These Kucinich diaries (and no, this is not another one) seem to be showing up the old divide between those who see politics as a practical enterprise, are resigned to the two-party system and want to see Democrats get elected, and those who think that our politics need to be radically transformed and are only willing to support politicians who will further that goal.
I realize these are very broad strokes and that these positions are not absolutely mutually exclusive (or absolutely inclusive, for that matter). But what strikes me is the fervor with which we defend them and the sense that we end up speaking different languages, past and at each other. Witness the Nader discussions, the Kucinich discussions. Are we true believers or are we pragmatists? Fundamentalists or mushy mainstream congregations? Or is the religious fundamentalism/political fundamentalism comparison just stupid? I feel as though there is some hard-wired in the brain difference going on here, but can't put my finger on what it is.
Or maybe I'm just looking for ultimate explanations where there aren't any.