Skip to main content

View Diary: UPDATED: The Cause: Justice And Democracy (61 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't think the above user is referring to... (4+ / 0-)

    ...the endless and pointless bickering among progressives about what is important on any kind of absolute strategic scale, e.g., "focus on campaign reform because without it we're never going to get Medicare expansion," etc.

    I think it's more about what is more important to each person individually—what they care about—which is often the thing that impacts their life most.

    And telling someone who can't get health care because their asshole right-wing governor refused to expand Medicaid, or the person whose pension was just sold out to pay for more tax cuts for the rich, that their concerns are "narrow," and that by focusing on the thing that impacted them the most they were "fractur[ing] and diffus[ing] the movement," is counterproductive at best.

    Rather, it's about helping them see the connection between the thing they care about and the larger issue—not in order to divert their energy from the thing they care about to your issue, but to make them aware so that they see those who care about other issues as allies rather than rivals for a limited pot of energy and attention.

    "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

    by JamesGG on Thu Jan 09, 2014 at 01:39:18 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Well that's just it (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ray Pensador

      I think the poster has originally misinterpreted the word "narrow" for the purpose of the diary itself.

      Because I agree with this:

      not in order to divert their energy from the thing they care about to your issue, but to make them aware so that they see those who care about other issues as allies
      but I didn't get that out of the above comment, either:
      endless and pointless bickering among progressives about what is important on any kind of absolute strategic scale
      (which, by the way, is by no means limited to progressives, but I digress...)

      I'm not trying to speak for Ray here at all, but what I get out of it when he uses the word "distraction" simply has to do with sheer volume. And once you've got volume going on, it's real easy to get sidetracked into something else, which then "narrows the focus" elsewhere, rather than to stay with the given subject at hand which happens to have--and needs--a much larger focus.

      The "narrow focus" itself--that is, its subject matter, might be important or relevant to many--but that's not the problem. The problem is the big picture of what that re-focusing ultimately serves to accomplish--it diverts energy, period.

      This all started with "what the Republicans did to language".

      by lunachickie on Thu Jan 09, 2014 at 01:51:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Obviously, I'm not saying that we shouldn't (0+ / 0-)

        continue focusing on the issues that are important to us individually.  What I'm saying that we should also go after the system at the root level IN ADDITION to what we are already doing locally...

        Actually, I'll have something to say about it in my next diary.

        I just got back from SF.  What a great day!  I got lots of ideas just walking around the financial district.

        I'll be posting an update.  I'm energized!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site