By Bruce S. Ticker in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Nate Cohn, chief political analyst for The New York Times, strained to define the term “progressive” in an analysis on Monday that consumed almost half a page of newsprint. He identified two kinds of progressives, initially, and then the second form of “progressives” diffused into any number of kinds of “progressives.”
Other glitches accompanied his explanation.
“‘Progressive’ is a huge category,” Cohn writes. “Over half of congressional Democrats support Medicare for all; nearly half are members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus; nearly half voted to cut off aid to Israel.”
Glitch numero uno: What makes aid to Israel a “progressive” issue? Half of that half of House Democrats voted for aid to Israel in the past. Evidently, what made the difference was Israel’s use of military aid to commence the reckless war with Iran.
“With this broader definition,” Cohn continues, “progressives don’t seem to fare much worse than mainstream Democrats as a whole; after all, they are mainstream Democrats. (Tammy) Baldwin (of Wisconsin) is a good example. By any measure, she’s one of the most progressive senators…By all appearances, she is an ordinary Democrat…She never championed progressive slogans like ‘abolish ICE’ or ‘defund the police’; she opposes them.”
Glitch numero dos: Baldwin is a progressive who does not champion some progressive slogans.
“Ms. Baldwin…and many other mainstream Democrats are counted as among the most progressive Democrats in the country by their measure,” he added.
Under the category of “Progressive left,” Cohn’s analysis tends to drift. “They’re not always the kind of candidate that people have in mind when they refer to progressives nowadays. There’s another, narrower kind of ‘progressive’ – a candidate of the activist progressive left, like Zohran Mamdani, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the Squad.”
Glitch numero tres: “Narrow” is an apt description.
“This isn’t an easy group to define,” he continues. “The self-identified democratic socialists, like Mr. Mamdani or Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, are at the core of it, but there’s also a broader group of progressives who don’t necessarily identify as democratic socialist but who clearly stand apart from the typical progressive Democrat. They might ally themselves with the democratic socialists, define themselves in terms of their support for activist causes like Gaza or the climate, run against the Democratic Party, engage in righteous fights with Republicans, post clap-backs on social media, or champion activist slogans like ‘Abolish ICE’ and “Defund the Police’.”
Top glitch: Cohn is correct that this “broader group…stand(s) apart.” They help to incite killings, assaults, harassment, property destruction and vandalism in the Jewish community.
That, too, defines a progressive. Are other Democrats so sure they want to identify as progressives?
*
Bruce S. Ticker is a Philadelphia-based columnist.