This is an important point, and one that it seems is too often forgotten, believe it or not.
The framework of much of our political debate seems to assume a particular political direction.
For example, the terminology "progressive" indicates that we're only making progress when we engage in these policies, particularly redistributive tax policies.
Another example is the common usage of the term "special interests". It seems to me this is commonly used as a synonym for "corporate interests". But more realistically, everything is a special interest. That includes the education establishment and the NEA, unions, and environmentalists. Yes, businesses are a constituency of special interests, but so are those others that support the other side of the spectrum. It can't objectively be said that one side is the common interest of the people, and the others are special; they all hold equal roles in the debate.
The framework of much of our political debate seems to assume a particular political direction.
For example, the terminology "progressive" indicates that we're only making progress when we engage in these policies, particularly redistributive tax policies.
Another example is the common usage of the term "special interests". It seems to me this is commonly used as a synonym for "corporate interests". But more realistically, everything is a special interest. That includes the education establishment and the NEA, unions, and environmentalists. Yes, businesses are a constituency of special interests, but so are those others that support the other side of the spectrum. It can't objectively be said that one side is the common interest of the people, and the others are special; they all hold equal roles in the debate.