What is your definition of liberal?

[OmahaBlueDog]

Inspired by this survey thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024444398

What is your definition of liberal?

Does a person have to agree with every.single.aspect. of your definition? Are there some issues on which liberals can disagree?

What is the difference between a liberal and a progressive?

[VanillaRhapsody]

1. I think we should ask Hillary Clinton about the Progressive part as she was the first one

I ever heard use the term...(much to the consternation of some).

[OmahaBlueDog]

5. I heard "Progressive" start being used frequently in '04

Air America used it a lot. I think it really started becoming used because the conservative media made "liberal" a bad word with independent voters. I think the term has increasingly become associated with politicians including (not limited to): Al Franken, Howard Dean, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren -- and is differentiated from politicians like Hillary Clinton, Diane Feinstein, Chuck Schumer.

...but if you want to ask Hillary, sure - why not?

[VanillaRhapsody]

7. before then!

[OmahaBlueDog]

10. Well ...yeah. Henry Wallace ran on the Progressive Populist ticket

I think the term originally came in around the time of TR.

[VanillaRhapsody]

14. Yeah well Progressive was used in the early 1900's too...

[democrat2thecore]

9. Good point

I think the term "progressive" to me means a greater amount of political energy is spent on more economically "progressive" ideals.

[democrat2thecore]

6. It was used much earlier than Hillary

I remember a couple of the '76 candidates using the term in the primaries.

[hfojvt]

15. a certain magazine just turned 100 a few years ago

http://progressive.org/

[Bluenorthwest]

90. Here's a Vonnegut interview from the Progressive that speaks to the subject matter of the thread

http://progressive.org/mag_intv0603

[hootinholler]

23. Figures she would co-opt the term

She is no progressive, she is the poster child for the conservative wing of the party.

[VanillaRhapsody]

26. Who decides that?

and I guess that means when she gets the primary you aren't voting Democrat huh?

[hootinholler]

30. How I may or may not vote is big leap to make.

Who decides what? That Hillary isn't a progressive? Everyone individually get to decide for themselves. Hopefully most will actually know her history when they choose.

Personally, I'm pretty confident she won't win the primary. If the republicans are smart they will campaign for her in the primaries. Why? Truman's law.

[VanillaRhapsody]

32. Then why beat up on Democrats now?

like you just did


Personally I am pretty confident she WILL win the primary and so are most people...

by the way...some Republican women agree with YOU ....they are not sure if they want to vote against Hillary either!

[hootinholler]

34. Um how exactly am I beating up on Democrats?

Pointing out that Hillary is not progressive nor a liberal isn't exactly earth shattering news, is it?

Your last sentence about republican women agreeing with me doesn't make sense to me. What exactly is your assertion there?

[VanillaRhapsody]

36. by saying that you might not even vote for her...even if she wins the primary

thats pretty telling....

[hootinholler]

37. And making things up about what I said is pretty telling as well.

That is a baseless assertion on your part.

Where exactly did I say that?

[VanillaRhapsody]

38. Its pretty easy to see....

couching it doesn't work with me....and because I KNOW what Truman's law is...

by the way....she has more odds in her favor than anyone we have ever seen in our lifetimes...THAT is why.

and here are 16 reasons why not only will she win the primary...she will WIN in 2016

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/03/16-reasons-why-hillary-clinton-will-win-2016.html

and THAT comes from a Conservative woman...

As a lifelong Republican, I am not pleased with my own prediction—nothing would thrill me more than if a conservative were to win back the presidency. But my political reality instincts lead me to believe the following. (And I’ve been right before: in January 2011, I cowrote “12 Reasons Obama Wins in 2012.”)

[hootinholler]

39. I'm not couching anything

You however are making things up about what I've actually said. Please stop it.

I'm glad you understand Truman's law. He also had some experience with long odds as well. I never said how I would vote one way or the other.

I did point out that Hillary is a poster child for the right wing of the party. I did assert that Truman's law would apply to her if she gained the nomination. Neither of those assertions is applicable to how I might vote almost 3 years from now.

[VanillaRhapsody]

40. "poster child for the right wing of the party."

is bullshit...and why I don't believe you....


Hillary Rodham Clinton holds a commanding 6 to 1 lead over other Democrats heading into the 2016 presidential campaign, while the Republican field is deeply divided with no clear front-runner, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Clinton trounces her potential primary rivals with 73 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, reinforcing a narrative of inevitability around her nomination if she runs. Vice President Biden is second with 12 percent, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) is third with 8 percent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/for-2016-hillary-clinton-has-commanding-lead-over-democrats-gop-race-wide-open/2014/01/29/188bb3f4-8904-11e3-833c-33098f9e5267_story.html

73%! Clearly 73% of Democrats are "Rightwingers" huh?

Her lead is the largest recorded in an early primary matchup in at least 30 years of Post-ABC polling.

[hootinholler]

41. She was featured prominently on the DLC website

The DLC, which is the right wing of the Democratic party who after realizing people figured that out, changed their name to the Third Way.

Like it or not those people are the right wing of the party. Those are her people, she helped found the DLC when Bill was first running.

That Hillary is some sort of liberal is what's bullshit.

[VanillaRhapsody]

43. So?

can 73% of Democrats all be "Rightwing"?

Apparently (like the teaparty is) you are in a minority in your beliefs and don't realize it...they don't realize it either...

[hootinholler]

45. Are you trying to insinuate that I am a teabagger?

That's an odd way of convincing others that your candidate is the best for the country.

[VanillaRhapsody]

46. did I say that? No I didn't ...

I said that you are convinced that you are in a majority when you are clearly not...Just like they are...that is the only similarity that I know of...

[hootinholler]

48. ROFLMAO

Where did I say I think I'm in any majority?

Again you are putting words in my mouth. Please stop doing that.

I said things like Hillary is a leading member of the right wing of the Democratic party. She is not liberal. She is not a progressive.

[VanillaRhapsody]

50. Well you said what you said about Hillary....seemingly as if SHE isn't a force to be reckoned with

you dismissed her as if no one who considers themselves a liberal could possibly support her...

yet 73% do!

with a COMMANDING lead...

[hootinholler]

53. Yes, I believe she will not win the primary

Damn the torpedos! Full speed ahead!

There are way too many candidates out there for that 73% to mean anything about what will happen in the primaries which are a long way away.

Will she be heard from? Yes. I bet she even attempts to move left in her campaign.

The thing is that the people know we need someone like Liz Warren or Bernie Sanders. Someone who will actually look out for the little guy.

[VanillaRhapsody]

55. So you are expecting something terrible to happen to Hillary?

Bernie Sanders is NOT a Democrat...AND Hillary is beating Elizabeth Warren like a drum...(she won't run against her). And the only reason that Martin O'Malley might run is to get a shot at VP...so


Hillary will be a fine candidate...with or without YOUR support.

[hootinholler]

60. Correct, Bernie has principles

Martin might make a fine VP.

It's a long time until the primaries start. You might be surprised by Liz. If she were to say anything about running other than I'm not, she would be forced into a campaign mode which would limit her effectiveness in the Senate right now.

There could be others. Hell, Dean could make a difference by then.

[pretzel4gore]

78. the nazipoohs hate the term 'right wing'

they very afraid of it. It says EVERYTHING. Rightwing stands for 'privilege of the few' over the 'needs of the many' (leftwing) ...that's from the pre french revolutionary National Assembly, where the reps of the wealthy, the landowners, the church, the king, and the military, iow the 'ruling elite' sat on the right, when the reps of the rabble (and we were loud and very obnoxious1 lol sat on the left...after a session, the aristocratic boors demanded the left side of the aisle be hosed down!
2500 people were killed in the 'reign of terror' (800 had noggins cut off by lady guillotine!)
unfortunately, the revolution ended with the fall of USSR.

[oldandhappy]

2. Someone who can talk about ideas.

Someone who can get excited about ideas. Information, stories, facts, experiences. For me, liberals eat up all of this. For me liberals are not stuck in an agenda or mind set.

Progressives care about people and want to push ideas, programs that will be good for people. I see progressives as a subset of liberals. Progressives push for the action.

And now I will click on your blue thread!

[oldandhappy]

3. oh, it is a poll.

Well, I hope you get some interesting responses. Will check back later, smile.

[orpupilofnature57]

4. A Liberal is inclusive, A conservative is exclusive,,

and Progressives want Liberals to Include those who Exclude, so we can all get along, in the name of progress, I guess that's the difference, Liberals won't pay the price for continuity .

[PlanetaryOrbit]

92. Almost everyone is exclusive of some things

Most liberals don't want Creationism taught in schools, for instance.

[orpupilofnature57]

93. Most people don't make it an art form .

[Starry Messenger]

8. Liberal: believes in reformed capitalism & the power of the markets to bring social change.

Economic views can run the gamut, but generally supports social safety net programs. Can be hawkish on foreign policy, depending.

Progressive, more strongly pro-union and activist. Supports higher taxes on wealthy and more active on social/equality laws. Tends to be more plugged into the grassroots.

(Note: I consider myself more left of either of these two, but appreciate alliances across the center-left spectrum where possible.)

[OmahaBlueDog]

11. Hubert Humphrey

Economic views can run the gamut, but generally supports social safety net programs. Can be hawkish on foreign policy, depending.

[TBF]

25. ^^ this ^^

I saw that poll ... everything I've read on here indicates the place was much more liberal/progressive/anti-establishment prior to the Obama years. I think that makes a lot of sense because the earliest folks were probably the more activist types. Many of us who came in with the Obama election were likely more pragmatic in terms of getting someone elected (ie anyone other than another dangerous repug - I am pretty far left myself in theory but I can also identify what will actually win in this country). There's definitely some pushback between the pragmatists and idealists, but sometimes I think that is created more by trolls fanning the flames than anything else.

[VanillaRhapsody]

27. Says who? You know this poll had an agenda right? and that some folks ignored it...

AND I have been told that the proprietors of this establishment support President Obama....

So are you going to vote them off the island too?

[TBF]

71. lol - you have no need to attack me

I worked on the Obama campaign.

Co-captain Precinct 58, Brazoria County, south of Houston

So don't even ...

[Starry Messenger]

56. On anti-war stuff before 2008, DU definitely trended more left.

Like you, I'm pragmatic about electoral options, but I get weirded out when people support policies they would have condemned under Bush.

That also creates fertile ground for right-wing trolls to slip into.

[TBF]

70. Yes -

on all points.

[VanillaRhapsody]

73. Yes...AND Obama has ended ONE and is winding down the other...

FYI on your myopic "points"

[TBF]

74. This really isn't

Necessary ...

Most dems supported Obama either because they really liked him or were convinced he could win. Has DU become more conservative as a result? I doubt it although people may withhold criticism sometimes out of respect for him. That probably happened more in the first term - there's no reelection to worry about now.

Most of us recognize that he's been a decent president who has been stonewalled by an insane GOP.

We'll continue to fight for more progressive policies and candidates .. This shouldn't be a surprise.

[VanillaRhapsody]

75. but you neglect to take into consideration...DU is NOT representative of Americans in general.

Some DU'rs have made it their mission to destroy anyone who supports this Successful Democratic President....successful against the obstruction AND the odds...

[TBF]

80. And I would submit to you that some of those DUers

are trolls. You've got to see that. There are certain folks on here who do nothing but stir the pot.

DU isn't going to be representative of America in general because it's for democrats, and early on I would imagine it attracted people who were very interested in politics.

That is why you will see me being generally supportive of Hillary Clinton as well (though I am usually killed for it) - because at this point I see her as more electable than many others. Although there are a few younger dems like Warren (possibly) or O'Malley that might be able to put together a winning campaign. The reality is a 2-party system and I know what that means.

I'll still advocate for left positions though. A president can do a lot but he/she is mostly an administrator. The big changes come from people marching and advocating - elections are a small part of what is important in my view.

[VanillaRhapsody]

81. I agree....the bashing of folks for supporting Democratic candidates on a Democratic forum is the

real problem...

[VanillaRhapsody]

12. Here is the list of those in the Progressive Caucus...

Arizona[edit]
Raúl Grijalva (AZ-3, Tucson) - co-chair
Ed Pastor (AZ-7, Phoenix)
California[edit]
Jared Huffman (CA-2, San Rafael)
George Miller (CA-11, Richmond)
Barbara Lee (CA-13, Oakland) - whip
Michael Honda (CA-17, San Jose) - vice chair
Sam Farr (CA-20, Monterey)
Judy Chu (CA-27, El Monte) - vice chair
Henry Waxman (CA-33, Los Angeles)
Xavier Becerra (CA-34, Los Angeles)
Karen Bass (CA-37, Baldwin Hills)
Linda Sánchez (CA-38, Lakewood)
Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-40, Los Angeles)
Mark Takano (CA-41, Riverside)
Maxine Waters (CA-43, Inglewood)
Janice Hahn (CA-44, San Pedro)
Colorado[edit]
Jared Polis (CO-2, Boulder, Fort Collins)
Connecticut[edit]
Rosa DeLauro (CT-3, New Haven)
Florida[edit]
Corrine Brown (FL-5, Jacksonville)
Alan Grayson (FL-9, Orlando)
Lois Frankel (FL-22, West Palm Beach)
Georgia[edit]
Hank Johnson (GA-4, Lithonia)
John Lewis (GA-5, Atlanta)
Illinois[edit]
Luis Gutiérrez (IL-4, Chicago)
Danny Davis (IL-7, Chicago)
Jan Schakowsky (IL-9, Chicago) - vice chair
Indiana[edit]
André Carson (IN-7, Indianapolis)
Iowa[edit]
Dave Loebsack (IA-2, Cedar Rapids)
Maine[edit]
Chellie Pingree (ME-1, North Haven)
Maryland[edit]
Donna Edwards (MD-4, Fort Washington)
Elijah Cummings (MD-7, Baltimore)
Massachusetts[edit]
Jim McGovern (MA-2, Worcester)
Joseph P. Kennedy III (MA-4, Newton)
John Tierney (MA-6, Salem)
Mike Capuano (MA-7, Boston)
Michigan[edit]
John Conyers (MI-13, Detroit)
Minnesota[edit]
Keith Ellison (MN-5, Minneapolis) - Co-Chair
Rick Nolan (MN-8, Crosby)
Mississippi[edit]
Bennie Thompson (MS-2, Bolton)
Missouri[edit]
William Lacy Clay, Jr. (MO-1, St. Louis)
Emanuel Cleaver (MO-5, Kansas City) - Former Chairman, Congressional Black Caucus
Nevada[edit]
Steven Horsford (NV-4, Las Vegas)
New Hampshire[edit]
Ann McLane Kuster (NH-2, Hopkinton)
New Jersey[edit]
Frank Pallone (NJ-6, Long Branch)
Rush Holt (NJ-12, Hopewell Township)
New Mexico[edit]
Ben R. Luján (NM-3, Santa Fe)
New York[edit]
Nydia Velázquez (NY-7, Brooklyn)
Hakeem Jeffries (NY-8, Brooklyn)
Yvette Clarke (NY-9, Brooklyn)
Jerrold Nadler (NY-10, Manhattan)
Carolyn Maloney (NY-12, Manhattan)
Charles Rangel (NY-13, Harlem)
José Serrano (NY-15, Bronx)
Louise Slaughter (NY-25, Rochester)
North Carolina[edit]
Mel Watt (NC-12, Charlotte)
Ohio[edit]
Marcy Kaptur (OH-9, Toledo)
Marcia Fudge (OH-11, Warrensville Heights), Chair, Congressional Black Caucus
Oregon[edit]
Earl Blumenauer (OR-3, Portland)
Suzanne Bonamici (OR-1, Beaverton)
Peter DeFazio (OR-4, Eugene)
Pennsylvania[edit]
Chaka Fattah (PA-2, Philadelphia)
Matt Cartwright (PA-17, Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, Pottsville)
Rhode Island[edit]
David Cicilline (RI-1, Providence) - vice chair
Tennessee[edit]
Steve Cohen (TN-9, Memphis)
Texas[edit]
Sheila Jackson Lee (TX-18, Houston) - vice chair
Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30, Dallas)
Vermont[edit]
Peter Welch (VT-At Large)
Virginia[edit]
Jim Moran (VA-8, Alexandria)
Washington[edit]
Jim McDermott (WA-7, Seattle)
Wisconsin[edit]
Mark Pocan (WI-2, Madison)
Gwen Moore (WI-4, Milwaukee)
Non-voting[edit]
Donna M. Christensen (Virgin Islands)
Eleanor Holmes Norton (District of Columbia)


So many Democrats....yet I don't hear much chatter about ALL these candidates from those on DU who claim to have the high ground on what is or isn't Progressive or Liberal.

[bigwillq]

13. The opposite of Obama

[Jamaal510]

54. That's not what the Republicans think. eom

[bigwillq]

84. I don't care what those fools think.

They're never right, either.

[Springslips]

16. Two types that are somewhat opposite.

Classic liberalism and classic conservativism do not resemble what those term mean in the modern political sense. In fact, some parts of modern liberalism is classically conservative, and parts of modern conservativism are classically liberal.

The main divide between classic con and classic lib is the idea of the nature of man, and thereby how he should be govern. In Classic Conservativism, man is looked at as being animalistic; his primitive nature is Hobbian; man is wolf to man. Therefor government needs to be strong and controlling, less society collapses to a Hobbian state.

In classic liberalism, man is essentially good, and lives with harmony as a primitive state. Therefor government needs to be weak and not controlling, less it oppresses and snuffs the goodness of man.

This is why modern conservative economic policies are called LIBERAL freemarketism. ( a term that confuses many.) meanwhile, neo-conservatism is so called as it believes in a strong government to create the Hegalian end to history. Both are part of GOP conservativism, but they really don't fit. Neither does Ayn Rand Objectionist ( highly classically liberal) fit with Christian Fundamentalism ( highly classically conservativism.)

Modern liberalism is just as comprised of different classical flavors. Groups formed by identity are often classical conservative, while socialist are highly classically liberal. Pro labor is highly classically conservative, while anti-authoritarians are highly classically liberal. You can see the fault lines of these ideas in almost every inner-party argument here on DU.

When you look at it this way, it is hard to defined the ideologies in a modern sense; it seems like a ready-made jigsaw of different group forced together by FOTA. Yet we also feel more connected. So my answer to what is a liberal is: ???????????

[Egalitarian Thug]

19. And has this come about by accident? I don't think so.

Obviously Noam Chomsky is the first name that comes to mind in discussing this topic.

By conflating and confusing words over a period of time, they lose their meaning and then the idea behind the word is lost.

[VanillaRhapsody]

28. Noam Chomsky is NOT a Democrat....

which is what I keep trying to say in the first place...

You cannot compare Liberal Democrats to full on Socialists...

[Egalitarian Thug]

31. Party affiliation is completely irrelevant to this topic, and to the larger question of

"liberalism, what makes it?" it is even less relevant.

This is about language and the manipulation of it, and in that regard, there are no greater authorities than Dr. Chomsky.

[VanillaRhapsody]

33. No this is about Democratic Underground...

How can you compare posters on THIS board to Noam Chomsky...that is ridic!

[MannyGoldstein]

58. I'm curious... Which of Chomsky's positions do you feel

are more extreme than those held by most on DU?

[Springslips]

44. Not sure what Chomsky's position is on this.

But mine is that today's conservative and liberal are myths. The parties are not about ideologies but are just the fraction of competing elites. The ideologies are myths told to the followers; identities, to pit us versus them, divide and conquer, to keep a voting base. It doesn't work fully as the democratic tradition bends the elites to their constituents will ( see the GOP re: tea-party.)

Be that as it may I still call myself a liberal, half knowing that it is just a simulacrum concept. It is more connected to living well, and too reality than conservativism is. Though it's phantasmic nature is revealed in conversation like today's: one where a DU member was calling drug legalist's, Ayn Rand libertarians. What? I could had sworn that legalization was a heavily liberal position. She though, thinks the other way.

Which is it? Can we agree?

[Egalitarian Thug]

49. Not a political position, rather a linguistic analysis. Your first reply was essentially what

he's been saying since at least the '70s. Through deliberate steps, meaning has been stripped from any of these labels. I'm like you and when asked identify as a liberal just because it's easier than explaining. But at this point the liberal/conservative labels have lost all meaning.

Edit: Just look at the subject of the OP, What is your definition...? That the word's meaning has become so completely subjective it no longer has any meaning at all.

[Springslips]

57. Yeepers.

I really wish we could have a parliamentary system, so as to empower more parties. That way we can find something more in-line ( or even party shop) and not have purity battles, Clinton-v-warren, ect. Just join the party more in-line with your values. We'd still join forces, of course, to build coalition governments and to thwart the righties. I'd like to see how many would jump the Democratic ship and join the Green, the Socialist or a new party. ( I would favor a pro-union labor party.)

But it is what it is.

[Egalitarian Thug]

69. It would go a long way to stifling their power.

With only two teams to buy, our political system has been turned in to the Harlem Globetrotters and the Washington Generals, a side show to keep the sheeple entertained while they do what they want to.

A parliamentary system would make that strategy very expensive.

[pampango]

85. Nice post. Helps to explain why the verb "liberalize" means to "open up" or "remove restrictions".

lib·er·al·ize verb

: to make (something) less strict or more liberal

: to become less strict or more liberal

"The country's immigration policies have begun to liberalize."

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberalize

In social policy liberalization may refer to a relaxation of laws restricting for example divorce, abortion, or drugs. Regarding civil rights, it may refer to the elimination of laws prohibiting same-sex sexual relations, same-sex marriage, interracial marriage, or interfaith marriage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalization

[Beearewhyain]

17. It's in my sig line

No, no one is has to agree with everything I think as everyone has the right to be wrong.

As far as the lib/prog thing. I think that the difference is rather nebulous as they are mostly identical in ideology but in general, self described progressives place a higher priority on social issues while liberals view economics as more important. Just my couple of pennies.

[doc03]

18. The righties have made liberal the definition of a left

wing extremist. Since some Democrats adopted the word Progressive I notice people
like O'Riely have started to substitute progressive for liberal. Whatever you call yourself
the Repugs will make it a dirty word and repeat it enough so the low information voters at
Fox beleive it.

[Blue_In_AK]

20. Coincidentally, someone just posted this to my Facebook page

Works for me.

[Earth_First]

22. +1 nt

[RobertEarl]

21. Liberal vs conservative

Liberal is one who is open minded, willing to explore alternatives, and in government is one that focuses on the whole being progressively better.

A conservative is one who thinks the best is what he has, is not willing to explore or be open minded, and in government focuses on controlling individuals so that the con feels safe.

Liberals can accept some danger in change, cons are afraid of change.

[frwrfpos]

24. we should just stop the pretenses

and have the Democratic Party put Dick Cheney on the ticket as a Democrat. full support of capitalism, free trade, and mocking lip service to social issues.

This country is fucked and bought and paid for. I find these pointless verbal exercises a waste of time.

[VanillaRhapsody]

29. ^^^^^ this is what tthe problem is right here...

anyone that doesn't fit your particular bent....is equated to Dick Cheney!

and the epitome of an example of purity policing...

[OmahaBlueDog]

63. It is a big part of what is making DU suck.

[Cha]

35. I'll repost my definition that was posted on said thread..

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.

2.
a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.

b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.(Lots of Pizza!

3. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/liberal

Semantics.. we are who we are and it's good to be here among the reality based community,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=edit&forum=1002&thread=4444398&pid=4445311

[Lost_Count]

42. No true Scotsman standards...

[MannyGoldstein]

47. A person who 1. has human happiness as their highest goal, and

2. Makes decisions based on evidence.

A Progressive, nowadays, is someone whose allowed the Right to steal the word "Liberal".

[OmahaBlueDog]

64. I would assert that Randian Objectivists believe that they make decisions based on evidence.

...the human happiness part, not so much.

I like John Rawls theory of the "Veil of Ignorance". One makes decisions with blindness to one's actual place or position in life. I this scenario, one might actually be a rich white male, but would decide issues based on the possibility they could actually be a poor Native American woman. That is a gross oversimplification of what Rawls wrote, but many brain cells have died since those Poli Sci lectures. Dumbed way down, I think the first quality of a Liberal would be that they would put the interests of others before their own.

When considering the interests of others, I see Liberals believing the following:

Liberals believe that the government has a role in protecting the governed. Generally, that means defending the weak from the strong. Specifically, it means protecting the poor from the disproportionate power of the moneyed; protecting the employee from the disproportionate power of the employer; and protecting minorities from the disproportionate power of majorities -- whether those majorities are racial, spiritual, or ethnic.

[KentuckyWoman]

51. Liberal has little to do with issues

In general liberals are going to stand up to the powerful on behalf the underdog. We may disagree about who or what the underdog is. We may wrestle with what path is best to accomplish the goals. At the heart of liberalism though is the belief all living things deserve some level of respect and that all humans deserve justice, economic opportunity, personal liberty and basic respect.

[bhikkhu]

52. Someone who believes that people are basically good, honest, and hard-working

and everything else follows from that. I don't think you could separate those three things from one another, though many more could be added.

And. yes, a person has to agree with every single aspect. Its a very simple proposition, but how we think of people in general is the basis for most every other kind of thought; political thought certainly included.

[MannyGoldstein]

59. Oooh. I like!

[bhikkhu]

66. Thanks.

I should qualify that a little better though - most people want to be hard-working, that's in our nature.

People are happiest when they have a purpose to put their shoulder to, and a body or mind up to the task. Not everyone is so fortunate, but there is enough credit to go around that that should be the beginning assumption for anyone.

[DreamGypsy]

61. Ten degrees to the left of center...

...in good times; ten degrees to the right of center when it affects them personally.

Guess I have to agree with Phil Ochs. BTW, I "self-identify" as Liberal/Progressive/Whatever, but if pressured I will confess to most of the character faults Phil identifies, eg.

Once I was young and impulsive
I wore every conceivable pin
Even went to the socialist meetings
Learned all the old union hymns
But I've grown older and wiser
And that's why I'm turning you in
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal

[Bluenorthwest]

89. Ochs 'self identified' as 'a left social democrat who became an early revolutionary'

Just for context.

[DreamGypsy]

91. Correct...at least after the Chicago convention in '68..

...which was a turning point in his thought, as his 1969 album Rehearsals for Retirement highlighted:

PHIL OCHS
(AMERICAN)
BORN: EL PASO, TEXAS, 1940
DIED: CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, 1968

It's interesting to contrast Phil and Dylan. Both were major chroniclers of the events of the 60's and 70's, but Bob was generally more of an observer, an office reporter of the news, while Phil was an on the ground, happening live journalist. Of course, both wrote great songs. Dylan now has a much greater legacy and portfolio. I often wonder how Phil and his would have evolved and what his legacy would be if his mental problems had not led to suicide in 1976 - we'll never know...

[Ed Suspicious]

62. FDR without the internment camps.

Or LBJ without Vietnam.

[Art_from_Ark]

67. Yeah, LBJ without Vietnam

or RFK on the campaign trail.

[Agnosticsherbet]

65. Liberalism, as a political philosophy,

holds as core concepts a belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual. In action it attempts to protect the political and civil liberties of individuals. For liberals government is a crucial instrument for amelioration of social inequities as those involving race, gender, or class. Economically, liberalism is closely associated with free markets and the individual right to own the means of production and private property. Because wealth, itself, is a huge contributor to social inequality, liberals back a strong regulatory control of corporations and banks that, otherwise, subvert governments in order to create a shadow plutocratic oligarchic order.

[YoungDemCA]

68. Good definition.

Well said.

[Agnosticsherbet]

79. Thanks.

[el_bryanto]

72. I think that a good definition is impossible, because Liberals care about all sorts of

different causes.

But at a minimum concern over the power of corporations and the wealthy and a desire for a more equal society would be a minimum to me.

Bryant

[Orsino]

76. Someone who sees, fearlessly, that there is enough for all...

...and that there is even more for all when no one is left out.

[Bandit]

77. Someone that believes in and follows the "Golden Rule"

In a nutshell..

[Ohio Joe]

82. Well...

"What is your definition of liberal?"

That would be a very long answer... I could write a book on it and probably still not have it all down. I would not even attempt to do it in a Forum post.

"Does a person have to agree with every.single.aspect. of your definition?"

No, not at all. There is plenty of room for different theory and methodology.

"Are there some issues on which liberals can disagree?"

Of course there are.

"What is the difference between a liberal and a progressive?"

I have no idea. For many years I considered them pretty much the same thing... It was not until I came to DU that I saw many people consider them different and as well have different meanings for each of the terms.

[liberal_at_heart]

83. I do consider myself a liberal. I have it in my screen name, but labels don't matter to me as

much as action does. In this day and age, with Trickle Down economics destroying our country, my current definition would be someone who fights against corporate control of our country. That's a narrow definition but it is the current economic system which is destroying us and until we address it nothing will get better.

[LWolf]

86. I have 2 definitions.

Economically liberal = corporatist, neo-liberal, "centrist..." all bad.

Socially liberal is tolerant of differences in others, is about freedom of choice within the limits of doing no harm. The "doing no harm" part is why I'm not so tolerant of economic liberals; they harm many.

Progressive? A term used by centrists to redefine what "liberal" means, and part of the name of the DLC's think tank, the "Progressive Policy Institute," an Orwellian reference to the activism and reforms of the Progressive Era, reframing "progressives" to actually SUPPORT the fat cats.

I'm sure both of those terms mean many things to many people, which is why I don't use them much. When a term is that open to interpretation, and that vaguely defined, it invites the possibility of abuse through manipulative, misleading propaganda. Re-defining common terms for the purpose of marketing is a common practice in the modern world.

It's also why I am not much interested in whether or not "a person" agrees with my definition or not; I already know that it's too late to agree on one clearly defined meaning for the terms.

[Iggo]

87. It's what a conservative calls a progressive.

[pampango]

88. A liberal is someone who agrees with me all the time about everything.

Everyone else is highly suspect. (Of course, by that definition there is only one person in the world who is 'liberal'.