XPost: alt.politics.greens, alt.politics.howard-dean, alt.politics.larouche   
   XPost: alt.politics.misc   
   From: newsgroups@virtualnow.mailshell.com   
      
   6-12-2004   
      
   So What is a "Progressive?" And Why is that Important?   
   Filed under:   
      
     a.. Vision   
     b.. Base Works   
   - JoeLibertelli @ 8:00 am   
      
      
      
   Are you a Progressive? A Teddy Roosevelt Progressive? A Eugene Debs   
   Progressive? A LaFollette Progressive? A Henry Wallace Progresive? A   
   McCarthy Era codeword-for-communist "Progressive"? A Bill Clinton/Democratic   
   Leadership Council/Progessive Policy Institute Progressive? A Take Back   
   America Progressive? A Progressive Republican?   
      
      
      
   I think that defining what we mean by "progressive" - and, in particular,   
   distinguishing it from "liberal," is an important step in communicating our   
   views with our neighbors and others with whom we hope to work. If we, as   
   Progressive activists, hope to gain people's respect and cooperation in our   
   efforts, we need to be clear and up front about our ideology - as well as   
   our specific organizational goals, strategies, tactics and decision-making   
   processes.   
      
      
      
   I would appreciate feedback on the following definition:   
      
      
      
   - Progressives call for a society based upon ecological balance and sanity,   
   one which seeks peace and security through the vigorous pursuit of justice   
   and an end to poverty and discrimination, and one which insists government   
   be transparent, participatory, and the result of true democracy.   
      
      
      
   - Progressive ideology is based on reality: environmental and public health   
   science, relevant social history, and a clear-eyed view of how public   
   policies affect both people and the environment - especially our most   
   vulnerable people and ecosystems.   
      
      
      
   - Progressives, unlike their Liberal cousins, believe the American and world   
   political and economic systems, despite their many strengths, are deeply   
   flawed and in need of nonviolent transformation, not mere reform.   
      
      
      
   - Progressives know that when one takes any issue sufficiently seriously -   
   homelessness, inner-city education, ocean ecology, sexism, energy policy,   
   workplace exploitation, prison overcrowding, AIDS or cancer research, the   
   war in Iraq, US policy on Israel, etc - both the interconnections with other   
   issues and the need for a real transformation become clear.   
      
      
      
   - Progressives can be distinguished from modern American "Liberals" (many of   
   whom now call themselves Progressives!) who either tend to see the problems   
   in isolation or are so daunted by the prospect of systemic change that they   
   act as if the problems are isolated - perhaps to maintain their sanity!   
   Progressives see a wide variety of problems as symptoms of a deep malaise.   
   They are active side by side with Liberals and even with Conservatives on   
   these individual problems, but are aware of, and maintain hope of ultimately   
   being effective on, the deeper, systemic ones as well.   
      
      
      
   - Liberals are reformers. Progressives are evolutionaries - nonviolent   
   radicals who seek to address underlying causes of problems at their roots   
   while striving to model their vision for a transformed and healthy society   
   through daily activism and healthy and joyous personal and interpersonal   
   life.   
      
      
      
   Comments (5) »   
   1.      Here's the simplest distinction that springs to my mind:   
      
   When confronted with social or economic problems, the following groups offer   
   the following solutions:   
      
   Reaganites/neocons - throw money at the rich (taken from the middle and   
   lower)   
   classic conservatives - tighten the belts of all (even those who have no   
   belts)   
   liberals - throw money at the poor (taken from the rich)   
   progressives - throw people power at the problems and work together to solve   
   them   
      
   Is that a fair summary? To me "progressive" is a Rosie-the-Riveter "we can   
   do it!" mentality.   
      
   Comment by volneysimmons - 6-12-2004 @ 8:46 am   
      
   2.      This is an overly simplistic comment, BUT:   
   Liberals point out the problems of the world.   
   Progressives point out the solutions.   
      
   Comment by Clarity - 6-12-2004 @ 9:42 am   
      
   3.      I like the definition of a progressive as someone who sees the   
   interconnectedness of policies and issues (global thinkers) and the need for   
   fundamental, systemic change. I like the emphasis on the practicality of the   
   approaches, embracing "best practice" and sound solutions, rising above   
   special interests to honor the greater good. However, the definition of a   
   liberal given here did not resonate with me. I found it confusing - maybe   
   because I am new to activism. It sounds like an insider's thing that the   
   general public wouldn't get. It also sounded like an internal division or   
   conflict. I personally do not think we need to distinguish ourselves from   
   "liberals" as many people view that term in a very positive light, more   
   along the lines of the dictionary definition: favoring progress or reform;   
   free from prejudice, tolerant; characterized by generosity; ample or   
   abundant. I have always considered myself a liberal, but did not identify at   
   all with the definition proposed in the post. For me, the most important   
   distinction to make about Progressives is that we are not some "fringe" band   
   of radicals. We are mainstream, intelligent, inclusive, and everywhere! We   
   are united by our values: justice, community, peace, health, environment and   
   education.   
      
   Comment by Jodi - 6-12-2004 @ 9:50 am   
      
   4.      I am concerned that the definition of "Liberal" is too defensive.   
   Liberals were demonized by the right because the right learned how to frame   
   the language and issues of politics in this country over the last   
   generation. What a liberal believes in as the best solution can change over   
   time, just like the ideology of the conservatives has changed from Goldwater   
   (e.g. balanced budgets, etc.) to Bush (e.g. deficits don't matter, etc.). I   
   say we dont't let the radical right define us and "steal" our labels. I say,   
   now that there seems to be a growth of some new backbone in some parts of   
   the liberal or progressive community, that we define our selves, and proudly   
   and vociferously stand up for ourselves.   
      
   If a progressive is one who wants to compromise with the far right so that   
   social security and medicare will end up privatized, and we will all be on   
   our own again, then I remain a liberal and proud of it.   
      
   Comment by Bruce Ballmer - 6-12-2004 @ 10:08 am   
      
   5.      I agree with you, Bruce, and was coming back to say exactly the same   
   thing. You said it much better than I would have! Thanks.   
      
   Comment by Jodi - 6-12-2004 @ 10:14 am   
      
      
   Add you comments at:   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)