I believe that throughout history, people have been divided by two basic political drives: progressivism and conservativism (if not so-called). The former sees a brighter future ahead and has an expansive, inclusive, and adventurous attitude. The latter finds comfort in the traditional and has a restrictive, exclusive, and safe attitude. At the very core, the progressive drive is based on love and hope, and the conservative drive is based on fear and greed.
Naturally, these two drives are the polar opposites of a wide spectrum, with the majority falling in the hump of the bell curve. Conservatives certainly feel love and hope, and progressives are not immune from fear or greed. Moreover, no political party perfectly captures an extreme...they also fall somewhere in the middle of the spectrum.
More on the flip...
The four core political values---love, hope, fear, and greed---all have pros and cons (no pun intended). Love without a healthy dose of fear leaves one open to being attacked or used. Hope without greed can result in wild risk-taking, eventually losing vital resources. I'm sure you can come up with consequences the other way as well: fear without love, and greed without hope. It's important to understand that I'm not necessarily suggesting that fear is the "opposite" of love, or greed of hope, in some kind of absolutist way. I'm saying they are opposing drives when it comes to social policy.
So, how do we apply these concepts to our modern parties?
With the Republicans, it's pretty simple, because fear and greed are easy to articulate. Manifestations of fear: war on (terror, drugs, etc.), anti-immigration, anti-gay rights, pro-gun laws, anti-choice, and all other stances that restrict personal freedom (eg. Patriot Act), and encourage social barriers. The more realistic agenda of the GOP is of course based on greed: lower taxes (especially for the rich), ease corporate restrictions, greater latitude in polluting and resource waste, the "ownership society" meme, etc. Again, not everything Republicans want is based solely on fear and greed, but those are the underlying drives that spur their policies.
For Democrats, it's not so easy to articulate our stance, because love and hope are inherently more vague and dangerous. These things involve risk-taking and the unknown. It's really impossible to know what will result from them, and not everything we try will succeed. In fact, sometimes things have to get worse before they get better. But progressives generally think it's worth the risk, because we love [America, the land, our family & neighbors, mankind, etc.] and we have hope that things can always be better than they are now.
But what does that mean in terms of political stances? Unlike the conservative stances, it is very difficult to seperate love and hope into distinct categories. They are really tied together, and one cannot really operate without the other. So, we have to use a slightly different model:
Within a political context, the three most basic things people love are:
1) our country, 2) mankind, and 3) the natural world.
Because we have hope for the future, here are basic progressive values and goals:
Country -> We want to protect and promote the welfare of America
- Maintain a strong defense
- Protect our foundational documents (Constitution / Bill of Rights)
- Establish an effective and responsible government
- Strengthen global influence (not power)
Mankind ->
We want all people to be happy, healthy, and fulfilled
- Promote universal opportunity, equality, and prosperity
- Seek social improvement via education, service, technology, and the arts
- Maximize personal freedom and privacy balanced with social responsibility
- Encourage healthy communities, families, churches, and cultural organizations
Nature ->
We want to conserve our resources and understand the universe
- Protect our natural resources
- Make our environment open and available to enjoy
- Explore all aspects of the universe and seek new discoveries
- Attempt to understand Nature through scientific study
Akin to what Kos was saying, these are meta-themes. Specific issues such as choice or gay rights fall under these essentially unchanging goals. Hopefully, neither choice nor gay rights will be an issue in the future...they will have become protected, stable rights...but values like privacy and equality will continue to be guiding principals of any progressive party.
Naturally, these are not presented in sound-byte fashion. I believe we need to have these meta-level discussions before we can get to the final framing for public consumption. To put it into long hand, this model basically says that there will always be a group of people driven by love and hope more than fear and greed. These progressives see a brighter future ahead and want everyone to be a part of it equally. We're willing to take risks, discover new things, and embrace the unknown on our journey of social evolution.