• morphballganon
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Naming a movement after a figurehead is not worship, it’s just descriptive.

    • wozomo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It absolutely is hero worship any time someone is put on a pedestal and their flaws are ignored.

      That’s what the author of the linked article has explicitly done. He waves away the fact that she consistently defers to Democratic Party leadership—except for occasional, “token gestures of resistance to solidify the illusion” that she’s a hard-line leftist—and then holds her up as the face of progressivism.

      If that’s not hero worship idk what is.

      Edit: spelling

      • morphballganon
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You are treating “differs from leadership” as if it is indisputably a flaw, and assuming that a person having a flaw means we should discount their achievements. Those oversights are just as fallacious as the supposed hero-worship you are accusing others of doing.

        • wozomo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You’re misunderstanding me (probably because I misspelled “defers” as “differs”).

          I’m saying she, as a proclaimed “progressive,” generally isn’t that progressive at all and generally defers to centrist, Democratic Party leaders: she does what they say rather than sticking to her ostensibly much more leftist guns.

          • morphballganon
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ah I see. I’ll gladly take that over someone incapable of compromise.

            • wozomo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ok, good for you, but that’s beside the point.

              This article is reactionary, leftist apologetics for yet another “socialist” politician who’s being publicly called out because her political actions don’t really line up with her professed progressive views.

              She’s clearly a decent enough politician, and yeah, she’s willing to compromise, but she’s also 1) disingenuously representing herself as something that she’s not, or 2) not self-aware enough to realize that she’s a social democrat and not a democratic socialist.

              Either way, her behavior doesn’t line up with her professed leftism, but does increasingly align neatly with standard, neoliberal Democratic policy. She’s become a part of the establishment, and got there by riding the anti-establishment, socialist sentiment in young people. Not sure how that could be considering anything but problematic.