Progressives believe in progress. But the key idea there is "better."

We have learned that 'newer' isn't necessarily better -- nor is bigger, higher, more powerful, richer, smarter, more efficient, stylish, easier or successful, etc. Those are also the values of the criminal class.

So does that leave anything besides just 'holier than thou'?

How about honest? Able to help others? Capable of sacrifice when required? Loving? Faithful? Hopeful? (opps, I think the Boy Scouts have that list covered.)

So, are progressives Boy Scouts? Then why don't we all just join the Boy Scouts.

Because they discriminate against gays? Or because such ideals can be held by the historically ignorant, and what we need to be is historically informed?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I suspect, in my own occasionally muddled mind, that I have always equated liberalism with progressivism. It was very helpful to see the distinction between the two as seen by the writer of this article.
Perhaps the one thing that progressives may have a problem with is their tendency to "rush into the future". Perhaps conservatives are there to put on our brakes. Maybe that is necessary.
However, in the long run, progressivism is what carries this country forward. Conservative thinkers, left to themselves, would create a static society that goes nowhere - which, evolutionarily, is an impossibility. Don't you just love this crazy logic! We are bound to win, we progressives/liberals - if "win" is the proper word to use.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Progressives are optimistic; we should be open to new ideas, to give them our consideration, then accept them or reject them. Regressives (otherwise known as conservatives) are frightened of new ideas, but of course there is no way new ideas can ever be squelched completely. Worlds evolve, people evolve, relationships become more complex. The human psyche must learn to address change and new challenges without fear.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I like the pragmatism in this article. I think the world is too divided in ideological camps which becomes too rigid after time. We fail to realize that the only constant thing we can depend upon to be there is change. Some of these old fogies develop their ideas and stick with them 50 years later in the face of changes happening all around them.
Viewing the world as a dynamic entity allows flexibility in approaching solutions to problems as they come up. Just like there are no pure human genotype there can be no pure liberal, democrat, conservatives. To remain pure is to become a fossil. It's up to us, do we want to be fossils or living, breathing participants in the world. Let's go progressive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Progressive movement roots are founded upon an open, transparent government in which people are trusted and true COMPETITION in business matters is an actual goal- not a political slogan meant to hide a true agenda of centralization of wealth and power in the hands of the few "betters/elites." Conservatives will attack by 'any means necessary' any reform or progressivism that they perceive will cause their family fortune to diminish- witness DUBYA and his handlers' rhetoric over taxcuts and the reasons given for both his and Cheney's non-service during the Vietnam era (they had "other things to do"). Conservatives like Rove are extremely pragmatic in their defense of wealth and power as witnessed by his attacks on Ann Richards in 1994, John Mc Cain in 2000, and Ambassador Wilson today! Our government today hides under words like patriotism and faith to hide their true agenda of outsourcing jobs, limiting health care to only the "chosen few", war for oil fields, and deregulation for campaign contributers' businesses. Expect even more vilifying attacks coming from the reactionary right as more people WAKE UP from the blinders of voting for a person because his ads portray him as a "GOOD MAN". Time brings out the Truth- and for Liars, the Truth Hurts!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've always maintained the conservatives seek to preserve the status quo at any cost, liberals try to do the same but with a kinder-gentler approach, while progressives are fully willing to toss any system that doesn't result in genuine subtantive solutions based on shared human values. All of that is essentially what Andrew's piece says.

The only area where I would differ is where he ties Progressive values to being "American." In light of contemporary experience, it's very problematic and potentially dangerous to tie human values to being distinctly "American." An Asian, African or European progressive would assuredly agree that values of equality justice and freedom are not uniquely "American." The era of "nation-state"-as-"value-anchor" is long outdated and is substantially the proximate cause of considerable violence in the world today. Progress means tossing that impractical system and opting for a better one.

One such "better system" for anchoring values within is the Green or ecological values base. A pragmatic progressive values-system needs to "go to ground," based on the Earth and its natural boundaries, limits and possibilities. Ecologics must replace and/or dominate economics (bioregionalism must replace nationalism, human rights over constitutionalism) as the values base for progressives. Just look at the Green Party platform or their "10 Key Values" to get a bigger picture of what ecological wisdom implies for progressivism as a values-base.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

By this definition: pragmatic, for improving the country for the "better," and other things mentioned here; I think the Right-Wing religious conservatives could define themselves as "progressive" in their own mind. (They wouldn't, of course, because to them "progressive" now means "liberal.") It all depends what you think is "good" or "for the betterment of the country" or what is "fair."

Mostly this is all about putting labels on people and that is what got us in this whole polarized mess in the first place.

Guy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's all a word game. Progress is well defined. Progressives are all about making progress. (But the promoters of war will tell us that we are making progress today in the Middle East.) Conserve is well defined. Many conservatives will steadfastly insist they are conserving Democracy. I suppose Liberals - I am one - can insist that they are trying to liberate humanity. We certainly do believe that it is the function of government to liberate the poor from poverty, the uneducated from ignorance, the starving from hunger, the needy from want (is that a duplication?), and to generally provide to the People those things enumerated in the Declaration of Independence. (It might prove interesting to read through the grievances listed in that Document and determine which of them might apply to the current Government.) That is somewhat opposite to the Conservatives desire to conserve the status quo. If the Progressives want to progress from the Conservative position to the Liberal positon, more power to them. I always wondered if the Progressives sprang into being because they bought into the Conservative campaign to make Liberal a dirty word. But that is unfair. Progressives seem historically to be trying to protect the populace from business interests, while Liberals seem to be devoted to altering the Government.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How can progressivism claim to not be an ideology? Progress is deep set in a "progressive vs conservative" (AKA "good vs bad") dichotomy, maintains the pretense of having THE absolute answers, and is dedicated to the authoritarian imposition of such. Definitely an ideology.

"Progress" too is a status quo, a fixed and linear road, now a superhighway, to a utopian, mechanically perfect Heaven (or is it Hell?). "Progress" refers to ABSOLUTE CONTROL, through both "liberal" genetically-engineered/poisoned carrots and "conservative" broom-rapes and beatings.

Question the fundamental progress, and you'll be trapped, slowly killed, run over, and spat upon, just like coyotes, mountain lions, and indigenous people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good article but lets not fall for the right's demonization of liberalism.

"Liberals are often burdened with endless optimism - a belief that all problems can be solved through implementing utopian visions (especially through government intervention)."

Post WWII liberalism was explictly counterposed to leftist utopianism. Shaken by the horrors of both fascism and Stalinism, post war liberals like Arthur Schlesinger and Reinhold Niebuhr clearly understood mankind's potential for evil and that liberalism was not meant to be another form of utopia that assumed that humanity could be perfected. Read the "Vital Center" for more on this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...for what is really a simple idea: to work for true progress within a framework of human rights, environmental preservation, and a longing to make the best of what we have, with fairness and justice for all.

I've always thought of 'progressive' as being somewhat to the left of 'liberal', since progressive ideas generally take one outside the mainstream and staid ideas of the status quo. Obviously definitions of progressivism will differ among individuals, according to our experience, but I think it's good to work toward a sound-bite-ready description that can be tossed around the airwaves and easily digested so the rest of the population gets their information from progressives, not from the opposition trying to define us.

And since the radical right has been so intent on denigrating 'liberals', I suggest we preempt them here and describe them as they truly are...REGRESSIVES!

:-)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Progressivism is not a political party, you can be progressive in ideas and ideals and belong to either party. Right now those progressives in the Republican Party are just beginning to break through evidenced by a rising Republican reaction to some of the White House activities.

Real progressive in the Democratic Party usually get coated over with liberal pap that has no value except in politics. Here again, some Democrats shed the pap, and begin to talk progessive without political undertones or overtones.

Guess what? We could wind up with a growing grouping of progressive citizens that can influence both parties and thus move us out of the doldrums we are in now. Please don't think a new political party, think influence on existing parties and most importantly on we the people.

That outcome could be very exciting and very promising. Why even sweet Lady Liberty might do a little dance. Hmmm, look's like hope floats after all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It was refreshing to read this essay. I am a high school teacher and I believe one of the most difficult challenges young people face today is to believe in themselves. This takes resolve in the face of overwhelming pressure all around them, most especially IMHO from media marketing. I can see how a young person today could have conflicts galore standing in the way of self-actualization. I am a proud 50-year-old progressive who never liked the term "liberal" because it was "the other side." I believe actions speak louder than words, and that belief without action is ideology, and ideology never wins. Thanks, Andrew. The blog is also inspiring. Keep it up and never shut up!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Utopian vision"? The utopians were among the first socialists.

A progressive is a socialist who is afraid of the label "socialist."

Do Christians run from the label "Christian" because the KKK and
other hatemongering crazies call themselves Christian? No.

Jesus was a socialist. When he went around advocating government (if you
read the Bible in Shakespeare's language, that would be "kingdom" to
you) that took care of everyone, especially the poor, he was advocating
socialism.

The United States of America was founded on the belief in "government
of, by, and for the people." To be against the use of government in such
a society is to be against the people themselves. But "progressives"
insist on claiming a distinction, not realizing that by so doing, they
fall prey to the implicit conservative logic that the government and the
people are distinctly different things. If they're right, it's because
we have collectively failed in our responsibilities to make our government
one of, by and for the people. Let's stop running from the idea of
government, and try to understand what it can really be in a democratic
context - it's not just about electing two people every four years.

Government of, by, and for the people is, by definition, socialist.

How many "progressives" opposed the recent Supreme Court decision on eminent
domain? Did it occur to any that if the court has established as precedent
that private property can be taken from individuals and given to
private institutions for the public good, then property can also be taken
from private institutions and held in the public domain? I.e., that a way
to deal with abusive private corporations is to take them over via eminent
domain?

Orwell wrote to suggest that when certain words are taken out of the
vocabulary, the ideas associated with them become unthinkable. Thanks
to words like "progressive" to avoid the word "socialism", the better
ideas that might otherwise be labelled "socialism" don't even get thought,
let alone talked about and debated.

This is losing the battle of ideas, folks - without even putting up a fight...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Although I agree with much of the article, I wouldn't argue that progressives are averse to simple solutions. As a self-proclaimed progressive myself, many simple solutions have come out of the progressive movement, including political rallies and marches, community-based organizations, newsletters, activist art, etc.

I make this subtle, but for me, important point, because having studying engineering in college, I've come to believe Ockham's Razor, which says that the best way to explain data is the simplest. This may seem more toward a neo-con philosophy, but the theory states that the best explanation is simple, and NOT that any simple explanation is the best. For progressives, the explanation for the Iraq War is simple: it's about power (through $ & oil).

The progressive solutions I mentioned above are also simple, but it is because, at their heart, the strategy is simple (which is to encourage people to thoughtfully consider whether their actions are for the best good), the solutions inherently develop a flexibility that meets the needs of the people. It is the rigidness within mainstream conservatism and liberalism, and their inability to reconsider an argument (whether it be about abortion, education, the economy, etc.), that make the solutions they pose as unnecessarily complicated. And maybe that's the fault of the media, through their portrayal of liberals and conservatives, and not so much the people themselves.

Well, except Bush & posse. No media alone could construct the rigidness of those fuck ups.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Liberalism is all about the government, vis a vis your neighbors and the political process, running and ruining your lives from the moment you are born until the moment you die and beyond.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I note the only concrete examples the writer gives center around sexual politics.

For most Americans, bedroom politics aren't high on our list.

Workplace issues (and yes, these do involve gender politics), environmental and education concerns and health care are far more important to the majority of working class Americans than the personal politics of sexuality so often pushed to the forefront by those calling themselves progresive.

Hmmmm.

Sounds like a Liberal to me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have read this entire thread and I have to admit that I still don't think there is any definitive agreement on what progressive means. Maybe that is just as well. Most folks can't be pigeon-holed into some neat little category... and why would we WANT our thinking to be confined by some arbitrary label? I prefer labeling an ISSUE as conserative or liberal (or progressive, or radical, or whatwever) and not people. When I do that, I'm not making the assumption that, for example, all conservatives are pro-war (what is consevative about invading a country?). Hopefully this results in dialogue about issues, not labels.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am
a progressive and a liberal
and a conservative and a libertarian
and an authoritarian and a centrist
and emotionally unpredictable and logically rational
and feminine and masculine
and a human and an animal
and a spiritual person and an atheist and a humanist
and a lover of life and a killer (of at least a few mosquitos!)
and an environmentalist and a businessperson
and a techno geek and a luddite
and a teacher and a student
and a happy person and a sad person
and many, many other things all at once.

I am not black or white. I am black and white. And all the other colors too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I would like to see more progressive mothers come out and speak, especially young single mothers. Activism takes a back seat when you are raising a kid, by choice...I am finding it the most hard to be a progressive Christian single mother. Talk about challenge. Everybody and their mother has something to say to me. I can not stand it. On the other hand, I have started engaging people in the religious world on issues of progress. Somebody even asked me "what is progressive" and it forced me to think about it and come here and read this article under the unceasing torrent of my child's unending need that constantly wears me down to a grain of sand that is being washed out to sea.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Read: Problem-solving

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In order to earn the title of a progressive, it is probably important to practice being one in daily life. I notice this discussion thread is geared only to "young" so-called progressives. Not to have a historical sense would limit one's ability to be a practising progressive.

I do agree with the discussion on what it means to being a progressive as opposed to being a lliberal or a conservative (I use these terms only in the context of the present discussion).

However, I think it is important to be aware that unmediated capitalsim, racism, sexism, militarism, and other oppressions present daunting challenges to the most disciplined practitoner of progressivism. I hope people can offer anecdotal examples of how they daily practice being a progressive. I'll offer my own example:

Recently while I was participating on a feminist listserv, the issue of free access information on Women's Studies came up. Leaders of my organization, NWSA, National Women's Studies Association, justified using Members Only access to the lists. But I proposed free access because part of being a progressive in my view is to provide free access to WS info, regardless of affiliation. I was conveying my notion that being progressive means that I hold that Knowledge(which is Power) is more important than money, or which group you belong to.

ckk

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Progressive means one and only one thing - "Progressing Towards Socialism."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Folks,
After a nasty attack by a member of the AlterNet community I have realized there is too much bullshit attached with identifying one self as 'progressive'. I am not going to be downscaled by some one else because I do not fit in to their notion of how a 'progressive' woman is supposed to write...It is unfortunate we have to be dogmatic about 'progress'. Isn't that the very thing we are fighting against?
Sheesh.
At any rate, my perspective changes as I read, write, and reflect. I will not stay the same. Life is change.
O

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm a progressive mother, and I have yet to know anyone who could comfortably weave politics and religion into an ideology and call it progressivism. To me, it's apples and oranges.

I just lost a lengthy post to this board through a bit of the ol' fatfinger, and now my kids need a bedtime story, so I'm off to take care of that.

But suffice it to say that, for me, there is nothing more political than raising one's children. The hand that rocks the cradle and all that. A lot of American women hide behind motherhood as an excuse for not being political, but I posit that no role for a woman could be more influential.

No, I don't force placards into my children's hands on streetcorners; I don't march with my kids in the stroller. The political acts of parenting happen quietly, inside the home.

A snapshot of a typical day in our house reveals daily lessons in media literacy, community activism through volunteering, exercises in compassion, and living thoughtfully. My children read because my husband and I read. My children care about politics because my husband and I discuss them at the dinner table or on long car trips. My children ask questions because my husband and I do the same thing, even of our neighbors, even in the local newspaper, even in the face of opposition. My children are good problem-solvers because my husband and I make a living practice of creative intention.

These are all facets of the progressive mindset. We can't make the world a better place if we don't raise children to believe they are here to perform that work, just like we are.

We had a plan going into parenthood that included our political vision. It's easy to blend it into daily life if one is clear on their vision and has already made efforts, however incomplete and perfect they always are, to put that vision to practice.

Of course, this is all speculative. I have no idea how my children will turn out, but the fact that I'm cognitively aware of my role in my children's lives and how that will leave its mark on the rest of the world is surely an indication that we're headed somewhere supportive of the progressive worldview.

My two cents. And now it's lights out in the room with the bunkbeds...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Garib's essay, while well-intentioned, is essentially useless for answering the question he proposes.

At the end, he emits every vacuuous cliche that's been making the rounds on boards like this one for some time: "progressivism is about pragmatism and fairness..." or "uniquely American", both statements which are long distance calls from accuracy.

Conservatives are often quite practical in their ideological approaches, particualrly when it comes to criticizing socialism. They also rely heavily on capitalist conceptions of fairness--property rights, for example--as well as liberal conceptions of fairness to argue against the common good, not for it. So Garib's assertion is pretty much a meaningless wash.

What I'd like to see from sources like Alternet is a much more specific and grounded approach to this subject, not just a bunch of new age meandering that ends up with definitions more suited to bumper stickers than to social thought. This is why the forces of reaction are kicking our collective tails.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am coming out of the closet. LOL. I found The Communist Manifesto on line. Jesus was a socialist. So am I. Folks have started calling me a Marxist. Fine. I am a Christian. :)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Being a progressive is a state of mind, not a party.
We need to learn to "think outside the box" when it comes to defining who we are as Progressives, least we end up in that tired rhetoric as Liberals.
Nothing wrong with Liberal ideas, but it gets bogged down in political baggage.
So think of yourself as being in a movement instead of a party. Reach out to others in others parties and you will find we have much in common. Democrats as well as Republicans are fed up with their leaders right now. So get to know who you are and what you stand for and you will have much more to offer than the two tired parties of the present.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here is a short story to illustrate what it means to be a Progressive.

A man is drowing 100 feet away from shore.
Republicans and Democrats are on the shore watching the man.
The Republicans throw the man a 50 foot rope and tell him to help himself by swimming the other 50 feet.
The Democrats throw the man a 150 foot rope--but drop the rope.

Progressives look for practical and ethical solutions
to societies challanges. Politcal parties look for
politcal solutions.
You can be a pragmatic and ethical person in either party.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I read another one of John One One's comments on another discussion, which made me grow weary of him.

I think the bottom line is the only label I need is "I am a Christian". In terms of politics, sure there is the political party I belong to.

In terms of anarchist, liberal, marxist, progressive, socialist...I do not know.

Obviously I have not resolved where I stand with the question "what is progressive". I think the thing that troubles me the most is if I say "I am a progressive" then people have expectations for how I should act, believe, feel, think, etc. and I do not meet up to those expectations, I am shamed.

Well you know what my priest says? Expectations are resentments under construction.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt were notorious racists, and much of what calls itself "progressive" today has the same problem. A united movement, capable of actually challenging the right-wing would need the unified energy of Black, Latino, and Asian communities (already the most "progressive," by any voting measure) and whites who see anti-racism as a central part of any agenda for change

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Any idiot can be a conservative. A conservative has one function. To conserve. To preserve the status quo. A conservative needs only one faculty. Observation. A conservative observes the status quo and holds on to it for dear life. Of course conservatives also need voices loud enough to scream at progressives: "I don't care if it's 's..t'. It's good 's..t'. Leave it alone. Don't change a thing".

Progressives also need good observational faculties. But they also need discernment; the ability to look at the status quo and discern the good and the bad. Progressives also need vast analytic powers not required of conservatives. After having discerned what is good, progressive must analyze from a myriad of options, what would be the best to replace that "piece-of-s--t" that conservatives want to hold on to.

Then of course, progressives need good organizational skills. They need to organize the body-politic to push for necessary changes. Progressives also need good hearing aids that they can switch off when the conservatives' cries become too loud and strident.

In the end, the history of the world can be viewed as a continuous pitched battle between liberal and conservative ideas. And history is an ever-leftward movement of society into more and more humanist and progressive ideals. Conservatives can win a battle or two here and there. But in the end, progressive forces will always win in the future as they've always won in the past.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank you for providing a clear definition of "progressive" in the context of American politics. I have had an affinity for that label, but avoided it because of its association with the "liberal" moniker. I am neither a liberal, nor a conservative. But I am progressive! And it feels awfully good to say it.

RIGHT ON!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Progressives are bourgeois revisionists that have not achieved revolutionary class consciousness

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why not pick something more grounded to describe yourself as, like a secular humanist, an independent thinker, a social liberal/fiscal conservative? You've defined nothing here.

Maybe you could coach John Roberts on his hearings, I've rarely seen so many words say so little. "American values"? Whose american values? Yours? Rush Limbaugh's? We're all americans, and we have widly different values. You can't define yourself in terms of american values, we agree on almost nothing. You need to pick specific positions you believe in and define what those are and why they're important and correct - regardless of what the rest of America thinks about those issues. Is gay marriage something you support? Probably, if you're "progressive". Is it something America supports? Based on all the votes in the past few years, no. You can't possibly defend it as part of american values, so don't try.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The neo-cons have spent years trying to make "liberal" a dirty word, and by changing the name by which you wish to be called you are just playing their game.

Trying to differentiate yourself from the negative connotations recently attached to the word "liberal" is just falling into their trap.

That whole "utopian" claptrap is just that. Words are defined by how we use them and for years "liberal" described a collection of values that include liberty, protection of the poor and middle class from the rich, democracy, and stewardship of the Earth. The word described the values not any specific policies or political position.

Those of us who share those values are liberals, plain and simple. The reason Democrats have lost all power at the federal level and at many state levels is for two reasons.

1) Many supposed Democratic candidates don't share the liberal values that the majority of Americans support. All these pro-business DLC democrats are like agents provacateur effectively sabatoging an important movement.

2) The rest of the Democrats seem to have lost their spines. Instead of standing up and fighting for their values they take more passive-aggresive steps like just changing the name of their beliefs from "liberal" to "progressive."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

progressives are not afraid to apply radical solutions to problems based on a radical analysis.

this is different than socialists who have a prefab radical ideology that (they believe) solves all of their problems for them.

liberals are averse to getting to the root of a problem and simply treat symptoms, often poorly.

progressives are not adverse to unlikely alliances, even with conservatives, when goals coincide.

progressives are not liberals on steroids.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

i think most people just say 'progressive' instead of 'liberal' the way one might say 'darn' instead of 'damn'.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Being Progressive to me means being open-minded about solutions to major problems that face the Country and the world, open-minded but not certain; Being Progressive means that human behavior is explicable and therefore understandable, if not always fixable; Being Progressive means that all peoples in the world are equal in ability, imagination, wisdom and caring, but not exactly in the same way at the same time; and being progressive means accepting all things big and small, life forms, histories, traditions, beliefs, hopes, dreams, efforts and mistakes; We all make mistakes, personal, local, national and just plain human mistakes; and we must learn from our mistakes and be willing to make amends. Being progress means all woman and men have equal rights and equal distribution of fundamental needs like health insurance, food, clothing, housing and all vital necessities; Finally, no person, government leader, follower or child has all the answers, and if you or many of you feel that you do, then it is time to meditate, pray or otherwise refrain from taking action until you have figured out your mistake. Virgil

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

EXTREMELY IMPORTANT
Earth under Transformation - The inevitable has occured only Knowledge of interrelationship and oneness can save humanity

we are aware of the stark rise in natural catastrophes since 2000. We have dubbed natural catastrophes as natural and are more concentrated on dealing with it. “Katrina” exposed the limitations of human preparedness. If the most prosperous nations can suffer in such manner, one can imagine the plight of lesser nations, the specially island nations that are vulnerable.

There is a powerful lobby in the world that rides and rules the world by their material power and the knowledge of matter or science. The knowledge of science is inferior is a truth that every scientist is consciously aware of, because it does not explain the interrelationship and oneness of nature in any sensible manner. More over with the advent of quantum mechanics the foundation of science was totally broken. The knowledge these lobbies exploit recklessly is disturbing nature and nature is revolting, is a stark truth which people around the world including many scientist has come to acknowledge. But the powerful nations who have immense investment in material world is not willing to hear – the price of their deafness is being paid by millions of life and unbounded agony around the world.

A well-known Russian scientist Alexey N. Dmitrieve [http://www.tmgnow.com/repository/global/planetophysical.html ] had clearly warned from his research that earth and our solar is transforming. From its premises he had expressed large-scale increase in natural catastrophes. A volume of emerging observations supports it. Yet the west seems to lie low on such facts. As a researcher pursuing the fundamental answers, the interrelationship and oneness of nature, I too have come to such conclusions myself and I have cautioned huge catastrophes ahead and I have discussed the origin, the cause and the only way to avoid it. The matter is open on the net as a challenge to scientist and intellectuals to evaluate.

Instead of preparing for catastrophes, it is much better to understand it and find means to alleviate it. This is discussed in the site. http://www.geocities.com/quantum_reality2003/inde.htm Let us not wait for another catastrophe to strike us. Who knows who is next?

Life is much more valuable than matter – give a helping hand in my struggle.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Progressivism is pragmatic rather than dogmatic. Progressivism says in this case the public sector works best and in that case the private sector works best. Progressivism says "ok, let's stop the partisan brawl and find the best solution to this problem". Progressivism promotes cooperation, shared information, discovery, facts and truths. Progressivism rejects deception, competition, class and privilege.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Your article boiled down to Progressives do good with 'practical good solutions' to societies problems. Define good please, for who and when? You coupled it with an attack on Liberalism saying all they wanted was big government.

You confuse Liberalism with the Democrats. There problem is they stopped being Liberals when they forgot why they used government to come up with practical solutions for problems that affected all of us. e.g. WPA, social security, unemployment insurance, FHA, etc, etc.

I am a classical Political Liberal = "for democracy and the abolition of privelege."(Concise Oxford English 'Dictionary). Liberty and Justice for all, not just for the priveleged rich.

Our problems are the same ones that have always faced us. They are the result of us being primates. We have a built in desire to have a pecking order = aristocracy. Conservatives like aristocracy and privelege, thats why they favor big businesses over people.

You so called progressives are not really. You do not work for real democracy. If you did you would still be screaming about our votes not being counted properly in Florida and Ohio. Notice the Democrats are not screaming either.

You are not screaming about the assault on labor, the reestablishment of corporate monopolies, the removal of bankqruptcy protections, the continuous relaxation of pollution controls, etc, etc etc. and niether are the Democrats.

Once you stop loudly defending against any assault on actual democratic processes, like counting all the votes, or assaults on a fair days pay for a fair days work, or anything else that gives a privelege to the few at the expense of the rest of us, then all your talk of being a Progressive is just HOT AIR.

It means that the conservatives have succeeded in making liberal a dirty word because the Democrats forgot what it meant and what it required of them to live up to the definition.

I suggest everyone step back and take a good look at what
the Republicans and so called conservatives in this country have become--Corporate Fascists who have almost completely succeeded in setting up a new aristocracy.

You forget what Political Liberalism really means and you forget what this country satands for.

Make some real progress, become a real Liberal.

Dan Alter

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

1,300 Progressive Spiritual Activists gathered this July in Berkeley at TIKKUN's first network conference of progressives from all faiths and those who are spiritual but not religous who agree America is in need of a New Bottom Line.

This historic gathering was not covered by the media but has been reported in Chapter 2: "The Revolution has begun...."

available FREE @:

www.wearewideawake.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"The boldness of the hope men entertain transcends all former experience. It calms and cheers them with the picture of a simple and equal life of truth and piety. And this hope flowered on what tree? It was not imported from the stock of some celestial plant, but grew here on the wild crab of conservatism. It is much that this old and vituperated system of things has borne so fair a child. It predicts that amidst a planet peopled with conservatives, one Reformer may yet be born."

--from "The Conservative" (Essay), Ralph Waldo Emerson

I suggest reading the essay in its entirety; it is both insightful and instructive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fearful of being tagged by neo-conservatives as liberals, embarrased by their middle-class roots, afraid to fight as their parents' generation did for the welfare of the masses and preferring to straddled the political fence, a new generation of "intellectuals" calls itself "Progressives." A nice title without substance, an ideology devoid of middle-class backbone where the advocates can sway back and forth without ever taking a stand.

A democratic society cannot be enriched when nebulous ideologies replace actions and commitment to improve the lot of the middle-class and the the disadvantage. Progressiveness is nothing more than a politically correct parlor game where the players simply want to impress their peers in pseudo-intellectual debates.

America achieved its greatness through the efforts of social advocates, men and women who were brave enough to face the challenges head on, often at the risk of their lives validating their words with actions not by playing parlor games.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]