Progressives are not Liberals nor Leftists

[denem]

comments welcome

[Xipe Totec]

1. There are more labels in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy nt

[denem]

3. Schools of thought are not labels except

for those who would dismiss them.

[Xipe Totec]

6. Defend you position, then

Define your terms.

:popcorn:

[denem]

7. I am aking whether DU'ers see a difference

It's an open thread, but not one dismissed as merely labels. Conservatives are not libertarians for example.

[Xipe Totec]

9. How can we see a difference, when all you show is three words

and don't say what you mean by them.

You claim they are schools.

Fine.

Schools of what? and by whose definition?

[denem]

11. I would like your ideas.

Iif we talk about these terms all the ime, but have no idea whether they have a core meaning, isn't that important?

[cali]

2. parsing. semantics. hair splitting.

[denem]

4. Progressive = Liberal = Leftist

there's more than a hair here.

[ixion]

5. Not all liberals and progressives are "leftists". In fact the word 'leftist'

is really a jingoistic term that is widely over used and signifies nothing specific.

[denem]

8. I view the essential core of 'Leftism' as

social relations are determined by the means of production.

If that is not left, what is?

[ixion]

17. That's what I'm saying: Not all progressives define themselves

according to the means of production. Just saying.

[denem]

20. So Progressives are not all leftists?

OK

[ixion]

23. Just stating my opinion. I've met progressives with a wide array of beliefs

just like any other human creation, it's not necessarily black and white, yes or no. There is nuance.

[Recursion]

24. Progressivism is often seen as an attempt to keep capitalism alive

That is, progressives do not question the bourgeois property concept, nor do they alienate the means of production -- for that matter, it is an entirely bourgeois movement.

[denem]

27. IMO Progressivism is a demand to separate

Government from Capital. When TR took the Presidency, few would question that the most powerful man in the land was J.P. Morgan. A Leftist would respond that the task was pointless because government must enable capitalism to maintain the social structures of production.

[OneGrassRoot]

10. I'd appreciate others' definitions of progressive and liberal

This is brought up here periodically and, I admit, I'm still confused.

:)

[denem]

12. That's what I'm asking.

If the words have little meaning, what do we stand for?

[Xithras]

13. Of course they're not. Words mean things. Those words have different meanings.

We may use them interchangeably, but each has a different meaning.

Conservatism - One who believes in political stasis. Conservatives believe that political and social positions should be absolute and unchanging.

Progressivism - The belief that political and social realities should reflect the current will of the people, even if those beliefs change over time. There are no political absolutes. Progressives aren't marching toward any particular goal, but simply want to ensure that our governments are consistently taking a "modern" view of the issues they're legislating. Progressivism is the natural opposite of conservatism.

Liberalism - Classically, this is a political philosophy based on the notions of liberty and equal rights. Traditional, or even modern, political positions taken by conservatives and progressives are not particularly relevant to liberals. The liberal positions themselves are viewed as an absolute, independent of modern or historical political realities. Equal rights are not something that can be negotiated.

Leftism - A political belief specifically oriented toward establishing a more equal society. Unlike liberalism, which has a specific focus on rights, leftists apply this equality across the full scale of human endeavors, including financial, social, environmental, and political issues. Leftists tend to take a more collectivist view of society as a whole, and in all things.


This can all get pretty confusing, of course. You can be a leftist, a liberal, and a progressive at the same time. You can be a liberal progressive, without being a leftist. You can be a liberal capitalist, but not a leftist capitalist. You can be a leftist without being a progressive (if you're into authoritarian leftism). You can be a progressive without being a liberal. A single person can carry many labels, but the application of one doesn't mean that all apply.

But, in the end, it's all just labels. Don't forget that.

[OneGrassRoot]

14. Thank you very much! :) n/t

[denem]

15. I disagree with all but your 'Liberal' definition,

but I am trying to create a thread about what DU'ers think.

Thank you.

[Xithras]

32. I don't claim to be a dictionary or any authority...

But I based those off the classic definitions of each word, as used during the past century. As the definitions have become a bit muddled over the past couple of decades, feel free to disagree. It doesn't hurt my feelings any :pals:

[boppers]

22. Xithras, how about land/sea conservatives? Folks who are environmentalists?

(Yes, I know this is tricky)

Greenpeace, for example, believes in stasis, and an untouched environment (aside from humans). If sharks wipe out a rare whale, they're fine with that. If humans wipe out a rare whale, that's cause for outrage and violence.

It's not simple. As you say:
"it's all just labels. Don't forget that."

[Xithras]

30. No, it is just labels.

Labels are for boxes. The problem, as you point out, is that real human beings tend to not fit in boxes very well. I have a handful of views that some here might find conservative. Many of my views are progressive. I'm extremely liberal. And I hold a few leftist positions as well. Environmentally, I'm at the screaming left fringe, to the left of about 95% of DU.

So which box do I fit in?

In my experience, I'm pretty normal. It's pretty rare for a person to find a person who is so ideologically pure that they fall neatly into one box.

But that doesn't mean the boxes don't exist, or that they aren't labeled. It just means that the boxes aren't nearly as important as some would like to believe.

[Recursion]

16. These are all historically loaded terms

"Progressives" were Republicans in the early 20th century who wanted to consolidate businesses and ameliorate their practices, let women vote, and prohibit the consumption of alcohol.

"The Left" describes where a certain faction sat in Louis XIV's court, and broadly describes a movement over the past several centuries to empower the oppressed over the powerful.

"Liberals" tautologically follow liberalism, which is an even much broader term related to the idea of individual freedom and liberty; liberalism has significantly influenced both the right and left.

[denem]

19. In describing "The Left" you cannot ignore Marx

'Capital' was and is essential for understanding 'The Left' IMO

[Recursion]

21. Kapital was published nearly a century after "The Left" started being called that

It's certainly an important part of the history of the Left, but not remotely its origin.

[denem]

26. But Capital provided the framework of laying bare

the political in the economics. Prior to Capital, the 'left' could be dismissed as anti-feudalism, at least in pre-revolutionary France.

[Dr Morbius]

18. I'm a liberal and I think the word "liberal" was hijacked.

First by the left, and then the right.

"Social liberalism" is a concept which was huge in the late sixties. It's the concept of a society where everyone gets what they deserve; social liberalism proposes everyone's needs should be met by society at large, and we should each work to fulfill our desires beyond the necessities. It sounds wonderful and terribly impractical. But social liberalism came to be confused with liberalism itself, and as a consequence more recently liberalism has been redefined by the right as a vague high taxes - pro-intrusive-government ideology. Dictionary.com claims liberals believe in progressive government; just another example that in the public mind, there's no difference between progressives and liberals.

Liberalism believes the purpose of government is to establish and maintain justice, making everyone equal before the law and responsible for themselves. This in turn creates a condition of liberty; say and do what you want but take the consequences of your speech and actions. Liberalism, as an ideological base, is the very foundation of America. Most conservatives and most progressives are also liberals; they simply don't know it. Washington was a liberal by his own words. Jefferson was one of history's greatest writers on the subject of liberty; he too was a liberal. But while Washington was essentially a federalist (in favor of a strong central government. though he never publicly or privately approved of either party), Jefferson fought tooth and nail to prevent government from becoming intrusive - he created the nation's first political party and until the civil war it was the party of conservatives. Note that Thomas Jefferson is cited as often (if not moreso) today by the right as the left; the reason is that Jefferson was one of America's first conservative leaders. But he was also a liberal, believing in personal responsibility and freedom.

I define a progressive as someone who believes the role of government is to help society progress (more forward) in the right direction. A conservative is someone who believes in limiting change, and believes government exists only as a necessary evil... and must be restrained to the greatest extent possible. Modern conservatives, especially those in office or leadership positions in the GOP, maintain a terribly inconsistent ideology but frankly, so do modern progressives.

You cannot be progressive and be conservative, but you can be a progressive and not be a liberal. You can be a conservative and also be a liberal. Most Americans, though, are really liberals. They are simply unaware of what it means.

[denem]

25. Indeed. There was a 'Liberal Party' - the whigs,

and they were diametrically opposed to the Conservatives - the Tories, and IMO, America came up with the Progressives, who, as you say, can share liberal values.

[Dr Morbius]

34. I'm actually very close ideologically to the American Whig party.

Abraham Lincoln was a Whig, as was Henry Clay. From an economic perspective, they favored investing in infrastructure and tariffs to support American businesses. Both opposed the Mexican war as unnecessary and usurious. Both supported war when the nation was threatened, Clay in 1812 (Americans were rightly concerned about British impressment, among other things) and Lincoln in 1861.

I sometimes call myself a neo-Whig. Usually good for a chuckle.

[ibegurpard]

28. ok

[Tuesday Afternoon]

29. where does that leave democrats?

:shrug:

[denem]

31. A Coalition

and we are not coming from the same direction.

The word I am search for is 'Respect' I think.

[cornermouse]

33. About the time Obama was running, the word "liberal"

apparently became old fashioned, out of date, and just too "not it" to be allowed to continue to be used so a movement for liberals to abandon the name "liberal" and start calling themselves "progressives" was born. Changing the word eventually demanded a new definition.

Do I wish Obama was liberal? Yes but as my mother told me a long time ago. "If wishes were horses, beggars would ride. And if watches were turnips, I'd wear one by my side." That pretty much sums it up.

Oh yes. Definitions from an actual dictionary
-------------------------
pro·gres·sive (pr-grsv)
adj.
1. Moving forward; advancing.
2. Proceeding in steps; continuing steadily by increments: progressive change.
3. Promoting or favoring progress toward better conditions or new policies, ideas, or methods: a progressive politician; progressive business leadership.
4. Progressive Of or relating to a Progressive Party: the Progressive platform of 1924.
5. Of or relating to progressive education: a progressive school.
6. Increasing in rate as the taxable amount increases: a progressive income tax.
7. Pathology Tending to become more severe or wider in scope: progressive paralysis.
8. Grammar Designating a verb form that expresses an action or condition in progress.
n.
1. A person who actively favors or strives for progress toward better conditions, as in society or government.
2. Progressive A member or supporter of a Progressive Party.
3. Grammar A progressive verb form.
------------------------
Lib·er·al (lbr-l, lbrl)
adj.
1.
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
d. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
2.
a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
3. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.
4. Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.
5.
a. Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
b. Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.
n.
1. A person with liberal ideas or opinions.
2. Liberal A member of a Liberal political party.
-------------------------------

Me? I'll take liberal over progressive every time.

[grahamhgreen]

35. Let's not debate the terms, but the policies. Some believe in rule by the people, others by power.

[old mark]

36. Back in the "radical leftist" days of the late 1960's, Progressive or Leftist

were much more acceptable self-labels...to call someone a "liberal" was to call him a faint hearted moderate/centerist poser. Note that there actually were "liberal republicans" at that time, as well, and to be a "liberal" was even somewhat fashionable among the middle class businesspeople of the day.
Very conservative people were pretty much universally looked down on.

The terms mean very little when currently used in the Media.
I think there are so few actual "progressives" around we are in a very small minority, even among actual "Liberal Democrats".
"Leftist" to me applies to someone who would move beyond capitalism...
"Progressive" to me means someone who advocates major change to the existing social system involving more equality and fairness for everyone.

"Liberal" is almost meaningless these days-anyone who is not a crazy conservative idiot could be labeled a "liberal"... All in my opinion, of course...

We have all been moved very very far right over the last 40 years.

mark

[mmonk]

37. Progressives aren't corporatists. Both Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt

are examples unless the DLC redefinition is going to stick.

[KharmaTrain]

38. Each Defines On Their Own...

I never attempt to claim to speak for anyone other than myself. I also know I don't fall into any one set catagory...all depends on the issue and my own experience. Thus the labels mean little as on some issues I can be very "liberal" or downright "socialist" where others I would fall into "conservative". Thus the definitions that are thrown around...even on the right...are arbitrary.

[OHdem10]

39. And this illustrates beautifully why the Republicans are cleaning

our clock.

We do not believe in anything. This is how the
American People see us. We have no core principles.