Nathan Newman wrote:
>But you'd rather have your preferred rhetoric defending a non-existent
>single payer system than an actual legislative victory that helps working
>families. Which pretty much sums up a chunk of the far left these days.
-Yeah, politics should be about conforming to what exists rather than -trying to challenge it. And one of the bedrock principles of social -democracy, universal public health insurance, is now far left. -Bizarre.
I didn't say public health insurance is far left; in fact, I said it could end up being reactionary depending on how it's implemented. My point was that I actually find a concrete assault on corporate profits via the Maryland Wal-Mart bill to be more inspiring than a theoretical discussion of a health care plan. It's not even a question of preferring the moderate solution to the radical solution, but of preferring the actual existing fight to the theoretical.
When single payer was an actual battle in California, I was heavily involved in the fight, but since fair share health care is where we are making real political inroads, I think progressive intellectuals should be doing what they can to help the ideological fight against the rightwing, not carping from the sidelines.
Nathan Newman