Calling ourselves 'progressive' is not helping

[sampsonblk]

How do you win a debate when you are unwilling to openly admit you are a liberal? That's handing a zinger to the GOP. Plus it looks like we have something to hide or be ashamed of.

There is nothing wrong with being liberal, and it makes us looks like fraidy cats when we run from what we are and try to hide behind a new, less tattered label.

[TreasonousBastard]

1. Actually, I'm a Socialist who doesn't believe in...

private property. That doesn't get me too far, though, so I really don't bother bringing it up very often. It's the sort of thing that stops all discussion, even if I admit that I won't get a chance to remold the world my way.

It's kinda been decided that "Liberals" are bad people, even when they agree with everyone else, so I'll happily be a Progressive or any other damn thing that doesn't immediately skew the discussion.

Labels-- they really suck. I understand how Conservatives musta felt back in the 60s when billboards were happily ragging on Goldwater.

And I thought THOSE Conservatives were wacky! Little did I know what was in the future...

[2rth2pwr]

2. What is it about private property that bothers you?

Trying not to stop the discussion.

[TreasonousBastard]

10. Not really much to tell, it's just something I've...

come to accept over the years.

I probably starting thinking about it back in college eco courses. The reals estate concept of "highest and best use" bothered me because it only meant the best financial return. Some tried to expand the meaning to public works, squares, environmental advantages and whatever, but they were all relegated as fringe uses when real money couldn't be made.

The word "rent" comes from the French where it historically meant "income." Before modern economic concepts, all income was ultimately derived from ownwership of the land. Eventually, trade and craft guilds and bankers started to upset that idea, and the Industrial Revolution pretty much trashed it completely. Even so, the basic concepts of land ownership still exists. Although it's no longer passed down through noble lineage, the idea of inheritance is still a leftover artifact from the royals.

So, after much moody thought, and noting that St. Augustine cme up with the idea long before I did, I come to the conclusion that none of us really owns much of anything but our own thoughts and creations. Everything else, every sort of property, is really only ours for a short time, even a short lifetime, and we are custodians of it, not owners to do with it as we wish.

Many more primitive societies have accepted this sort of cuastodianship and the lands, if owned at all, are owned in common, or by the king who is responsible for their upkeep and the well-being of the tribe or nation. As societies become more "civilized, and complex, it becomes more difficult to enforce such a concept, so property ends up being "provatized."

There are small communities that have tried to live with everything, or most things, in common. The Puritans tried it, and it ended badly. Quakers in Pennsylvania fooled around with the idea but eventually got thrown out of the colony. And, of course, there were all those communes, kibbutzes, and other such things popping up years ago.

So, I don't expect title insurance companies to go belly up any time soon now, and we're kinda stuck with wealth of all sorts being "owned" by someone. But, at least let the idea of the "Commons" be expanded before we're all hemmed in by "Private Property! No Trespassing!" signs, even on public land.

[Greyhound]

21. We are in a position to abandon the entire basis for economy as it has become a fiction

anyway. There are no real currencies left in the world, but the exchange systems have matured to the point where it is possible to equalize value o a global basis. The only problem is that the controllers of the system are among the big losers in the conversion so we aren't ready to make the change.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

5. Cool. I'd like to hear more about it. nt

[TreasonousBastard]

11. Not that interesting, but se my reply above. n/t

[sampsonblk]

6. That sounds kinda interesting

Why don't you post about your private property concerns? There are a lot of us who'd like to know what you think.

[TreasonousBastard]

12. Not that interesting, but I see my reply above. n/t

[Sarah Ibarruri]

3. I've NEVER called myself progressive. I call myself liberal and feminist.....

.... and anyone that doesn't like it, can just kiss my @#$!

[sampsonblk]

7. Now THAT's the kinda stuff I like!

You gotta be who you are!

[Adelante]

8. I'm with you, Sarah Ibarruri

Liberal and feminist and proud of it.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

13. And a big high five to you! :) nt

[illinoisprogressive]

4. I just like the word better. If someone calls me liberal, cool.

[Clintonista2]

9. I personally use the word Liberal, but I can understand the reason that politicians dont

The word "liberal" means something so totally different to the general public than what it really means.

[illinoisprogressive]

14. I think it's because Liberal belongs to the 60s to 90s. Progressive is more today.

[sampsonblk]

16. Why? What changed between the 90s and today?

Its because the GOP began to use the language against us - to fire up their base. And in an effort to compete for swing voters, many in our party gave in and (in effect) conceded that liberalism is bad.

Martin Luther King was a liberal. Its really the only way to be!

[Clintonista2]

27. The GOP won that one

I don't think anyone denies that the term "liberal" has become a bad word in American politics. If your average wal-mart shopping American-Idol-watching American were to understand the true meaning of th definition, it would change.

[Veek]

15. "Progressive" is an accurate contrast to "Conservative"

The departure point for both terms is a tolerance for change
to the status quo.

Conservatives are squeamish; they'd rather not recast a smoothly
operating system when they themselves don't immediately feel the
consequences of its flaws. They cling to the status quo. They
embrace orthodoxy. Thus they have high tolerance for issues like
institutional racism or erosion of civil liberties.

Progressive implies change and forward movement, when change
serves a more inclusive common good. Progressives are genetically
suspect of the status quo, and may sometimes be guilty of making
change for the sake of change. Clinton's welfare revamp
may have had some element of that restlessness.

Morals have nothing to do with either term.

All that said, I go by either term, liberal or progressive.

[sampsonblk]

17. There's moral aspect to liberalism

But not progressivism. That's nothing but a political tool - a way of approaching politics, really.

I am a liberal because I believe that every single person in this world deserves a chance at life, and every single person in this world has value. That, unfortunately, does not fit the progressive approach. Even a monster can see the light and become a progressive. But it takes a moral world view to be a liberal.

We are not wrong. We never were. Why abandon our moral position to the crooks on the other side?

[Veek]

20. Hmmm...interesting, but....?

"But not progressivism. That's nothing but a political tool - a way of approaching politics, really...Even
a monster can see the light and become a progressive. But it takes a moral world view to be a liberal."


How do you define progressivism? How does it compare to political liberalism?

I'm a liberal because I believe government has a big role to play in improving the lives
of its citizens while insuring that justice is preserved and mercy is abundant (contrast that
with permissiveness). I don't fear government because We the People are the government, and
when we pay attention, our system of checks and balances works.

The crooks that you refer to are despicable, but not because they're Republican or conservative.
That said, when you worship the status quo as Pubs do, change generates fear and fear makes
small thinkers desperate. So they are sheep who follow all bombastic, blustering, fake-confidence
shepherd. But I believe you can be conservative and a good person

I can't wait until the leaders of today's Repugs grow up.

[sampsonblk]

23. Here's your difference

I am a liberal. I believe that the world (and the country) needs to make major changes - progress - in order for things to work the way I believe they should. So I am also a progressive at the moment.

But 'progressive' doesn't tell you anything about what I believe in. Whereas 'liberal' makes my purpose clear. And because I don't believe that I am wrong, I refuse to hide what I believe in. Liberal is the way I live. It defines how I see people, and how I view the world.

On edit: Its 4am here. If my post is incoherent, I apologize.

[ProudDad]

18. I'm a Radical Socialist

and Anarcho-Syndicalist...

But I don't want to scare the great middle of the unwashed away... :evilgrin:


On edit: 'Cause it's too confusing anymore.

Liberal in Social Policies is a good thing.

Liberal in Economic policies is evil.

[skids]

19. I'm actually not very liberal, though, just progressive. n/t

[Greyhound]

22. I call myself progressive because that's what our movement has been called

for a very long time. Liberal has been conflated with the Democratic Party, which has never been very liberal at all, there have been some great liberals in it, but the party itself has generally sided with the authoritarians.

[NoFederales]

24. Semantically, people today tend to use the two words interchangeably. But

'liberalism' as an American theme arrives in the early 19th century, 'progressivism' about mid 19th century. Liberalism, I believe, is more pregnant with meaning in contrast to other political, economic, and philosophical 'isms'--and since progessivism is inclusive within the liberal definition, liberalism should have the preferred usage.

NoFederales

[Forkboy]

25. I stick with liberal.

My views are essentially the same as they were 20 years ago.To me "progressive" rose out of a fear of using the dreaded "L" word.But I didn't, and still don't, share that fear at all.I'm proud to be a liberal.

[sampsonblk]

26. We are on the same page

A lot of my liberal friends are suddenly calling themselves progressives. I guess it makes life easier for them.

[Forkboy]

28. It shows how effective the Right has been in framing the debate.

For almost two decades people have being running from the word like it's some horrible skin affliction or something.

Me, I'm not running anywhere. :)

[ShortnFiery]

29. Excellent points. I've never denied my "LIBERAL" label. Stand up for what you believe. nt

[mohc]

30. How long before...

the word "Progressive" is just as demonized as "Liberal". No one can be sure, but if we rollover on Progressive like most have on Liberal, then it certainly will happen eventually. It's not that I do not see the rationale behind using Progressive in the current political climate of the US, but the attitude that we must move on from using Liberal is short sided. If anything, reclaiming the term Liberal may be the best defense against Progressive being trashed.

[Romulox]

31. "Progressive" = a Democrat who doesn't care about poor people...

There has been a concerted effort to separate the concept of social justice from that of economic justice. In this way, the upper and upper-middle classes have co-opted the American Left to a mode that does not threaten the economic status quo. Thus issues like environmentalism and abortion rights take center stage, while economic justice, which threatens many of these self-same "progressives'" stock portfolios, are rarely addressed, even by the self-proclaimed champions of the poor.