I don’t think the current facists in charge are doing it incrementally.
Yeah. Funny how incrementalism isn’t the only way to accomplish things. But it’s a great way to not accomplish them.
Slavery took a civil war but women’s rights, gay rights, minimum wage, social safety nets (granted not at the level they should be), etc. I’d argue there has been lots of progress.
There has been progress. And incrementalists love to take credit for it because they have none of their own. Women’s rights took a constitutional amendment, you can’t creep up on those incrementally. Roe v. Wade was a court case. Also not incremental. Minimum wage was instituted as part of the New Deal. FDR was not an incrementalist. Same with social safety nets. Those were part of the New Deal and Great Society plans, which again, were not incrementalist. But the Clinton-era welfare “reform” that surrendered to the racist “welfare queens” rhetoric of the Reagan era was incrementalist.
If anything, the last 10 years have shown that getting discouraged by imperfect progress and not voting (even for the lesser evil, who do sometimes surprise us) can lead to very quick backslides.
Then the party shouldn’t have stymied progress and called it “incrementalism”.
We’ve literally lost rights and baked in harder obstacles to progress by not choosing the lesser evil when that is the only realistic choice.
We lost those rights because the party thought second worst was good enough to win.
I’m not sure what your definition of incrementalism is. A law passing or court ruling on a single issue is not but a reform of a law is?
My point was not defending some ill-defined “incrementalism” but to just say that all issues won’t get addressed at once. Look at the ACA, watered down and not enough but it did get millions of people insurance. It took so much political capital to get it in that form and it still became a beating stick for the Right for decades. It’s a ad campaign against billionaires that’s needed for anything expanding the government.
People don’t want to vote for anyone who can’t move a mountain in less than 4 years, or in this case someone who can’t move a hundred mountains.
I’m not sure what your definition of incrementalism is.
It’s what centrists call doing nothing while everything slides to the right. They pretend it’s a virtue.
Look at the ACA, watered down and not enough but it did get millions of people insurance.
It was 15 years ago. How much longer are we gonna coast on a less generous version of a Heritage Foundation policy that manages to keep getting worse every year?
People don’t want to vote for anyone who can’t move a mountain in less than 4 years
I don’t know about others, but I got pretty fucking jaded about democrats’ claims that everything they do has to happen on a geologic time scale when they snapped to attention to give Netanyahu what he wanted immediately, and without the holy Parliamentarian’s approval.
Yeah. Funny how incrementalism isn’t the only way to accomplish things. But it’s a great way to not accomplish them.
There has been progress. And incrementalists love to take credit for it because they have none of their own. Women’s rights took a constitutional amendment, you can’t creep up on those incrementally. Roe v. Wade was a court case. Also not incremental. Minimum wage was instituted as part of the New Deal. FDR was not an incrementalist. Same with social safety nets. Those were part of the New Deal and Great Society plans, which again, were not incrementalist. But the Clinton-era welfare “reform” that surrendered to the racist “welfare queens” rhetoric of the Reagan era was incrementalist.
Then the party shouldn’t have stymied progress and called it “incrementalism”.
We lost those rights because the party thought second worst was good enough to win.
I’m not sure what your definition of incrementalism is. A law passing or court ruling on a single issue is not but a reform of a law is?
My point was not defending some ill-defined “incrementalism” but to just say that all issues won’t get addressed at once. Look at the ACA, watered down and not enough but it did get millions of people insurance. It took so much political capital to get it in that form and it still became a beating stick for the Right for decades. It’s a ad campaign against billionaires that’s needed for anything expanding the government.
People don’t want to vote for anyone who can’t move a mountain in less than 4 years, or in this case someone who can’t move a hundred mountains.
It’s what centrists call doing nothing while everything slides to the right. They pretend it’s a virtue.
It was 15 years ago. How much longer are we gonna coast on a less generous version of a Heritage Foundation policy that manages to keep getting worse every year?
I don’t know about others, but I got pretty fucking jaded about democrats’ claims that everything they do has to happen on a geologic time scale when they snapped to attention to give Netanyahu what he wanted immediately, and without the holy Parliamentarian’s approval.