What IS a 'Progressive'?? Or a'REAL Liberal', for that matter?

I hate to admit it, I am still confused. After all this time, I cannot figure out what Progressives stand for vs. the people who claim to be REAL Liberals vs. those that style themselves "died in the wool Leftie's". Throw in the DLC'ers and I am lost. Well, actually, I have figured out that DLC'ers are considered to be Republicans in Democrat's clothing. I have been around the DU long enough to know DLC=BAD. Bad DLC, BAD!

So, is the difference a difference in core beliefs or a difference in how each segment believes those beliefs should be implemented? What do Progressives BELIEVE that is different from what liberals and DLC'ers and Lefties believe?

What makes you one or the other?

Maybe those people who you say claim to be real Liberals will weigh in and edify us both.

I tend to have a fairly simple view of things. My husband and I run two small businesses (one of which a horse farm with 28 head of horses), I homeschool my daughter and have a teenage son. I get most of my info about what is going on here on the DU. I had gotten comfortable about being a Democrat and then started coming here and realized I had to figure out what KIND of Democrat I am. I still confused.

I don't find much interest in doing so. I agree with Toots that it is used because we've let ourselves become ashamed of the term liberal. For that reason, I won't use it. We've walked right into the labels that RushCo has hung on that noble word.

I say we resurrect liberal and use it over and over and claim its virtues as the very essense of our great nation. There's no better place to start than with JFK's acceptance speech found here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/35_kennedy/psources/ps_nyliberal.html

let me be the first "I AM A LIBERAL".

It is a Liberals job to keep Liberty strong, but most of all to keep an eye on Them.

progressives have a different stance toward belief. It's revisable. The "core" belief of a progressive should be valuing the recognition of error and the ability to change course, progressing if you will. Dogma on the other hand has "core beliefs" that withstand the test of things like facts and the real world. Those beliefs are not revisable. This definition allows "core beliefs" to develop in relationship to fact. Not the other way around, as with dogma. We can hold onto beliefs about universal principles of justice because we know what oppression looks like. However we can add or subtract things that don't pass the test of things we find in experience.

Example of Dogma: "Free market will bring forth utopia"
Example of Progressive belief: "Fact is, unregulated markets polarize social classes. Let's rethink this utopia thing."
Example of Dogma: "Communism will bring forth utopia."
Example of Progressive Belief: "Still waiting for communism and democracy to coexist to see if that might be true. As of yet, we've seen dictatorships crush worker rebellions, and little else. It's still pretty open ended."

Example of Dogma: "Corporate interests represent the interests of the people."
Example of Progressive belief: "In the real world, those interests represent the interests of only that organization, and typically only those at the top of the corporate bureaucracy. see dogma #1 from top for the consequence."
Example of Dogma: "Western ideals of freedom are universally valid."
Example of Progressive Belief: "Worldwide conflicts invalidate this assertion and suggest we might be better off discussing what forms of freedom work and more importantly whether our worldwide social engineering is worth the effort (imperialism)."

Distinguishing between these two (dogmatism and progressivism) rather than merely conservative or liberal or even using progressive merely as a stand in for liberal only, avoids the problem of having to deal with dogmatic liberals who seek the same purity that the dogmatic right wingers do. That way we aren't just defining ourselves in opposition to some other political entity. The partisanship will have no end if this is how we define our collective identity and organize our political sensibility. Liberal and conservative have no meaning without the other. However progressive defined in the above way finds its meaning in reference to placing a certain value on truth, rather than sheer unquestionable belief, and opens the door for an actually "progression". That is progressives should define themselves against dogma, so that they too don't fall victim to its propensity to create paradigm blindness in the same manner that most of our critiques suggest of the right(the failure to perceive alternatives, an inability to distinguish the vase from the face, the old lady and young girl, and other gestalt type things).
Anyway that's how I define myself, of course its a project that requires a little help from your friends. "You see you aren't looking at the whole picture here. Look at this over here." That sort of thing.

....besides the fact that I've never liked a lynch mob or Joe McCarthy-style tactics....

is that the DLC actually has thought-out positions on issues, with specific plans and recommendations for action. Moreover, they get things done.

Here's a proposal to deal with chronic health care problems, proposed by the "hated" Joe Lieberman. Notice he's already proposed a bill with bipartisan support. And notice that DLC honcho Tom Vilsack has already gotten the nation's governors on record favoring the idea.

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=131&subid=207&contentid=253646

I rarely if ever see anything like that from the progressive wing..and on DU there's nothing but inchoate wailing divorced from reality.

Chimpy's got to be removed from office. Ho-kay. How would you go about that without bipartisan support?

We have to "get out" of Iraq. Again, how do we do that without bipartisan support and the support of average Americans? (And what happens to the Iraqis now that we've smashed their infrastructure and destrryed their society. What happens to the rest of the world and us now that we've given al Qaeda a shot in the arm?) And if we mindlessly demand that "we get out of Iraq" and the GOP starts bringing some troops home in September and October of 2006 (as it is blindingly apparent they will), won't we look like idiots at the ballot box with our leading issue shot to hell?

and that "plan" your spouting would do absolutely nothing to make health care affordable in this country.

It's your war.

How pathetic.

C'mon.

We need to keep our attention on the goals we work for and not get locked into "it's my way or the highway" kinds of solutions.

For instance, a bipartisan and workable solution to providing affordable health care may not be a single payer system that many here advocate for. While we may still have programs like medicaid, there are other ways to provide coverage for a population as large, as diverse, and as quirky, as we have in the United States. We can find them, and we can make them work for us. There are a lot of ideas being floated by different authors and think tanks.

The goal is to provide affordable health care for all of us in the United States. It is not necessarily to institute a single payer, monolithic health care system.

But, I still can't say I'm a big fan of the DLC. But I suppose they have their strengths. They do need to work better with the other progressives, though. They seem to be quite protective of their power and influence. But that power and influence could disappear if no one trusts them.

if there was a proposal on the table for a single-payer health care system, with specific details of how we might get from here to there...but there isn't.

I'm not unalterably opposed to single-payer if there's a plan that seems feasible. But I want to hear a plan.

And even with a BIG win in 2006, congressional Democrats still going to need bipartisan support for any plan they put forth. It's unlikely we're going to have filibuster proof majorities in both Houses next session.

I don't think the 'far left' gave us Bush. I think a combination of KKKarl Rove and complacency gave us Bush. I honestly think that people who should have known better underestimated their machine.

Ralph Nader...

...and his voters who bought into his "the two parties are the same" crap.

Oh my! That was actually 16 words.

to enough to really hurt the Dems. I am drawing on some pretty hazy memory, though.

Gore lost Florida. Nader voters tipped Florida to Bush.

But I'm pretty sure Democrats who voted for Bush in Florida outnumber Florida Nader voters.

Hmm like branding Democrats as "leftists" Teeny Progressives" "Progressive Purists" "Shits" etc.

Keep posting, you only hurt your cause with each lynch mob or Joe McCarthy-style tactic that you launch.

When the word "Liberal" became to have bad connotations attached people began to call themselves Progressives so they could pretend they were not "Liberal". Progressive is the Cowards way of saying you are a "Liberal". IMO

The Progressive Majority Agenda: A Future Worth Fighting For

No one agrees on everything — especially progressives. But here at Progressive Majority, our focus is on the common sense values that unite us. We're solely devoted to electing people who will lead the fight for economic justice, civil rights, health care, education, the environment, and reproductive freedom.

Most Americans want a more just, more enlightened country — one that pays its workers a living wage, that bans sweatshops and keeps our food safe, that guarantees comprehensive affordable health care for all, that invests in high quality education for our children, that ensures dignity and security for seniors, that protects civil and political rights, that stays out of our bedrooms and private lives, and that works to protect the air we breathe, and the water we drink. These are majority positions — just not in the current Congress or many state legislatures. With your help, we aim to change that fact.

Progressive Majority will recruit candidates and help to finance and organize their campaigns. What will we look for? We'll look for leaders, not careerists; for stalwarts, not trimmers; for workers, not shirkers.

What issues will we expect them to support? A set of issues based on common sense and common decency. Our agenda is designed to unite progressives around a set of core concerns while still allowing us to promote a multi-issue progressive agenda that we expect our candidates to champion.

We're electing progressive leaders on the basis of their principles and their ability to champion a broad progressive agenda. Learn more about some of the positive progressive ideas worth pursuing:
Economic Justice
Civil rights
Health Care
Education
Environment
Reproductive Freedom

What principles will they fight for? The ones that matter to our democracy.

http://www.progressivemajority.org/values/

Personally, I don't think that there is any difference between "real liberals" and progressives.The sad thing is that the Democratic party of today doesn't know where it stands on the issues. That wasn't always the case; when I was a kid (in the '70's) Democrats were fairly reliably pro peace, civil rights, environment, education, gun control,reproductive freedom, gender equality, socialized health care, and anti death penalty, hunger and poverty (both here and abroad-we weren't isolationists). Now dems are only the opposition on a few issues, and even those aren't consistent. It's not surprising that we continue to find ourselves in the minority when the people keep pleading for true opposition (the last poll I read found that something like 60-70% of Americans want their next leader to be "the opposite of Bush").

I am going to check out Progressive Majority.

liber libera, liberum : free, independent, unrestricted.
liber : child, offspring.

liber libri : book.

liberalis : courteous, generous, gentlemanly.

liberaliter : courteously, generously, honorably.

liberatio : release, liberation, aquittal, setting free.

libere : freely, openly, frankly.

libero : to lift (an obstacle), raise.

libero : to set free, deliver, liberate, release / exempt

libertas : freedom, liberty, independence / frankness, candor.

libido : whim, caprice, violent desire, passionate longing.


Foreigners are always confused by the American use of "liberal," particularly in politics.

Outside the USA, "liberal" is used to describe free market, small government republicanism or libertarianism.

Welcome to the Liberal International Website
Liberal International (LI) is the world federation of liberal political parties. Founded in 1947 it has become a pre-eminent network for liberal parties and for the strengthening of liberal democracy around the world.

http://www.liberal-international.org/

... not an either or. Gray, not black or white.

I am "liberal" on most issues, but not all - and to be honest I think anyone who is "liberal" or "convervative" on every issue is probably not the sharpest tool in the shed.

or an enemies list within the party....

progressives are more focused on grassroots organizing for causes/movements not represented in, or shut out from the official political establishment.

Liberals generally work within the political establishment through creating programs and enacting legislation.

I don't see the two as mutually exclusive; in fact, when they work together, we often make real progress that benefits everyone. The labor movement, civil rights, women's right to vote...I think these were progressive movements that eventually were integrated into the political establishment through liberals in government.

I'm something of a combination, I suppose: a progriberal.

Whatta concept :crazy:

Liberal generally means the moderate or "center" of the political spectrum - where as Progressive is certainly Left of "Center" - (Caveat: "Center" has become an ever rightward shifting political benchmark in current politics of the day)

these are the progressive political orgs that might help you in your search for clarity and meaning:

Within the Democratic Party:

Progressive Democrats of America:
http://www.pdamerica.org/
http://pdamerica.org/policy/vision.php

--------------------------------------------

Inside and Independent of the Democratic Party:

Independent Progressive Politics Network:
http://www.ippn.org/
http://www.ippn.org/article.php?ID=unity.html

-----------------------------------------

usual DLC shills to pop up magically and make insulting remarks about Mondale and Dukakis. ;-)

:D

The rest of you are pathetic posers.

(oh, and fuck the DLC!!!1)

TurnLeft
The home of liberalism on the web
Political Glossary

http://www.cjnetworks.com/~cubsfan/glossary.html

Liberal- Signifies an openness to change and respect for individual liberties within a societal framework in which all have equal opportunity (See Rawls Theory of Justice or Walzer's Spheres of Justice)

Progressive- One who actively campaigns for (liberal) change.