So just how ‘Progressive’ are you?

Some times an issue arises that really puts to test just how ‘Progressive’ you really are. Gay marriage is one such issue.

For some out there it may be an opened and closed issue but for others it raises some uneasy moral and ethical questions that are not easily resolved. A case in point is the position taken by Stephanie Herseth, Democratic candidate for South Dakota's at-large congressional district. She is clearly caught between a rock and a hard place. Maintaining a progressive liberal position on this issue would severely impact here chances of winning the election and she has clearly attempted to walk the tight rope of basing her position on the argument of State’s rights. American liberals are castigating her for her stance but I for one think that she has a point.

The US Constitution without a shadow of a doubt comes down on the side of the legality of gay marriages. Hence the need for a new Amendment to ban them! It clearly backs moves to bring the legal status of gay couples in line with those of heterosexual couples. On the matter of Civil Unions I feel ‘Progressives’ must make a stand and to be fair the opposition to such a position appears limited. However, the use of the word “marriage” appears to trigger a whole other debate. I guess this is due to the word’s religious connotations. On this point I fear that we as progressives must be weary of pushing to far against the general consensus. This is where the argument for State’s rights is so important. Undoubtedly Massachusetts, Hawaii and northern California are comfortable alien themselves with such countries as Canada, Belgium and the Netherlands on this issue. If so, then so be it. By the same argument however States with alternative values should be allowed to take alternative positions in line with the democratic rights. We may disagree with those values but that is the price of living in liberal democracies. It is up to us as ‘Progressives” to win the arguments and pursued others, not impose our values on them.

By emphasising the importance of State’s rights I feel that ‘progressive’s reinforce two important points; we show our support for grass-roots democracy and we nullify gay marriage as an election issue by basing our argument in support of it on traditional Republican values.

Undoubtedly Karl Rove wants to fight the US election on the battleground of social issues but Democrats must not let him pick that fight. Their battleground of choice should remain jobs and Iraq.
  ¶ 12:49 PM

  Hello again…

It seems like an age since I last updated this blog and when a week in politics is a long time I guess it has been an eternity. I will admit that I bit off more than I could chew… my aspirations failed to match my ability… I failed to grasp that maintaining a worthwhile blog whilst holding down a full-time job, completing one’s Masters degree and getting married was rather ambitious. I had rather hoped to get some collaborators aboard to share the workload but I now realise that this is a journey one starts alone.

So let me make a fresh start…

The aim this time is to learn to crawl first… and my nursery will be here on blogger. It is all very well building a dog’s bollocks web-site but rather pointless if one has nothing to publish on it. I fear I was caught up in that modern ailment of image overriding substance. Hopefully I’m cured?

Well we have much to look forward to in the coming months and the top of the list is undoubtedly the US presidential election. The coverage of the race will be unashamedly biased on this blog. US politics is normally a fascinating side-show for us over here. Since 1945 it has rarely mattered what administration has occupied the White House. The “special relationship” has always flourished. However, with the present Republican Presidency there is a very real gap opening up between the interests of our two countries. More and more it appears that merely a common language and the sheer will of Tony Blair are bridging the gap. This is not a health state of affairs and one that needs to be addressed. The obvious solution is for regime change in Washington. The sooner the Democrats retake the White House (and the Congress too) the better for all of us.

So okay the outcome is important but so is the dynamics of the process. Lessons can be learnt that can be applied here in the UK. The UK has a great political blog community but they’re to few in number and to insular in readership to have the effect of those found in the US. How can we translate the model of their success to our very different political system over here in the UK? How do we deal with the fact that our natural home as progressives, the Labour Party, may no longer be such a sure bet? How should we deal with a government increasingly mirroring the authoritarian policies of the Republican administration in the US and not the aspirations and beliefs of the people who voted them into power? Maybe it is time for us to tailor our strategy more towards the candidate and less towards the party. Maybe there will be occasions where it is better for us to vote and support a genuine, freethinking, honest and open candidate, even if they’re a Tory or a Lib Dem, if it means replacing a “Yes” person or a “Tony Crony”? But exactly how do we go about putting that into practice collectively?

So lots to ponder and plenty to learn! Enjoy…  ¶ 1:41 PM