I read Peter Quaranto's column "Calling All Progressives" and wanted to write in a response.
Quaranto writes, "For those of us progressives, Tuesday was a deeply disappointing day, a day when we lost hope for our country." I feel that this language ("us progressives") is an over-simplification of the electorate, polarizing in a way that is inaccurate and most likely counter-productive as well.
As I see it, this was a complicated election. There were various issues of great importance to the electorate, and each citizen had to discern priorities, and cast a vote accordingly. I know my own (Ohio) family was divided as to how each would vote, but I respect each member of my family as intelligent adults, and the reasoning behind their vote as well. And in the end, I can confidently say that each of our votes were informed and cast with the hope for the betterment of society.
In my opinion, respectful dialogue and discussion are true signs of progressiveness, or "that which will lead to the gradual betterment of humankind." So I echo Quaranto's cry, "Calling All Progressives," but suggest that the call not be limited, but inclusive to all who share in the right and the responsibility to work for the progress of humanity. In a democracy such as ours, each voice and each vote has the right to be heard, and for all to be heard starts with all to be listening.
Nicole Shirilla
alumnae
Nov. 8
