. I believe that policies that are enacted have to work for people first, not corporations or ideologies. I think a "people first" mindset has shifted my thinking more when talking with other folks who support politicians and policies with which I strongly disagree. I think it's important to listen for what's not being said, the emotions underpinning the political beliefs. I've got a bunch of family who support Trump, and if you listen carefully, there are real fears behind their words. We are not going to get anywhere without addressing those fears first.
im struggling to see how this is different to what is being stated in the article?
I addressed this above, I think
how u describe it is exactly the same as how a lot of leftists describe it. i think the point is more what are you going to do about it rather than label wars
There are those who see being on the Left as an end in itself, taking part in a game of tribal politics, and those who see being on the Left as a means for a better world. We should ignore the first ones; we should listen, be inspired by, befriend the second ones.
At least for those who sincerely police the correctness of others' beliefs, I think there is an underlying understanding that doing the actual work is always more complex than theory. That is why they stay away from it. The second you start to interact with real people, you must "compromise" some beliefs to do real work
This mindset paralyzes people though. There is nothing more freeing than actually working toward a better world with others and seeing how messy the work is. No one is perfect. There's no use pretending to be
Thanks for putting this in writing. Being labeled as a leftist has always felt uncomfortable to me. I've never understood how Democrats could accept the word 'progressive' being used pejoratively without pushing back at every opportunity- use the OED definitions: "Progressive" ("in favor of new ideas, modern methods, and change") and message that the opposite is 'retrogressive'--("returning to old-fashioned ideas or methods instead of making progress")-Why is this language not being used by candidates, journalists, etc. 'Leftist' has too much baggage, but to be a 'Progressive' equates to exercising simple common sense. That messaging is beginning to appear in the Harris speeches- moving forward...but to me, there should be constant emphasis on the clear difference between the definition of 'progress' ("the process of improving or developing, or of getting nearer to achieving or completing something") and its opposite. It's no news that the Good Old Days were not-- but the whole MAGA platform is built on that premise- and the debunking of the myths is not loud enough. DO you have ideas for how individuals can work on spreading information outside our own bubbles?
Just thought of this too: DC DSA had an initiative called Stomp Out Slumlords where people regularly canvas and talk to people who are on the court docket to be evicted to make sure they know their rights, what resources are available, and see if they need help. This also gets you to talk to a lot of different people, both at the apartments and just while you're walking around. Hopefully other chapters do similar things
You make many good points. I personally am wary of the word progressive because of the last several decades of technological progress being many people's only idea of progress. I think Silicon Valley became way too good at co-opting the language of progress for their own gain. But like Joshua, I think it's better to put more stock in actions than words, and I think it's precisely because of the different meanings words have to different people.
To your final question though, I have found that a lot of people who volunteer for organizations that I volunteer for do so for very different reasons than I would have expected and often have different politics than me. It may only be a slightly larger bubble I'm going into there, but it's at least something. Also, I read about the idea of deep canvassing in The Persuaders by Anand Ghiridaradas, and it sounds like a good way to get outside of our bubbles (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/oct/09/the-persuaders-winning-hearts-and-minds-in-divided-age-by-anand-giridharadas-review-why-it-pays-to-talk-in-a-polarised-world). This is something you can do not just for politicians too. People often canvas for specific causes or advocacy groups. And there's even a group in Maryland that canvases just to try to connect with neighbors, share information, and connect people to help if they need it (https://everydaycanvassing.org/).
Thank you for that book link. I will read it. Much appreciated.
THANK YOU!!!
I firmly believe canvassing about and for issues/policy is BRILLIANT. No labels. No “conservative”, “liberal”, “Progressive”, “Libertarian” need be mentioned.
Simply research a topic dear to you, find out “best policy practice”, engage, educate, urge others to demand good governance and hold elected officials accountable for such.
By definition “Universal Healthcare” a great example.
Why did I qualify? Because M4A is more money, less quality of care and a gigantic corporate donor class boondoggle.
Finding unbiased sources can be tricky. Find out who funds the source. Do your homework before you do your homework, so to speak…lol
There is absolutely NOTHING Progressive about the Democratic Party. Zip it.
This reminds me of debates I've heard over the "horseshoe" theory of how you can get so "left" you start running into right-wing beliefs (also characterized by the adage, "You can go so far left you get your guns back"), which I think isn't wrong so much as looking at all of these questions in ways that don't get to the core issues. I try to think less of left vs. right, than of how deeply someone wants to control or have power over other people. Thinking about it that way helps me reframe a lot of these questions.
And yes! Let's make the world a better place!
Why the generality? Why not go with BEST POLICY PRACTICE?
Perhaps you won’t disagree but I don’t think it’s necessary or likely to be effective to ask people to surrender leftist as an identity in order to prioritize action. I think leftist identity is important. I also think it’s slippery to imply that identity is limited to something immutable or innate.
Leftist identity seems to me to be a useful precursor to action. It helps people find their people to do things. I don’t think it’s identity that’s at issue as much as it is feelings, such as being threatened, powerlessness and/or hopelessness, turned into gatekeeping. As you said, there’s an important reason for gatekeeping. There are ways to help people self-select into and out of what matters or doesn’t matter to them, particularly the work they want to do. Bad gatekeeping turns people off even when they might otherwise want to work for the same cause. More nuanced gatekeeping helps people realize this isn’t what they want and more importantly to me, can make that work safer for more vulnerable people doing it.
This is such an important subject to talk about, thank you for writing it! I think also when we identify too much as a right/leftist we equate sides of the spectrum as either moral or not. This by default would mean the other side is inherently immoral, which isn’t really accurate and turns us into enemies. This framing means we become susceptible to alienating and condemning those that disagree with us instead of engaging in constructive dialogue about policy change. If we’re always attacking each other for not being left enough or right enough we’re also in danger of falling into groupthink.
But as you say, if we prioritize kindness and humanism over political spectrum labels, we’re more likely to be able to both be free to be individuals, and also create positive change through constructive dialogue and debate.
Also, less than 1% of‘Murikkkan’s know enough about policy to have a legitimate discussion.
As a political position, I firmly believe Progressive policy is the only path to restoring the Republic.
As a real world critical thinker, both parties are corrupt, having NOTHING to do with left/right.
There is nothing truly “conservative” about Red tribe policy, NOTHING leftist from any one but the ostracized Squad types.
“Fourth leading cause of DEATH in this country is POVERTY.
...I don't care what Donald Trump says a black job is. I don't care whether he thinks Kamala Harris is black.
WHAT I CARE ABOUT is whether people who go to their job every day can make enough money to survive, to live a good life.”
“I want a world filled with justice, a world where no one is hungry or homeless and where people are able to thrive and explore and turn their dreams into reality. I want a world where we, humanity, can explore in every way, thrive, and not be burdened by the daily struggle to survive, by the fear of violence and war, by scarcity.”
Your wishes are undoubtedly well-meaning, but the road to fulfilling them seems horrific when you think about it.
Thank you! If only we could start teaching organizing in schools along with civics.
This is my favorite essay of yours yet and it couldn't have come at a better time.
Identity markers are such a psyop.
Irrelevant drivel much?
I used to be a leftist who was not an organizer, because I didn’t really know how to get involved. But eventually I figured it out and then I got really deep into organizing. Now I’m letting most of it go, because I realized it drained me and despite all my efforts I didn’t have a real community from it. In a lot of your pieces you call people to organizing — I wonder if you have anything to say to those of us who are/were organizers who burned out or lost faith in it. Now I feel like I want to go back to my old individualistic mindset of just focusing on making money, because if no one is really there for me or cares about me at least I can be there for and care about myself — which I kinda need to do anyway because I’m a queer person with mental health issues. :(
I would also like to hear more about organizing as an actual practice. I was trained in the IAF model and also worked with a PICO group. Although we occasionally achieved a big win, I did not experience community being built. I once complained to a lead organizer that IAF has been organizing in this country for 50+ years and people are still struggling for stop signs and soccer fields. I concluded I don't have the patience. My organizing now is small scale and focused on producing art events that build political imagination. I hope you can find ways to act strategically that also bring you into real community. 🌼
Appreciated what and how you wrote this piece. I remember opposite political sides with the main speakers -who each voiced a common theme albeit at different times. One said we are to be ‘beacons of light’ and the other political side said, ‘It takes a village…’ .Both were basically speaking of being the help the encouragement of being part of this world as human beings first. We all breathe the same air, have families or know of families and must do what we can where we are planted to make this a better world. It starts at home- when children are young- if no parents are able- then a teacher, neighbor- reach out to help. Don’t wait for a committee or an organization; just do what you can. This is what I do, have done and will continue to do. Wherever I see a need and I can help/ then I do. I don’t care who what where if someone is in my path, there’s a reason and I want to be one of the lights.
If you actually remember that, you are really old……
Love the focus on action via organizing and other stunningly beautifully inventions. But think the worry over terminology is a bit of navel-gazing. When words have absolutely no meaning for the looming political threat, I don’t care what you call or think of yourself as long as you’re doing the good work. I think we agree more than my comment might hint.
wonderfully said