My suspicions that this examination of the dichotomy between conservatism and progressivism was going to be a mess were pretty much confirmed. First off there is a presumption that we know what these terms are and their histories...but really you might as well have said "the dull fearful, shortsighted, greedy, needy and uncooperative versus the smart, nice, eloquent, big picture, embracing, honest..."

So, is the Dalai Lama a progressive? Is Ron Paul a conservative? It seems like lock step works two ways and neither of them are walking towards getting a comprehensive view of what the political landscape really is like, because if it was we'd be talking about the political compass, the x and y axis of the two dimensional region in which real politics happen. Instead we get the us versus them where the "us" are people who read for comprehension and the "them" are people who memorize dogma by endless repetion instead.

Major differences between conservatives and progressives? Sure..it's the width and depth of that difference that creates the dynamic political system that we have, but can it be too dynamic for its own good? Will it, like an internal combustion engine without a balanced fly wheel, reach a point where it destroys itself? Without a balanced and honest view we're more likely to expereince the latter...and the increasingly ideological adherence to the polarities in politics is the reason I fear it will happen...and that's too bad because if the media, this article included, instead of beating the drum of vilification of those with other opinions and ignores the historical path taken to get here, I don't see much hope of cooperation or consession or compormise. Idealists; nice if you agree with them.

Interesting article and perspective. I'll keep my eye peeled for her book and a chance to read it, but I have to say one thing I noticed; if you removed the pronoun "I" and the use of the absolutes such as "all" or "none" or "always" or "never" there wouldn't be much to it. I gather many women agree with the author but I can attest to the fact that some women and men, often labelled non-conformists of one stripe or another, don't have the personal neurosis and hangups that the author does. Rather than blame it on artificial social standards and an implied insistence that everyone should be equal even in how they respond to stimulus, I suggest one delve more deeply into evolutionary psychology because quite a few of the aspects of socialization in general and sex in particular are seen in other species of mammals, primates in particular. We are monkeys first and foremost. Our intellect seems to be contriving to hide that from us most of the time.

Good to see this new column. An objective, or at least a more objective perception of the noble opposition, from either point of view, is the first step to ending the endless nut-grabbing that parades around in front of cameras and calls itself "politics".

I have many close friends whose personal politics lie along nearly every direction on the compass (note: compass not spectrum). Hearing them stereotyped or reading their supposed perspective trivialized or poorly framed by the MSM is painful, if not altogether avoidable.

Our un-named wingnut seems like he is both a product and believer in the myth that the two party system as we have it a reflection of some kind of "us versus them". His example of the portrayal of the unfair depiction of his party's candidates is a great example of that. Did he blame the MSM's unfair and incessant liberalism for Reagan's 2 victories? Oh, no. Then it's a case of "americans rising up and over-comming", at which time it's the left wing's time to blame the MSMs depiction of their candidate (Dukakis in mufti, anyone? Or Teddy's sex-life?). Why no candid discussion on the growing realization that the presumed objectivity of the MSM is a myth and that it has one interest only: itself. Whatever brings prestige, influence, and, of course, money, is the path that our constitutionally protected "free press" is obliged to take. Yeah, sure....

I think that as long as experts and upper eschelon members of the two main american political parties continue to perpetuate the myth of the greatness of the"two party system" and point to the one dimensional shadow cast up onto the back of the cave wall, while keeping our attention away from the 3-dimensional world whose shadow is creating that shilhouette, we will be easily fooled and free from being distracted as the illusion becomes more important than the reality.

Play ball.