Progressive vs. Liberal

[Steely_Dan]

Poll question: Progressive vs. Liberal

So, I've been thinking about this whole "progressive" vs. "liberal" thing. Some think that there is little or no difference while others believe that there is a clear separation. With this in mind, take the following poll:

[ccharles000]

1. I am a liberal and I support Clinton.

[MaineDem]

2. I truly do not know what a Progressive is

I have never been able to figure that out.

[ccharles000]

4. It is what people call themselves when they are afraid of being called liberal.

[LWolf]

22. Not really, since the DLC think tank is the "progressive policy institute." nt

[Forkboy]

30. I love you already!

You nailed it. :toast:

[LordJFT]

41. QFT

[CTyankee]

46. Not me. I think "progressive" is the better term because it denotes

progress, which most people view as positive. A progressive's opponent, then, is a "regressive" which denotes backward thinking and early toileting issues...

[a kennedy]

14. I always thought it was farther left then a liberal....

:toast: :patriot:

[dansolo]

35. I always considered a progressive to be a pragmatic liberal

I view liberals as idealists. There is nothing wrong with that. However, from a practical matter, a lot of liberal ideas cannot be implemented. I believe that progressives want to work towards a liberal position, but in smaller steps, realizing that people will fight against dramatic change, and will actively resist it if it is forced upon them.

I may be wrong, but that is how I view the distinction. I consider Howard Dean to be a progressive, as well as Obama.

[Catherina]

44. A former liberal who refuses to play ball with neoliberalism n/t

[rucky]

3. help us out, here

did we finally agree on a distinction?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

5. exactly....what is the difference? is there an official definition somewhere?

:wtf: :shrug:

[Steely_Dan]

7. I don't know..nor do I care if there...

is an "official" definition. However, wouldn't you agree that let's say....Kucinich supporters would be thought of as more "progressive" than let's say....Biden supporters?

-P

[Tuesday Afternoon]

8. in that reference could you not use the words "progressive" and

"liberal" interchangeably?

as in:
....Kucinich supporters would be thought of as more "liberal" than let's say....Biden supporters?

[Steely_Dan]

11. An important point...

and I see what you are saying. However, as time goes on, I think that there is a growing separation between the two terms.

-P

[Tuesday Afternoon]

17. see post #9 below ...

sounds reasonable to me. thanks :hi:

[insanity]

9. I use progressive because:

In political theory liberalism refers to belief of laissez-faire in both civil and economic issues. In Europe the Liberal Party is often about as centered as can be which is why they usually find themselves in coalitions.

I'm a progressive because I believe the government's role in both civil rights and the economy is to help foster progress and that it is done through carefully leveling the playing field for all comers and that the repressive bullshit of the last 40 years has got us nowhere so we need to start thinking forward.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

10. ok, thanks

in this definition, then would Libertarians be considered Liberal??

I think I consider myself Progressive at this point...

[insanity]

12. Yes and no

Libertarians aren't really liberal because their political philosophy is a sham. They advocate two things that are ultimately opposed to each other. However, the roots of libertarianism do steam from classical liberalism. It would take a lot longer than I have to prove that libertarianism is a fatally flawed philosophy, but to make it short think of textbook liberals as John Locke, John Stuart-Mill, and Adam Smith (all of which saw a place for government intervention to promote a fair state, but advocated laissez-faire as a means to help promote society).

[newmajority]

45. As Thom Hartmann often says

"Libertarians are Republicans who want to smoke dope and get laid."

[Warren Stupidity]

31. yup - plus I view liberals as in favor of legislation I oppose.

WOD - liberal policy I oppose.

Censorship of media - liberal policy I oppose.

Liberals frequently support interventionist military policies, for example Senator Clinton with respect to Iraq, and a long sorry history of liberal cold warriors going back to the beginnings of the post war period.

Liberals tend to favor a lopsidedly pro-likud Israel-Palestine conflict position that has done nothing to resolve this cancerous problem and everything to prolong the misery.

Liberals tend to be all over the place on neo-liberal fundamentalism - thus the confusion within both the Clinton and Obama camps about where exactly they stand on free trade agreements.

I could go on - as a progressive I openly support the development of democratic socialist institutions and policies within a mixed market economic system. Liberals are afraid of the 's' word, despite the fact that their hero FDR brought democratic socialist institutions such as social security into our economic system and other liberals, such as LBJ, extended those programs with wildly popular democratic socialist programs such as medicare that no mainstream politician, no matter how rightwing they are dare attack.

[Bright Eyes]

6. Progressive for Obama.

[Tippy]

13. I always called my self a Liberal...until bush came along....n/t

[Brundle_Fly]

15. PROUD LIBERAL

GºBAMA-MANIAC

[POAS]

16. Liberal supporting Obama

even though he is far too far to the right for my taste he at least appears to be less to the right than Hillary (I opposed NAFTA while I campaigned for NAFTA and even when I said NAFTA was a good thing) Clinton.

[OHdem10]

18. Aren't Progressives those who used to be Liberals but were

too intimidated to stand up to RW Criticisms of "Libruls"

Please I am teasing, here. Could not resist.

[malik flavors]

19. Progressives are basically liberals that don't want the tag liberal, or to be thought of as dirty or

a hippie, or a tree hugger or anything else like that. It's like when the mustang changed to its new cooler, hipper, and more fashionable body style after the old one got dated and boring and nobody wanted to be seen in it anymore.

Progressives = The New Coke

Same as the old coke, but the can is more shiney.

I like to think of myself as a left leaning independent, but I probably lean too far to the left to really be considered independent. I just don't like to fully prescribe to any ideology. I like to think I'm just for whatever's smart, but too often what's smart in my mind is a progressive/liberal belief so in reality that's probably what I am. Whatever...

[Exilednight]

21. New Coke was pretty nasty tasting. n/t

[sellitman]

20. Progressives are self hating Liberals.

They are Liberals who have bought into the right wing BS that Liberal is a dirty word.

IMHO

[Exilednight]

23. Guess who is a self hating Liberal .......

I won't ruin the surprise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2oOoCdFblc

[MH1]

24. Er, I am a progressive liberal.

Unfortunately many people use the term "progressive" when they really mean "radical" but don't like to call it what it is. So "progressive" is now meaningless - may as well just go back to "liberal".

(Radical = rapid, "overnight" change - throw out the old completely and impose something entirely different. Progressive = gradual change (not necessarily at a glacial pace though) that moves from where we are to where we need to go.)

[xchrom]

25. i'm a liberal progressive. nt

[Warren Stupidity]

26. Progressive and Obama is my 3rd choice centrist candidate.

And it was nearly a toss up between him and Senator Clinton way back in February after Edwards dropped out. Since then, due to the campaign tactics and behavior of Senator Clinton, my support for Senator Obama has gone from weak to strong.

[JohnnyLib2]

27. Liberal supporting Clinton, with Obama a close second.

I've been called a progressive locally. The term seems not to be well established, yet.

[NorthCarolina]

28. Liberal and Progressive are interchangeable

when the Republicans successfully used their media connections to give a bad connotation to the word "Liberal", liberals began to move towards the moniker "Progressive" as a means to defuse the negative media banter. Kucinich is a Liberal/Progressive and he has identified himself with both words. Obama is a left leaning moderate whereas Clinton is a DLC corporate conservative.

[depakid]

40. Nope- there's a difference

Both historically and in contemporary terms.

One of the hallmarks of liberalism is that it turns first to government to solve policy problems with major programs.

Progressives, on the other hand look to whatever means look to solve policy problems- and those include the non-profit and private sector as well as government.

There are other differences between old guard liberals and progressives as well.

[H2O Man]

29. Progressive, which is distinct

from liberal. However, I have many family members and friends who are liberals. They are on the right path. I must be patient.

[RichardRay]

32. Some definition

Think for a minute where you stand on economic justice and how it is to be acheived. Do you believe in price controls? Corporate citizenship? How much taxation? How much top down control from the Federal government? Social legislation?

Get a real sense of where you are viscerally on issues like those, then start with this piece:

Progressive vs. Liberal - What's In a Name?

See where that gets you, and consider a little more research.

'Liberal' vs. 'Progressive' is a very slippery distinction, be pretty careful arguing about 'which one you are'. For those who've come here out of places further left, it looks like the Stalinists vs. the Maoists vs. the Trots vs. the SomeObscureIdealFromLithuaniaIsts.

[Carrieyazel]

33. Why doesn't Obama say that he's a "proud, liberal Democrat?"

He's running away from it. Trying to distance himself from it.

Kerry 2.0 anyone?

[BlooInBloo]

34. "Progressive" is for liberals who are to cowardly to fight for their name.

[lastliberalintexas]

36. I am a Socialist and I support neither

You didn't have an other option. :)


Seriously, why there is so much drama between the supporters of 2 moderate to centrist candidates is beyond me.

[Steely_Dan]

37. My Take....

As the person who started this thread, I'm pleased that it didn't turn into another cat fight...it got close, but everyone is sticking to the subject at hand.

I thought that it was an important question because of the infighting that is going on here. I wanted to see if there was a separation between the two terms, perceived or otherwise and how it "might" relate to the divisiveness.

With all due respect to those that hate labels (I being one), I believe that they are a necessary evil. I somewhat agree with those that see "progressive" as members who are running from the term "liberal" after it has been trashed for so many years.

And again, with respect to the post with the link on the subject, there is some valuable information there as well. However, in keeping with "perception is reality" in most cases, clearly defined terms seldom reflect the real world.

As for my self...
Rightly or wrongly, I have always seen "progressive" as referring to those who are somewhat to the left of liberals. One post used the word "radical." I would agree with this. Further, I see liberals as those who would like to achieve progressive goals, but they understand that it does not happen overnight. For me, liberals want to ultimately embrace progressive ideas and goals...however, they are well aware that the system does not allow for "radical" change and choose to work well within the system.

An example for me would be Kucinich. IMHO, Kucinich supporters were more radical in what they wanted to achieve "now." We would all like to see much of what Kucinich stands for come to reality. However, it exists on the political pendulum that is light-years from where we find ourselves now. Jerry Brown was pretty much cut from the same cloth. Both have been labeled as radical and in some cases, "nuts." There can be no other explanation (other than RW smearing) than the fact that they are so far from the accepted norm, that they are not considered viable by both the mainstream media and by most people.

Here's how I see it...
Ever since RR, we have been moving to the right. In some cases we have moved at such speed that many of us on the left have been caught off guard. Even Bill Clinton was "moderate" in terms of being a liberal. I don't know about you, but the re-election of George W. Bush was such a shock that I had only to conclude that this country is far more conservative than I had ever imagined. In many ways, we on the left, were asleep at the wheel over the past thirty years. Many of us were so complacent about the changing political atmosphere in our country that we woke up one day to a world we no longer recognized.

I tend to look at it as a pendulum. This pendulum has been swinging to the right for many years now. All of us, whether we are progressive or liberal would like to have that pendulum start swinging the other way. We all agree on this. Where we disagree is how to go about it...what methods are best employed to make this happen? For many progressives, the dream would be that the pendulum disappears from the right and magically reappear on the left. For me, this is impossible.

Progressives (IMHO) would like to see that change happen now....happen yesterday. They will put forward candidates that represent immediate change. The flaw in this approach is that it is not palatable to most of the electorate. I wish it weren't so, but Americans (and people in general) are not into "actual" change. It is also the reason why third party candidates have not been successful. Rightly or wrongly, the electorate sees them as too much change, too fast.

So what are we left with?
If it is accepted that change cannot happen overnight, we are left with working within the system. Even if the system is broken, the electorate would never allow for a wholesale overhaul of the government during one term in office. This is what concerns many of us with regard to Mr. Obama. He is using well-honed methods that appeal to people's desire for change...especially coming off of the heels of one of the worst presidents in our history. Whether scripted or natural, Mr. Obama's approach has struck a chord. My fear is that he will be unable to accomplish his goal of "changing the way we do politics" or the "way we do government."

All politicians voice how much they will "change" the way things are. However, how many times have we had our hopes dashed on the shore of despair once our "dream candidate" got into office. This is not a slam on Mr. Obama. I hope and pray that he can deliver the change that he promises. I just simply haven't seen it delivered in the past.

But back to the main point...
It is my view that we can only have change when we can get the pendulum to start swinging the other way...back to the left. This election cycle was a time to get our bearings back, not make presidential history. It was a time to get the pendulum to start swinging the other way...little by little, back to the left.

I personally feel that both Clinton and Obama represents risks that we could not afford to take at this time in our history.
Hillary Clinton is so disliked by the right that no other candidate has come into the picture with higher negative numbers. Many people have the same visceral reaction to her that we have when we think of Bush. It is a hurdle that I doubt she could overcome in the GE. Mr. Obama has his own issues with the electorate (some, not of his own doing). Unfortunately, I believe that he will be seen as too radical by the electorate on the right (and even some on the left)...he is this change that people talk about but are unwilling to make happen. Does this mean that I dislike Mr. Obama? Of course not. It is simply my belief that this country "is farther to the right" than we ever imagined. Our passion, or hopes and dreams want this to happen, but the ugly head of racism and bigotry are never more prevalent than when narrow minded people pull the lever at their polling stations.

Ask anyone on the right if Mr. Obama's race effects their vote. Nearly all will say..."of course not." But it is a different story once they pull the curtain. I wish it weren't so. It is about time we have a person of color holding the highest office in the land.

And so...
Progressive goals are honorable and even achievable. However, the progressive method for getting there (IMHO) is flawed. I consider myself a liberal because I know that the only way to get things done is to embrace the "reality based world." This means that as much as I hate the system, (in most cases) it can only be changed from within.

We had a huge number of qualified candidates with little or no baggage...with the most experience and skill. Unfortunately, they all occupied the bottom tier and were quickly dismissed. Now we have taken what should have been a shoe-in in November and made it a horse-race. Only the Dems could have taken the only two candidates remaining and pitted them against each other on some of the most passionate issues of our time...race and gender. Only the Dems could have torn back the thin veneer of our own issues with race and gender and exposed them to the rest of the world. Only the Dems.

So, to all of the progressives...good luck making that pendulum magically appear back on the left. And to the liberals...nice job getting us a viable candidate. November should be very interesting.

-P

[Steely_Dan]

42. What?

Anyone want to respond to my rather long-winded post??? Any takers.

-P

[book_worm]

38. Aren't liberals and progressives the same thing?

[NaturalHigh]

39. I'm a conservative Democrat, and I support neither.

It's possible that I will vote for Obama in the GE - and then run home to take a shower and some pepto bismol.

[RiverStone]

43. What makes you "conservative" vs your more progressive Dem buds?

Just curious :hi:

[iamthebandfanman]

47. i support Obama

but only because i have too.

and i embrace the word/term liberal joyfully!

[Radical Activist]

48. Historically, progressive was a catch-all term for the far left.

It might include liberals but also radicals, Marxists, anarchists and so on. In modern times I don't think there's any meaningful difference between the two words.

[newmajority]

49. I'm a proud Liberal

I don't like the word "progressive" because the definition seems to change dramatically depending on who is using it. True, you have some good, left of center Democrats calling themselves "progressives", but then you also have the DLC subsidiary, the "Progressive Policy Institute", which is essentially a whitewashed PNAC, and NOT anything a Liberal would want to be associated with. Hillary Clinton refers to herself as a "Progressive". Interpret that however you like, given the previous information.

Since the Kennedys have been invoked a lot on this board lately (whether for good or for bad, and a lot of it bad, unfortunately) maybe we should remember that JFK said he was "proud to be a Liberal". And indeed, given the miserable failures of the last 28 years of neo-conservatism, I'd say Liberalism and the record of Liberal accomplishment in this country are things to be proud of. :)