It also shows a disregard for *the political* as a category. Establishment Democrats would rather history, ideas, and conflict just ended: They'd love a return to the status quo, with incremental nudging, but nothing too bold or interesting or creative
The biggest divide in the Democratic Party isn't about policy proposals (after all, the GOP will block) but about how to understand the nature of politics and conflict. Here, Chantal Mouffe has been a major influence on my thinking, which I discuss here: americanaffairsjournal.org/2018/11/left-p… 
@AmericanAffrs Over the years, I've realized my true political orientation is something approximating "agonism," and the realization that policies matter, but they are rarely defining. They tell us some things, but they don't tell us the most important things
That's why when pundits say, well, the policies of the Democratic candidates aren't all that different, so who cares, they're almost entirely missing the point of politics and specifically *the political*
If someone doesn't believe in politics, then that's a bigger divide for me than whether someone's a Republican or a Democrat or conservative or liberal, which is one reason I'm generally very skeptical of "centrism" and "politics as problem solving"
And whenever someone says or even hints that they might be "post-ideological," that's the sign to run for the hills and never look back
If you're interested in learning more about "agonism," then read any one of Chantal Mouffe's books. In the meantime, here's my primer on some key aspects of her thought and their implications for left politics: americanaffairsjournal.org/2018/11/left-p…
For how to apply "agonistic" principles in daily life and politics, here's my essay in @TheAtlantic on suspension of judgment and the need to de-theologize politics: theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
