EVENT
First, I stumbled across this today: Street Prophers :: Faith and Politics. It’s run in conjunction with Daily Kos with the slogan “the Right doesn’t own faith”… sounds encouraging to me. We’ll see.
Second, I’m really impressed with the Wikipedia article on the political spectrum. Wikipedia pieces in general seem to run the gamut, but this seems more like a well-written essay than an overview.
I find myself thinking a lot about political categories and continuums, and the way we describe ourselves. Just as identity with a religion seems to supercede the actual tenet of that faith in many peoples minds, it would seem that political identity is often more important than political positioning.
I realize this is probably all a foregone conclusion for everyone… I had a sense of it from the time I was in junior high. I describe myself as “centrist socialist” and that’s pretty convenient in that it often enables me to vote for whoever I find most appealing in a particular context. That said, there always seems to be the idea, and sometimes the reality (in a flawed form) of a group (cadre?) of like-minded individuals, who not only share the same views, but for the same reasons, and whose similarity is liberating, not claustrophobic.
I will say I believe in the general existence political categories, and even more, a bit of judgment in terms of political capacity. Unlike some distinctions, say race, gender, occupation, even religion, our political identity is formed by how we believe we ought to relate to each other and an organized body of individuals. If there is a generalizing model to use to “judge” someone, politics is perhaps one of the most appropriate and fair, since politics are essentially ethical distinctions dressed pragmatically.
But to give the postmodern growd a nod (this time), the political dialogue is inherently social. That is why regions tend to identify politically, as races, as men and women, as faiths. We cohere to our other communities both out of our own experience and also to find consensus. Consensus and compromise is a democratic necessity. These are flawed and often vague categories used in a dialogue that is itself, its very foundation, compromised.
END OF POST.