I, as are others of the left are confused over the descriptors of us.

[Safetykitten]

Are we the Ultra-Left? What does one do as one? Is it the same as the LOUD Left or is a smidge to the left of the drug-tested left? Are there Ultra-Progressives and are they the same as Ultra-leftists? I would think they would be the same, maybe except for the Ayn Rand on the shelf.

What are the pragmatic Leftists? Are they just not as noisy as the LOUD Left, or are they more a wait and see group that is unreasonable?

Need some help here with the definitions.

[Tunkamerica]

1. How about the confused left?

[RandomThoughts]

2. Not sure, I drew a line a decade ago, and been standing on it.

Ah, got it.

Pragmatism without a thought of moral relativity is what many pragmatist are. If there are two positions, some think the midpoint is where a pragmatist ends up.

If one position can be shown right, and the other wrong, by best explanation then why would you be 'pragmatic'

Here is the thing, people have different postulations. If you postulate that anything you can take is yours, then the position for tax cuts for the rich make sense, since they are able to take that. If you think in concepts of a balanced society, they do not make sense.

So :shrug: really it comes down to what you think the world should be, from there what most people think the world is, then from there the need for secrecy if you are on the stealing side, and the idea of education if you are on the more balanced side.

It really is not that complicated.

And I am still due beer and travel money and many experiences.

[Life Long Dem]

3. It's just another division to divide the party.

We are the left or the Democratic party. When election day comes we see how we need to be one. But the right and the media love to divide us anyway they could and that includes using race or using definitions such as Ultra-Progressives, Ultra-leftists, pragmatic Leftists, and the LOUD Left as you describe as an example.

[niceypoo]

4. It is GOP rhetoric that has been taken up by Democrats to attack other Democrats

[KoKo]

27. Agree with what you say...and Poster Above you says. n/t

[Supersedeas]

40. same GOP rhetoric used by more Network Pundits to describe those who oppose the Estate Tax give-away

[CakeGrrl]

5. Someone who's been consistently anti-Obama proclaimed themselves as part of

the "Moral Left".

Take your pick.

[JoseGaspar]

6. That would be the "insensitive Left"...

We don't care about people. We care about abstract principles.

Oh sure, we are the only ones who talk about unemployment or foreclosures most of the time, but that is easy talk. When it comes time to sell-out, who is really for "helping people"? Not us...

We talk a good game but we don't get it:

Undercut Social Security, for the benefit of the people.
Tax cuts for the Rich, for the benefit of the unemployed.
Government insurance collection agencies, for the benefit of the uninsured.

...and, of course, war, for the benefit of reelection.

We don't care enough to have those really deep tears... as we do something we promised not to do... for the thousandth time... shamelessly... in the name of sensitivity.

We just don't want to get things done.

[Norrin Radd]

7. We should start using the terms

ultra-centrists and far center purists.

[Union Scribe]

8. And wtf is the professional left?

Are they hiring? Do I need to be more "loud" or "purist" to apply?

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fasttense]

10. Funny how a supposed liberal like Obama

Uses the same name calling and rudeness techniques that the bushes used to put down the left. Though, Obama doesn't do it as often.

Does he do it to the right too? Does he call conservatives sanctimonious and retarded, like he name calls we on the left?

Obama is building up the RepubliCON party so he can get reelected. It will help him but it will wipe out the Democratic Senate and in 2016, the RepubliCONS will be back in power. But Obama will have been reelected, just like Clinton but without the good economy.

[vaberella]

11. I don't think all Progressives and Leftsts are equal.

Not to mention, I find the word progressive to be used too loosely. I consider myself Progressive versus the left. Progressives also include the right, I'll have you know. Although a larger umbrella they have similar hopes and goals. While the Left and the Right are normally divided ideologically. The Left are similar to the whole Democrat/Republican range---you have you're extreme Liberals and you have your extreme right. Blue Dog Dems for all intents and purposes are Republican than Dem.


Progressives tend to be reasonable and tend to also agree with low hanging fruit because their entire focus is on implementing change no matter how small to meet a better end. The Left tend to be very idealistic and rarely realistic.

[Sherman A1]

12. You make a good point

I find myself to (in your description) both a progressive and leftist. I do tend to be very idealistic and believe we should be thinking long term with a huge shift in priorities away from the M I C, big business and oil, but I would also be a progressive because I believe that all those things will take a huge amount of time and change in priorities to achieve. I would be satisfied with some low hanging fruit, but I don't even see that being achieved at this point.

[vaberella]

18. Hey...same here.

Here's a great article on progressivism: http://www.wiretapmag.org/stories/23706

[Pholus]

16. So you have surrendered to the demonization of the term "left" and bought the right's framing.

And where you say "low hanging fruit" I see "whatever crumbs the right decide to throw."

I'm not disagreeing on pragmatism here, sometimes you get what you get (ignoring the current compromise and being more general). What I am saying is that if you have already decided that the ideals don't matter, you've pre-emptively moved the debate rightwards and ceded ground before you start.

But, as someone who is apparently "idealistic and rarely realistic" I guess I don't understand how negotiation works. Next time I'm trying to buy a car I'll think about the list price, my first offer and bump my first offer a couple thousand towards the asking price just to make sure I get some "low hanging fruit" in the form of *some* discount.

Edit: Incidentally, the righties WIN by putting their far side out there in the spotlight at least for show. Sure, they come back towards the center in the end but they do better than they would have otherwise cause it sure looks reasonable compared to what their kooks want. And it works, you guys fear the rightie kooks and you GIVE IN TO THEIR REASONABLE COLLEAGUES because you fell for their game.

Then, you "Progressives" go farther and try to lock up your own rabble and the "leftie kooks" to appear all reasonable and mature in the spirit of bipartisanship.

No wonder we consistently get our asses kicked and end up in hostage situations. We're, for lack of ANY other term, "hapless."

[vaberella]

17. I'll make this simple---I'm not demonizing the left. You need to get over yourself.

However, it's people on DU you claim to be on the left and who I share almost very little similarities. Progressives are made up of the Left and the Right. Most people agree to this very well. So Progressive and Left are not equal. I have come to terms that I am not of the left, or as the left as defined on DU.

Here is an article and you'll understand what I mean:

http://www.wiretapmag.org/stories/23706

They define it very well and along my way of thinking. This has nothing to do with demonizing the left. I just realized I am not one of them. Or as I thought I was. I recognize the political climate and I don't take for granted what can be done versus what can't be done but people want done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

[Pholus]

20. Your words were: "reasonable" progressives / "rarely realistic" leftists. Man you're touchy.

It was blazingly clear you consider yourself some kind of "steely eyed realist." But before you start sorting your little definitions:

After the TSA groping affair, I was "too right" because I considered it an unnecessary violation for no added security.

In the tax cut surrender, I was "too left" because I thought it was too quick a capitulation for too little.

Heck, there was one poster trying to tell me I was sooooo far left that my vote for Obama magically was somehow a vote for McCain.

So enjoy trying to sort the square pegs into the round holes. Where you see reason, I see moral cowardice.

And yet somehow we're trying for the same things. You'd be wise to remember that.

[polichick]

25. Progressives on the right?!? That's ridiculous. nt

[StarsInHerHair]

28. I believe the higher you aim to begin the more you'll end up winning, as

opposed to being 'pragmatic' which I define as not trying very hard, not aiming for anything as visionary as women's right to vote, or the end of slavery-back in those days these concepts would have been said to be unrealistic goals.

BUT I also think a true leader can get his/her followers to go further than they themselves believe, a leader of high caliber can get the best out of people, and accomplish what others say is impossible.

[stray cat]

13. I suspect tea par tiers and conservatives and moderates feel the same way

[Pholus]

14. I got a concise definition yesterday. Without using labels we are....

1) Minority of Dems whose opinions are not mainstream enough to consider. "The 15%'ers"

while simultaneously being

2) The traitorous Naderites who will bring about ruin and darned-nation in the 2012 voting. "The sanctimonious purists."

So, to summarize -- we are welcome as long as we keep our opinions to ourselves but do our normal donations of time and money.

Edit: I should add -- "Who cares?" Other than a lot of sound and fury I suppose that's how things work out. I just remember my Will Rodgers.

[Dawgs]

15. I like 'informed left'.

Or, 'not insane left',

Or how about, 'no more reagonomics left'

and, 'social security is now fucked left'

[JoePhilly]

19. No need for labels ... IF, IF, you can articulate how you will PASS specific legislation

Honestly, nothing else matters.

How will you get the votes you need. THAT is what matters.

Complaining on DU is not a solution ...

On any issue you care about, simply explain how we get the votes.

[StarsInHerHair]

29. find a charismatic person, a good "salesman/woman", the type that is instantly

liked by many-get that person to go around the House and the Senate. I'd need a policy writer first, then I'd have to find the salesman or woman, then I'd do background on those whose votes are not guaranteed and see where I could get them to mesh with the vision and direction I have. It's a rough outline, as I'd need more specifics.

[polichick]

21. On DU all of those terms mean you've dared to criticize the president. nt

[Pholus]

22. +1, nuff said.

[Armstead]

37. plus 2 --- If you aren't blindly loyal to Obama.....You must be a "leftist"

Or worse yet a (gasp) Socialist

[slackmaster]

23. I need more information

Do you drink cafe lattes?

Drive a Volvo?

Automatically donate money to any charity promoted by Sally Struthers?

[Uzybone]

24. maybe those worried about who calls them what should stop navel gazing and work for progress

this "left' narcissism and "me me me" syndrome is why we keep getting our butts kicked.

[ProudDad]

42. No you get your butts kicked

when you pass republican legislation...

And call it "progress"...

Why should people vote for faux-republicans when they can vote for the real thing...

That's what happened in Nov...

[truthspeak]

26. What do you call those on the left that don't understand civics?

"Obama HAD the majorities...he can pass anything he wants!!"

[Armstead]

38. That sounds like something Bachman or Beck might say

Maybe all Democratic "leftists" ought to sign up for Michele Bachman's
Upcoming Civics Re-Education courses, eh?

If you are going to condescendingly insult people, you might at least try not to echo right-wing talking points, eh?

[Forkboy]

30. All I know is that in almost 10 years on DU I've never seen a single person truly "Ultra-Left".

DU's perception of the political spectrum is somewhat limited, to say the least. One of the reasons I laugh my ass off at people calling Obama a Socialist is because I know actual ones, and there's few on DU that are even close. And Obama himself isn't even in the ballpark. It reminds me of the lines from Pulp Fiction about being in the same ballpark...

...which I won't repeat here. :)

[ProudDad]

31. I think anyone who actually demands Peace, Justice and Equality

is considered "clueless about the real world" and some sort of threat to the Appeaser in Chief...

[Pisces]

32. Maybe the whiny left.

[Warren Stupidity]

33. The hate from the capitulationist camp is understandable.

Having decided to back the 'party' no matter which direction it wanders off in, they have the miserable job of defending Absolute Horseshit, and we keep shoving that shit back in their faces. I understand the hate. I simply suggest that they try a little honesty, step back, take an objective view of what just happened, and stop pretending it is what it isn't.

[ClassWarrior]

34. It's not "the party." It's one individual.

:shrug:

NGU.

[Warren Stupidity]

35. nah, it is the party as well.

This really isn't just Obama. It is the sickening spectacle of a government that is now more corrupt than at any time since the end of the Gilded Age, being defended by people who have mistaken politics for a football game. In reality the sports analogy that fits is professional wrestling.

[robcon]

36. I think it's a reaction to the 'professional left."

The "always to the left of thou" crowd.

[WiffenPoof]

39. I Used To Be A Democrat...

...now I'm considered a left-wing radical.

-PLA

[WorseBeforeBetter]

41. Those tossing out the descriptor du jour are the ones confused.

They're like little kids repeating what mommy or daddy said, only mommy and daddy are Obama, Emmanuel, Gibbs, et al. I couldn't care less what they call me.