Thank you for this note. I also am ambivalent about this, as the piece suggests. Perhaps you captured it well: "We need a radical politics that doesn't result in self-satisfied isolation." The question is, how do we achieve that? I suppose it seems to me that one way towards that is by having exactly this kind of conversation. Thank you for doing so.
I find myself having a mixed reaction to this post. I agree that building coalitions and finding practical ways to make progress is important, but I also think that the changes needed to bring about a just and healthy society will not be met by moderation, centrism, etc. We need a radical politics that doesn't result in self-satisfied isolation. It's a conundrum that I don't know how to resolve.
Regarding good ideas coming from both sides, I can't think of any transformative--or even good--proposals initiated from the conservative side of the ledger (as represented by the Republican party) for at least the last 30 years. Point being, when we talk about working together, we need to be careful about who we mean. There are people who need to cooperate and there are people who need to be defeated. We have to define those differences neither too narrowly nor too broadly.
Thanks for this balanced and insightfull post, which recalls us that health policy making cannot be based only on the opinion of one political side and that it requires a dialogue.
Thank you for this note. I also am ambivalent about this, as the piece suggests. Perhaps you captured it well: "We need a radical politics that doesn't result in self-satisfied isolation." The question is, how do we achieve that? I suppose it seems to me that one way towards that is by having exactly this kind of conversation. Thank you for doing so.
I find myself having a mixed reaction to this post. I agree that building coalitions and finding practical ways to make progress is important, but I also think that the changes needed to bring about a just and healthy society will not be met by moderation, centrism, etc. We need a radical politics that doesn't result in self-satisfied isolation. It's a conundrum that I don't know how to resolve.
Regarding good ideas coming from both sides, I can't think of any transformative--or even good--proposals initiated from the conservative side of the ledger (as represented by the Republican party) for at least the last 30 years. Point being, when we talk about working together, we need to be careful about who we mean. There are people who need to cooperate and there are people who need to be defeated. We have to define those differences neither too narrowly nor too broadly.
Dan Brooks
Thanks for this balanced and insightfull post, which recalls us that health policy making cannot be based only on the opinion of one political side and that it requires a dialogue.
Arnaud Chiolero, Switzerland