Here's my contribution to Aardvark's challenge. In the context of American society, what does the word "progressive" mean to you?
For example, do you require that something be consistent with actual, real progress to be called "Progressive"? In your opinion, would policies that reduce unemployment or bring about a color-blind society or give workers the freedom to decline union membership, be "Progressive"?
Or is "Progressive" anything that a political party wants to call it?
Put another way: Detroit is in ruins. Would you characterize the policies that got it there as progressive policies? Or as "Progressive" policies? Or neither?
Again, I ask what it means to you. I'm aware of dictionaries.
__________________
It is rare for people to be asked the question which puts them squarely in front of themselves.
It's obvious from your poll answers that you have no real interest in open discussion. I deal with enough of that 'tell me what you think, no really, I want to know, how could you be that stupid' 'did you stop beating your wife' bull at work, sure don't need it on my down time.
It's frustrating, isn't it?
ETA: As for my intention, my "real interest" was in asking, what does this word mean to you (all)? Aardvark wanted a thread; I gave a thread.
-- Edited by Papa Bear on Wednesday 4th of September 2013 09:06:21 PM
__________________
It is rare for people to be asked the question which puts them squarely in front of themselves.
To me "Progressive" means "moving forward"... therefore it has nothing to do with Government, because Government doesn't know how to move in that direction.
I voted "Car Insurance"
__________________
"Yabba Dabba Doo" - Frederick J. Flintstone... So what?
(Judd Nelson as Atty. Robin 'Stormy' Weathers in "From the Hip")
It's obvious from your poll answers that you have no real interest in open discussion. I deal with enough of that 'tell me what you think, no really, I want to know, how could you be that stupid' 'did you stop beating your wife' bull at work, sure don't need it on my down time.
I do agree that the poll was rather one sided... politically speaking.
Politically speaking, only one side ever calls its policies "progressive." This regardless of whether these "progressive" policies actually result in progress.
That's why I want to know what everyone else considers a "progressive policy." Does just calling a policy "progressive" make it so, or does it ever have to mean actual progress?
__________________
It is rare for people to be asked the question which puts them squarely in front of themselves.
I picked the second, b/c to me Progressive has become a buzzword and it's become separated from it's original meaning.
So the term is meaningless? Except as a vaguely feel-good label?
Sounds about right to me
Pretty much. Also, "progression" itself isn't a goal - it's a process. What are you progressing towards? Saying that a policy is "progressive" - what does that mean? ANY policy that promotes change can be seen as "progressive" even if that change is awful or just stupid.
I think political terminology comes with all sorts of baggage (earned and unearned) and it's difficult to define them without bias. I think those who consider themselves "progressive" believe that they support and advocate for policy that is ahead of the curve, so to speak, when it comes to advancing the common good. It's the sort of thing that springs up from the grassroots and moves to the state or national level from local needs.
Generally speaking, progressive policies don't have to be limited by political party or philosophy. The big differences arise because people don't agree on what constitutes the common good.
I honestly believe that most Americans want to reduce unemployment, eliminate racial bias, etc. We just don't agree on how. Sometimes the most basic solution ("Wal, gee, just hire more workers already!") isn't realistic without making other adjustments first. Sometimes the collateral damage from a proposed solution is just as devastating as the problem. If we really want to see progress in our country, it all boils down to ends and means. What do we really want and how to we get there without causing more harm than the status quo already does?
Of course, a large element of the personal philosophies of the American professional politicians is concern for their own personal common good, and good luck to the rest of us, so that doesn't really help.
Those who consider (i.e. call) themselves progressive are often advocating policies that hurt the poor. Disagreement about the common good, indeed.
They can, but I don't presume they do it on purpose. I highly doubt the average self-described progressive lies awake at night plotting his or her next cause with the further discomfort of the poor as the goal (mwahahahaha, etc.). I do think that sometimes when there is a problem (poverty) people who are passionate by nature can get a little steamrolly about fixing it NOW without realizing the consequences. I think the solution is to step back from the demonization of our fellow citizens (the average folk, not the vocal fringes) and really, truly work together toward shared goals. There really should be enough that we can agree upon to keep us busy for a long, long time if we get back to fundamentals. A girl can dream, right?
It's also far too easy these days to insist that someone who wants to use different means to achieve the same ends is actually against said ends, and the under-informed agree without thinking about it.
Those who consider (i.e. call) themselves progressive are often advocating policies that hurt the poor. Disagreement about the common good, indeed.
They can, but I don't presume they do it on purpose. I highly doubt the average self-described progressive lies awake at night plotting his or her next cause with the further discomfort of the poor as the goal (mwahahahaha, etc.). I do think that sometimes when there is a problem (poverty) people who are passionate by nature can get a little steamrolly about fixing it NOW without realizing the consequences. I think the solution is to step back from the demonization of our fellow citizens (the average folk, not the vocal fringes) and really, truly work together toward shared goals. There really should be enough that we can agree upon to keep us busy for a long, long time if we get back to fundamentals. A girl can dream, right?
It's also far too easy these days to insist that someone who wants to use different means to achieve the same ends is actually against said ends, and the under-informed agree without thinking about it.
I guess I resent that part the most, that Progressives describe themselves as such and others buy into the label as such, with all of it happening more-or-less on autopilot. Every time I ask someone self-described as "progressive" to reconcile their beliefs with actual progress, they get testy.
But at least they're safe drivers. Maybe it really is car insurance!
__________________
It is rare for people to be asked the question which puts them squarely in front of themselves.
It's obvious from your poll answers that you have no real interest in open discussion. I deal with enough of that 'tell me what you think, no really, I want to know, how could you be that stupid' 'did you stop beating your wife' bull at work, sure don't need it on my down time.
I have to agree with this, and from years of casual observation, also must say that this is completely typical of how this OP posts
It's obvious from your poll answers that you have no real interest in open discussion. I deal with enough of that 'tell me what you think, no really, I want to know, how could you be that stupid' 'did you stop beating your wife' bull at work, sure don't need it on my down time.
I have to agree with this, and from years of casual observation, also must say that this is completely typical of how this OP posts
Well goodness, this was fun
All I wanted was to know what people mean when they throw the word around. But yeah, it probably ran its course.
__________________
It is rare for people to be asked the question which puts them squarely in front of themselves.