(inspired by an exchange at Medley) I once had a membership in NOW -- at both the national and local levels. I had been self-identifying politically as a "progressive" rather than a "liberal" for some time, although I had not precisely defined the differences between those two terms. At one local NOW meeting, the topic du jour was whether or not women prisoners should be used on chain gangs. Surprisingly, most of the women at this meeting supported using women on chain gangs. They all made the same argument : men were used on chain gangs, so women should be too -- women could do anything men could. When it was my turn to talk (NOW relies on a modified version of Robert's Rules, even at the smallest meetings), I said that neither men nor women should be working on chain gangs, and wondered if we should perhaps be discussing the reasons chain gangs exist, who benefits from them, and why their use was expanding in our state. The chair of the discussion told me that our focus was on women, not on men, and asked if I had anything relevant to contribute to the discussion. I replied that I had many relevant things to say, but it appeared that they did not fit into the current concerns of the group and passed my turn to the next person. After that meeting, I finally understood the difference between the progressive and liberal labels. Progressives ask questions about the morality or value of a certain course of action, while liberals focus only on whether all affected groups are being treated equally. The short-hand way of putting this is that progressives ask "how can I make this better" while liberals ask "how can I make this equal." I am a progressive. I have certain strongly held values that guide my political behavior. I think we should consider whether or not a thing is right before we consider whether or not it should be equal. I have never renewed my NOW membership. All contents copyright 2001-2002.
Written December 19, 2001 |
|