Last night I offered an historical lesson on the Progressive Movement in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, in
Progressives Past.
The term 'Progressive' is commonplace nowadays, used by liberals and Democrats and left-leaning activists to describe themselves. I wanted to find out if there is a separate and distint Progressive movement today. But first, I thought it would be instructive to see what being a Progressive meant 100 years ago.
As we saw, Progressives of yesteryear concerned themselves with economic, political and social reform. Better working conditions, no child labor, no sweatshops, women's suffrage, income tax, contested political primaries rather than smoked filled back rooms, economic competition rather than economic monopoly. Progressives of the past sought to achieve social progress. They wanted to protect the weakest to make us all stronger.
Isn't that what we are trying to do today as Democrats? Aren't those the underlying principles that guide us all?
Aren't we all Progressives today?
I think so.
Indeed, after traveling around the Internets, I think I have found a couple eye opening statements about what Progressives want today. I think, if we all read this, we will find something startling, but I will save that for the end.
First:
Progressives want to make Americans feel more, not less, secure.
...
Progressives want to produce successful results in the real world, rather than fixate on unproven ideology.
...
[Progressives] want government to serve everyone, not just the upper crust, special interests, or particular demographic groups.
...
Progressives want to restore public trust in government, instead of actively undermining it.
...
[Progressives] can be trusted to make all Americans feel more secure. Conservatives are dividers, not uniters; they cannot be trusted to run the government; they care more about ideology than results; and they value the unpredictability of markets over your personal security.
Second, and perhaps the best description of modern day Progressivism that I have ever read, from John Halpin from the Center for American Progress:
At its core, progressivism is a non-ideological, pragmatic system of thought grounded in solving problems and maintaining strong values within society.
The original progressive movement at the turn of the 20th century sought to improve American life by encouraging personal and moral responsibility among citizens; by providing the carrots and sticks to promote efficient and ethical business behavior; and by reforming government to provide a level playing field for all citizens and groups.
Theodore Roosevelt's brand of progressive reform appealed to a broad coalition of Americans and created a legacy of social and political change that battled social decay and modernized urban politics; reined in corporate corruption and abuse; expanded voting rights and democratic input; and - despite its jingoistic enterprises -set the stage for American intervention in defense of democracy.
....
[P]rogressives believe the typical liberal-conservative fight over big government versus small government misses the point. We want to focus instead on finding the best solution - public or private - to a given problem, a proven approach that marries American pragmatism and our history of taking all challenges head on.
Progressives believe that there are some issues, such as increasing access to quality health care, improving public education, and providing retirement security, that are so vital to individual opportunity that strong public action is required to ensure basic needs that cannot be met by the free market alone. We know, too, that in other areas, like job creation and economic growth, the private sector must drive progress - and will do it better than government - but we recognize that a mix of public and private incentives and protections for consumers can best provide the framework for prosperity to flourish. And progressives focus strongly on cultivating moral values and personal responsibility in citizens as the best way for individuals and communities to take control of their own lives, ensure societal cohesion, and find solutions to problems that can seem intractable.
...
[P]rogressives ... [focus] on fairness - the legal, political, and economic conditions that provide access to equal opportunity and allow people to combine their abilities and aspirations and make the most of their lives.
Fairness does not guarantee that everybody will be the same, think the same, or get the same material benefits in life; it simply means that people should start from a level playing field and have a reasonable shot at achieving success whether they want to go to college, start a business or have their day in court.
...
Progressives want to banish the notion that elites alone will take care of the nation's big problems. They seek ways to fight political apathy and general disengagement and bring more people into public debate and decision making, as MoveOn.org has demonstrated. Progressives believe that the best ideas come from the grass roots, and that public officials have a duty to create new forums for citizen engagement and input. In turn, citizens must keep themselves educated on important issues, get involved in the political process, and encourage civic virtues in younger generations.
Most importantly, progressives believe that citizens and leaders alike must give something back by staying involved in the affairs of their community, voting, voicing opinions, volunteering, and placing the country's needs above narrow self-interest.
...
Progressives do not cede ground on patriotism or protecting the American people. In this sense, we view the fight against terrorism much as we did those against Nazism, fascism and totalitarianism - American battles that are not the monopoly of any particular ideology or political party. Progressive leaders such as Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy fought to make the world safe for democracy, and progressives are there today to defend America against on-going terrorist threats.
But given the focus on pragmatic approaches to solving world problems, progressives want to return to a bipartisan American foreign policy that focuses on the proven and successful path of building alliances, sharing burdens, using strong public diplomacy, and developing an integrated national security strategy based on prevention in the broadest sense rather than preemptive wars and an over reliance on military might alone.
Halpin frames his column by separating Progressivism from the Liberal and Conservative ideologies, showing how Progressivism is a third and better way. I agree with what he says about Progressives, yet I disagree that it is in any way divergent from what Liberals want, or from what Liberalism is today.
But that is besides the point.
I started out on what will now become a whole series of diaries on Progressivism, looking for what separated Progressives from Democrats. I have found the answer to that question.
Nothing.
The goals that I have as a partisan Democrat, the underlying principles of how I view American society and the world are as described above in the first piece and in the piece by John Halpin.
And I am a moderate Democrat. I am a Democrat that values party unity and loyalty. I am a SYFPH person here on Daily Kos. Progressive values, policies are mine.
In my view, Progressives are Democrats. Democrats are Progressives. Where we diverge is on how we best achieve our goals. How we get our message out. What tactics we use to battle the Republicans. Those battles win continue. They will never end, even when we recapture the Presidency and Congress from the vile hands of fascism. But those battles are over process, not substance.
What has divided Daily Kos on a number of occassions, and very passionately so, has been battles over process. The NARAL flap. The Roberts confirmation. Senator Obama's diary. We all agree with Senator Obama's progressive principles as so eloquently stated in his convention speech. Some of us differ on the tactical decisions he makes. Or how he explains them.
But we do not disagree with the Senator on his principles. His views on the world.
I think we are all Progressives today. I do not accept any divide between those who term themselves as Progressive in opposition to Democrats like myself. Our battles are not over substance, but over tactics.
And whatever divide that exists between us today over process pales in comparision to the divides in the Democratic Party in years past, which were mostly over substance.