Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Progessive vs. Liberal - Difference?


KAOSkins

Recommended Posts

Is there a difference?

I have some strong conservative tendencies even though I am life long dem. ie social liberal fiscal conservative. My ultra left wing cousin in San Fran calls me a progressive redneck. (which I presonally think is pretty cool - reminds me of Willie). But I'm not sure what she means.

Is their a difference between the two terms? :yes: :no:

What would a hard core liberal see as the difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure about views from extremes.. interesting topic though, I did some research and here's what came up...

Liberal apperently ocmes from "liberalism," which is defined by the Dictionary as:

1) A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority.

often Liberalism The tenets or policies of a Liberal party.

2) An economic theory in favor of laissez-faire, the free market, and the gold standard.

"Progressive" is more interesting apperently there was a Progressive Party, actually several. http://www.answers.com/topic/united-states-progressive-party

1) A U.S. political party that was organized by Republican insurgents in 1911 and supported the presidential candidacy of Theodore Roosevelt in 1912. Also called Bull Moose Party.

2) A U.S. political party organized in 1924 that supported the presidential candidacy of Robert M. La Follette and was active in Wisconsin until 1946.

3) A U.S. political party formed in 1948 to support the presidential candidacy of Henry A. Wallace.

It was organized by Republicans, how bout that?

There is also a document called "Progressive Party Platform, 1924" It's a pretty good read:

http://www.democracyforwashington.com/civicspace-0.5/?q=progressiveplatform1924

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Progressive Party Platform, 1924:

Retention of surtax on swollen incomes, restoration of the tax on excess profits, rapidly progressive taxes on large estates and inheritances

Abolition of the tyranny and usurpation of the courts, including the practice of nullifying legislation in conflict with the political, social or economic theories of the judges.

and of course:

We denounce the mercenary system of degraded foreign policy under recent administrations in the interests of financial imperialists, oil monopolists and international bankers, which has at times degraded our State Department from its high service as a strong and kindly intermediary of defenseless governments to a trading outpost for those interests and concession seekers engaged in the exploitation of weaker nations, as contrary to the will of the American people, destructive of domestic development and provocative of war.

back in 1924, how bout it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This one is actually pretty simple to explain....

The word "Progressive" is very similar to the word "Moderate" in the political iconology.

"Progressive" is generally used by one extreme to describe a member of the opposite party/extreme whose stated policies and/or voting record is marginally closer to the center of the political spectrum than others in that members party.

ie... A Democrat who may have once voted for a tax cut (even accidentally) might be said by Conservatives to be a "Progressive" Democrat. Likewise a Republican who once voted for a gun control measure might be refered to by the Liberals as a "Progressive" Republican.

"Moderate" is a term for those people whose political ideology is all over the map and/or has no true underlying moral/values based reasoning. Also called "fence-sitters" or "undecided"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Progressive Party Platform, 1924:

Retention of surtax on swollen incomes, restoration of the tax on excess profits, rapidly progressive taxes on large estates and inheritances

Abolition of the tyranny and usurpation of the courts, including the practice of nullifying legislation in conflict with the political, social or economic theories of the judges.

So, they were in favor of confiscatory taxation -- fits in well with today's progressives.

But they were against activst judges -- now very much a conservative point of view. The Progressive Party had a problem with judges finding FDR's New Deal policies in direct conflict with the Constitution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Moderate" is a term for those people whose political ideology is all over the map and/or has no true underlying moral/values based reasoning. Also called "fence-sitters" or "undecided"

whoa there, slow down.

"Undecided" has nothing to do with "moderate"

And that whole bit about "no true underlying moral/values based reasoning" is misguided, even considering you wrote "and/or."

How many wise extremists have you seen? Moderation is the way of the wise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Undecided" has nothing to do with "moderate"

Then why is it that I have never known a "Moderate" who could tell me more than 30 seconds before walking into a voting booth who it is they're going to vote for?

Most of the time I can tell you who I'm voting for about three days into the campaigns and it doesn't change throughout the campaign. Oh, and NO, I don't vote a party line. I vote a certain very selective set of issues and I go on a candidate's voting record more than their mouth.

And that whole bit about "no true underlying moral/values based reasoning" is misguided, even considering you wrote "and/or."

I would seriously disagree on that. I have never met a "Moderate" who could sit down and tell me, in a concise form their moral/value based paramaters for life. What they felt was Right and Wrong without any exceptions or caveats.

How many wise extremists have you seen? Moderation is the way of the wise.

Chenghis Khan & Ronald Reagan for starters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they were against activst judges -- now very much a conservative point of view.

That's your opinion. People don't even agree on what an activist judge is. I am a Democrat and I hate activist judges that ignore the establishment clause and think they know more about it's meaning than Thomas Jefferson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why is it that I have never known a "Moderate" who could tell me more than 30 seconds before walking into a voting booth who it is they're going to vote for?

Perhaps because of your limited exposure to moderates.

I would seriously disagree on that. I have never met a "Moderate" who could sit down and tell me, in a concise form their moral/value based paramaters for life. What they felt was Right and Wrong without any exceptions or caveats.

Too bad you live in Mass. I live in DC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Moderate" is a term for those people whose political ideology is all over the map and/or has no true underlying moral/values based reasoning. Also called "fence-sitters" or "undecided"
I take issue with that. I've found moderates to be far more consistent. Look at conservatives today rushing to expand government - watch "liberals" arguing for conservative economic policy. The moderates willing to cross party lines are the ones guided my morality, or at least those with the clearest vision IMO.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would seriously disagree on that. I have never met a "Moderate" who could sit down and tell me, in a concise form their moral/value based paramaters for life. What they felt was Right and Wrong without any exceptions or caveats.
Because absolutes are fantasy. You have to hold your nose in order to stick to absolutes - while you can remain much more loyal to your views when you leave behind such nonsense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because absolutes are fantasy. You have to hold your nose in order to stick to absolutes - while you can remain much more loyal to your views when you leave behind such nonsense.

I will have to disagree with that. I live in a Black/White; Right/Wrong; Good/Evil world. There is no "grey area" in my world. There never has been and never will be.

You only have to "hold your nose" as you indicate if you are looking at the wrong absolutes or at things that are not truly absolutes to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chenghis Khan & Ronald Reagan for starters.

I think you prove the point that moderation is not a tactic to use with foreign policy in times of war.

But for determining economic and social policy it sure seems more intelligent to me.

mod·er·ate

adj. 1. Being within reasonable limits; not excessive or extreme: a moderate price.

2. Not violent or subject to extremes; mild or calm; temperate: a moderate climate.

3. a. Of medium or average quantity or extent.

b. Of limited or average quality; mediocre.

4. Opposed to radical or extreme views or measures, especially in politics or religion.

n. One who holds or champions moderate views or opinions, especially in politics or religion.

I, for one, am proud to be a moderate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a difference?

I have some strong conservative tendencies even though I am life long dem. ie social liberal fiscal conservative. My ultra left wing cousin in San Fran calls me a progressive redneck. (which I presonally think is pretty cool - reminds me of Willie). But I'm not sure what she means.

Is their a difference between the two terms? :yes: :no:

What would a hard core liberal see as the difference?

I'd say you're probably a liberal by the more traditional meaning of the word. Do you think government is generally the answer? If no, you're a liberal by the more traditional meaning (and if your truly fiscally conservative, I'd think you lean towards the no answer to the question). I'd think your ultra-left wing cousin is the one I'd call progressive (it would be better to append the term statist progressive).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my relatives ran for President for the Progressive party. He lost, but man how he tried.

Progressives do not have to come from a party - it is an sometimes an attitude more than anything else these days compared to the Progressive party from the turn of the century (which, incidentally, involved many former Republicans). Read about individuals such as Robert La Follette (or Lafollette), especially in regards to his vote against WW1 and the comments he made about the government's actions at that time against dissenting citizens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you prove the point that moderation is not a tactic to use with foreign policy in times of war.

But for determining economic and social policy it sure seems more intelligent to me.

mod·er·ate

adj. 1. Being within reasonable limits; not excessive or extreme: a moderate price.

2. Not violent or subject to extremes; mild or calm; temperate: a moderate climate.

3. a. Of medium or average quantity or extent.

b. Of limited or average quality; mediocre.

4. Opposed to radical or extreme views or measures, especially in politics or religion.

n. One who holds or champions moderate views or opinions, especially in politics or religion.

I, for one, am proud to be a moderate.

A political moderate is a statist, at least if the left-right continuum is to have any meaning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will have to disagree with that. I live in a Black/White; Right/Wrong; Good/Evil world. There is no "grey area" in my world. There never has been and never will be.

You only have to "hold your nose" as you indicate if you are looking at the wrong absolutes or at things that are not truly absolutes to begin with.

What color is the sky there? Grey? :silly:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if you're in the democratic party and you call yourslef a progressive I don't really want to know you. Many people use the word different ways but the progressive democrat label does mean something. John Kerry was a liberal. Hillary Clinton is a progressive. I think that the more socialist and protectionist tendencies that go hand in hand with the labor wing of the democratic party are the ones that fall under the category "progressive," wheras liberals tend to be more concerned with the freedom for all thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

KAOSkins,

Someone asked me today who was the greatest left-winger of your time. One of my answers is the current president: he's got a lot of right-wingers thinking he's one of them.

I would agree in terms of spending (but not what he's spending on) and immigration. But the rest? Certainly not a liberal on foreign policy. Social programs, he's cutting em all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

? when did this happen?

Ok, you caught me exagerating as I am wont to do. :D

He's is, though, cutting funding for alot of them.

"President Bush plans to unveil a $2.5 trillion budget today eliminating dozens of politically sensitive domestic programs, including funding for education, environmental protection and business development, while proposing significant increases for the military and international spending, according to White House documents."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3319-2005Feb6.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In San Francisco, the "progressives" are to the left of the "liberals." They are economically socialist, excessively politically correct rather than live and let live, and basically are self-righteous pains in the neck.

As examples - liberals want more affordable housing available and are willing to be taxed some to support that goal. Progressives want strict rent control and are willing to have landlords eat it to reach that goal. Liberals want to put bike lanes on main city streets to encourage bike riding. Progressives want to ban cars on the same streets. Liberals want to help the homeless. Progressives oppose virtually any restrictions on the behavior of the homeless and support "squatters rights." And so on.

This may not be how the terms developed historically, it is how they are used nowadays around here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In San Francisco, the "progressives" are to the left of the "liberals." They are economically socialist, excessively politically correct rather than live and let live, and basically are self-righteous pains in the neck.

As examples - liberals want more affordable housing available and are willing to be taxed some to support that goal. Progressives want strict rent control and are willing to have landlords eat it to reach that goal. Liberals want to put bike lanes on main city streets to encourage bike riding. Progressives want to ban cars on the same streets. Liberals want to help the homeless. Progressives oppose virtually any restrictions on the behavior of the homeless and support "squatters rights." And so on.

This may not be how the terms developed historically, it is how they are used nowadays around here.

:paranoid: I wonder how close she lives to the crack dealers now? Because she knows that ain't me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...