one of these days I’m going to publish a dictionary of words that should be dropped from the progressive lexicon … but for now I’m going to take aim at one word in particular “hack” … what does it mean? A hack could be an insider or a hack could be an outsider. A hack could be a pro or a hack could be an amateur. A hack could be a carpetbagger (see: Bill Weld in NY) or a hack could be someone who has spent their whole life in a state.
There’s a million reasons to drop the word hack from our lexicon, but heres the one that resonates with me … if we use the connotation of “hack” (someone who has run for office before, been elected, and is seeking higher office) then ANYONE who has entered public service to improve the lot of others, ANYONE who has dedicated their life to the common good, ANYONE who has put themselves in the public arena, sacrificed (much of) their personal life … is a HACK.
How then, do we get good people to run for office? If Deval Patrick wins the nomination and wins the corner office, is he then, by default, a HACK? Are his supporters then, HACKS?
I’m not saying we all have to get along. There is wide spectrum of views within the Democratic party, especially within Massachusetts, and those differences should be respected and debated in the public arena. And while there are clearly strengths to having a background in the private sector or outside of the “establishment” (another bogus word), we all should be careful what paths our word choice leads us down. Denigrating public service, and assuming the worst of those who have put themselves up for elected office, should not and cannot be a plank for any progressive majority.
