This might be just a personal opinion, but it seems that pragmatism has been left by the wayside in favor of straight ideology and/or metaphysics.
It seems that people of all political leanings are digging their heels in the sand and feel like their ideological stance is axiomatic to 'the good life', regardless if the employed strategy is failing in reality.
The concepts of dialogue and compromise seemingly are out of favor.

Do you feel the same way? If so, how do you think we got here and what might be done to reverse this?

Our political discourse is fragmented in two pieces in terms of conceptualization, and increasingly you're either on the 'left' or 'right' of the divide. To establish yourself as one, however, necessitates that it places you in opposition to the other. Finding any kind of common ground then becomes framed as concession, which means one must double-down on their own side's position lest they be labeled a political outsider.

It's aggravating. I'm in favor of actual progress, but I feel like the means of achieving it are deliberately not discussed and explored out of fear of losing ideological purity, if you will.

I find it harder and harder to affiliate myself with the 'new left'. I'll always be 'old left', or what might be called an original liberal, I guess. But I am open to any strategy that provably maximizes human flourishing. This includes listening very carefully to actual scientists and changing my ideas about something (unclean!) if the data requires me to.

Now, before the righties start salivating. I'm by no means convinced that your 'side', as you seemingly like to think of it, is doing any better.

I see it more as the left are trying to improve the system while the right support the current status quo and that there is a significant chunk of people who just see it as sports teams and will support "their" side no matter what.

I think a fundamental issue though is that "common ground" is increasingly a weapon used against dis-empowered groups to prolong a status quo, similar to Plaguefear's post. There is very little common ground to be achieved on individual issues, and I have no issue with that.

What is concerning though is that positions get lumped behind group identity. Political parties are the worst thing to happen to political discourse, I think.

I don't agree with the bolded, necessarily. It's not called the 'regressive left' for no reason. The old lines between right and left are blurring it seems, which might compound the problem of ideological sanctimoniousness (if that's even a word).

I fully agree with the cursive.

Hm. An interesting take.
I agree to an extent, because idiots and sociopaths do exist. But, for my sanity, I have to believe that well-meaning, relatively intelligent people should be able to find common ground and forge a way forward together. If not, what's the point?

Common grounds efforts to approach social issues result in things like separate-but-equal policies, ineffective social programs that don't provide adequate services, and altogether complicate a standstill by providing the illusion of progress.

I agree that a lot of progress still needs to be made.

But huge leaps forward have been made, especially the last 100ish years. Some by means of upheaval, for sure, but most by democratically elected goverments that had to use some form of compromise to actually get shit done.
I'm not arguing in favor of diluting your own personal beliefs/morals. But rather that to achieve those things, it's probably best to get as many people on board as possible and plough onwards, instead of everyone holding on to their respective views and mire everyone in an onmoveable swamp.


Edit: I fucking hate typing on my phone.

This post was edited by BannyMcBannerson on Aug 4 2020 04:13am

that really depends on what you define as 'the left'. some call the democratic establishment 'the left', which is obviously ridiculous - they are centre-right by any reasonable standard. some try to portray the caricature of the overzealous feminazi as 'the left', and if that is your idea of it, it makes sense to reject the notion they are trying to 'improve' the system from your personal perspective (though changing the status quo most definitely still applies).
if you're talking about the progressive movement, however, bernie sanders and people fighting for similar ideas, a very much utilitarian approach to politics, you will have a hard time arguing their main goal is not to improve society to the benefit of everyone. i'd still be curious to read it though, so by all means, don't hold back.