Heh™.

H/T Ron Chusid...

OK…

…but what does it mean? Chris Bowers…

The last ten years has witnessed a marked rise in the use of a different left and center-left ideological term in America: progressive. This rise has been so pronounced and widespread that "progressive" is now the most favorably viewed ideological term in America, surpassing both "moderate" and "conservative."

"Moderate" (another weasel word) Republicans often call themselves "progressive." Mainstream liberals often call themselves "progressive." Democratic Socialists and others who used to call themselves "radical" now cling to "progressive."

No wonder it's popular.

Like I always say sometimes.

Atrios…

Progressive is an awful term for a variety of reasons and it's about time to reclaim the word liberal.

Time to reclaim the word radical, too. Near as I can tell, 'progressive' means you just don't want folks to know what your actual politics are.

Yep.

And proud of it.

My Liberal Identity:

You are a Working Class Warrior, also known as a blue-collar Democrat. You believe that the little guy is getting screwed by conservative greed-mongers and corporate criminals, and you’re not going to take it anymore.

Take the quiz at http://www.fightconservatives.com/Inside-the-Book/What-Breed-of-Liberal-Are-You.html

Hat tip to tristero.

Exactly.

Anonymous Liberal...

The GOP has reached a point where no one in the party is even capable of discussing fiscal issues in a way that is remotely serious or reality-based.

Which brings to mind my continuing annoyance with Democrats who feed the beast with rhetoric like "fiscal conservative." There's nothing inherently illiberal about responsible stewardship of the public purse. Conflating conservatism with responsibility has done major damage to our Party and to the underlying political philosophy of our country. It's one of the primary reasons, I think, that so many people who believe in constitutional governance, a social safety net, social equality and a sound national defense - all fundamentals of contemporary liberalism - define themselves as 'conservatives.'

So all y'all Ds who play the 'social liberal, fiscal conservative' card? Knock it off. You're hurting the country.

Why it won't work.

Hillary may try to duck behind 'progressive' in order to avoid whatever unpleasant associations have been attached to 'liberal,' but it won't work. Steve Benen highlights some of the attacks quickly launched to sully the image of the revised language.

The rules are simple, folks.

There's us and there's them.

We're right and they're wrong, but...

No matter what we call ourselves, they'll lie about us.

No matter what we say, they'll lie about us.

No matter what we do, they'll lie about us.

They're just liars.

We can't adapt our policies, actions or language to please them. We have to do the hard work of honest public political education all by ourselves, because the crooks and liars on the other side aren't going to help.

A Historical Comparison…

…via Eric Alterman.

John F. Kennedy, 1960:

What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then ... we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

Hillary Clinton, 2007:

You know, it is a word that originally meant that you were for freedom, that you were for the freedom to achieve, that you were willing to stand against big power and on behalf of the individual.

Unfortunately, in the last 30, 40 years, it has been turned up on its head and it's been made to seem as though it is a word that describes big government, totally contrary to what its meaning was in the 19th and early 20th century.

I prefer the word "progressive," which has a real American meaning, going back to the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th century. I consider myself a modern progressive, someone who believes strongly in individual rights and freedoms, who believes that we are better as a society when we're working together and when we find ways to help those who may not have all the advantages in life get the tools they need to lead a more productive life for themselves and their family.

So I consider myself a proud modern American progressive, and I think that's the kind of philosophy and practice that we need to bring back to American politics.

Granted, I'd probably quibble if Hillary did call herself a liberal, but she's certainly more in the mold of Kennedy-style Cold War liberalism than historical progressives, whether the populist progressives of the turn of the last century or the Progressive Party of Henry Wallace.

Surrendering the language to the slurs of the VRWC isn't her proudest moment, in any event. It's time to make 'conservative' the word to avoid, with it's overtones of greed and criminality.

Liberalism is Americanism, after all.

Advocate?

Enthusiast? Surely something other than "crusader."

Oh well. I guess I'll settle for the AKA...

My Liberal Identity:

You are a Social Justice Crusader, also known as a rights activist. You believe in equality, fairness, and preventing neo-Confederate conservative troglodytes from rolling back fifty years of civil rights gains.

Take the quiz at www.FightConservatives.com

Hat tip to Misty.

In general…

…yeah. Hunter...

...in general, any word that ends in -ism tends to have a long and boisterous tail --the kind of tail that, on the rear end of a dog, scatters papers and knocks over lamps, and on the rear end of a government, sometimes scatters rights and knocks over nations.

And this too.

If a liberal sees a starving child, they want to give them some food. If a conservative sees a starving child, they want to give them a Bible. And if a libertarian sees a starving child, they want to build a privacy fence so they don't have to look at that shit anymore.

Heck, it's all good.

Heh™.

"If Liberals hated America, we'd vote Republican."

Hat tip to Pacific Views.

My "Progressive" Problem.

HTML Menken dips into a minor blog war I'd just as soon avoid, but raises an important point in the process.

...I’ll skip the thing about the war per se right now, and go to the other point this brings up: the definition of “Progressive.” I thought it meant something closer to ‘left-wing’ than ’sensible centrist.’

Most actual leftists who call themselves progressives probably agree. The mainstream liberals who operate under the same label would doubtless demur. Therein lies the rub.

Back in the day, the left end of the American political spectrum ranged from folks who called themselves liberals, somewhere near the center, to folks who called themselves radicals. Radical, though, came to be an umbrella that included groups like the Panthers, the Weather Underground and even the Symbionese Liberation Army. No one was really sure how radical you had to be to be a radical, but it was pretty clear that most weren't going as far as the vanguard insisted was necessary. The more rational elements of the left insisted they didn't want so much to reduce the system to rubble as to make progress toward a more just society. Those radicals adopted the tag progressive.

Meanwhile, the liberal brand was under attack from both the right and left. Were liberals anarchist bomb throwers or hesitant half-steppers? Who knew? A new label was needed, and "progressive" seemed to fit the bill. What we ended up with is a label that was adopted by a broad spectrum of people, most of whom had little relationship to one another outside of opposition to the Republican establishment.

"Progressive," in other words, says practically nothing about who you are or what you believe and almost everything about what you're against. Handy in some instances, but hard to build a movement around.

That's why I prefer to be called a liberal, rather than a progressive. At least liberal means something, even if it doesn't mean what "they" say it means.

Mostly, though, I'm a Democrat. Just a Democrat.

Without prefix. Without suffix. Without apology.