I know everyone wants to adopt the word ‘progressive’ and no one wants to define it, but there are a few issues that I think are clearly progressive in the sense that most mainstream Democrats won’t touch them.
These are highly controversial issues that only progressives seem to have the balls to tackle. Number one, above all others, is the United States’ foreign policy towards Israel. I think there is a wide latitude for progressive thinking on the Israel-Palestine issue, but only progressives seem willing to truly question the wisdom and morality of supporting the status quo in the Middle East. In the simplest and broadest terms, progressives are willing and desirous to force a settlement on Israel that approximates the 1967 borders and involves the removal of all, or nearly all, settlers from occupied territory. Needless to say, I can count the number of politicians in Congress that espouse the progressive position on this on my two hands.
In a broader sense, progressives generally agree that our worldwide foreign policy is too large, too unilateral, too expensive, and the number one cause of the threat of terrorism. Progressives think we can make ourselves safer, improve the budget, and find funds for needed domestic programs and initiatives by rolling back our forward-leaning military basing strategy, sharing more responsibility for maintaining the international order, and cutting defense spending. Very few Democrats are willing to openly and consistently fight for these changes.
Progressives also appear to be about the only people that are willing to question the War on Drugs. Advocating the decriminalization of marijuana is still a fringe position. And drug and prison reform are not issues that mainstream Democrats are willing to tackle.
There are other issues (feel free to list them), but these seem like the big three. Democrats have compromised themselves on various issues in the post-9/11 era, and issues like retroactive immunity for warrantless wiretapping reflect their degree of compromise. Progressives have not been complicit in torture and illegal spying and violations of habeas corpus so progressives are unsympathetic to those that sold their soul on those issues.
One thing that should become evident in looking at the issues I’ve laid out is that progressives distinguish themselves from mainstream Democrats mainly through their interest in protecting civil liberties and their skepticism about the uses of U.S. military power. In this, progressives have a lot in common with libertarians and some paleoconservatives. I don’t think it’s an accident that Markos and I both consider ourselves ‘progressive libertarians’, although we have slightly different visions about what that means.
In laying out the issues this way, I may give the impression that progressives are defined by their proclivity to take positions that are outside of the political mainstream. I assure you that I do not mean to leave that impression. Progressives’ share many values with the majority of Americans and the majority of Democrats. In fact, progressive opinions do very well in issue polls. Depending on how you ask the question, you may find that the majority of Americans support single-payer health care.
Part of the mission of the Progressive Movement is to turn ‘fringe positions’ into safe centrist positions. From that standpoint, Obama’s early cabinet appointments are not accomplishing anything. I think that is where you are seeing some frustration. But, in the big picture, Obama has moved the national debate onto much more favorable turf. What we have is a Democratic country. It is going to be good on most progressive issues, but it is not going to good on some of the more taboo issues. There is always work to do.
“sharing more responsibility for maintaining the international order“
It would be quite enough for me if the United States simply ceased its contributions to international DISorder. That would be a significant improvement.
I believe what we have is a liberal country. I believe that questionairres like Kucinich wins in a landslide (that reveal that when the public is asked to say how they stand on the issues and matching those answers to the candidate that voted most in line with each persons responses, Kucinich wins with more votes than all the other candidates put together) show us that America is extremely progressive.
The Mighty Wurlitzer would just have you believe otherwise. Them and the “Biparisan” Democrats.
Interesting poll, thanks for posting. Kucinich was my first choice, also. By a large margin. We progressives got to stick together.
Thank you for this wonderful exposition of progressive values. I think you hit the nail on the head with this:
“…progressives distinguish themselves from mainstream Democrats mainly through their interest in protecting civil liberties and their skepticism about the uses of U.S. military power….”
As far as progressives being in or out of the mainstream, I agree with you that many progressive values are very widely shared by the public, though not recognized as such. Certainly the Constitution is one of the most progressive documents ever written and the desire to govern by such a document one of the most progressive movements in all of history.
As for Israel, it is Obama’s appointment of people with Middle East policies in general, and policies towards Israel in particular, that I consider to be anti-progressive that worries me a lot. Like most people, I am taking a wait and see attitude, but until I see concrete steps for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East I will remain deeply concerned for the possibility of real change.
Of course in all this there is a cross-cut or cross-tab too:
The Power Elite vs. “Ordinary” citizens; or perhaps the conception of an elite-run republic vs. direct democracy.
and then we can really have some fun with cuts on class, race and gender.
I wouldn’t agree re the drug issue. I’m not for the decriminalization of marijuana, for example. But I’m very progressive in other areas, and agree that the Israel example is a good one, as is the desire not to have bases all over the world that we then have to pay for an maintain.
No covert empire! No overt empire!
Could you give us your thoughts on marijuana? Couldn’t it be controlled, as alcohol is, but not criminalized? I don’t see the sense of throwing people in prison for possession of marijuana while other, highly addictive and unhealthy substances such as tobacco and alcohol are advertised.
I’ve just seen too many people do stupid things on it. I’m not opposed to medical marijuana, but that’s under a doctor’s supervision.
I’ve seen people waste half their lives because of the drug. Yes, alcohol is abused, but not to the same extent. Nearly everyone I know who drinks is not a drunk. But nearly everyone I know who uses marijuana can’t do without it.
What are the stats on potheads shooting people or causing auto deaths while under the influence? Don’t know but I doubt all that high. And how many people kill themselves or others in their household with cigarettes/cigarette smoke? You don’t incarcerate people because they waste themselves but because they are a danger to others.
They’re an absolute menace to Mallomars.
Single-Payor Healthcare
Guaranteed Pensions
A Stakeholder model of governance; including corporate governance
Socialization of profit as well as socialization of risk
Yes – that’s a good list!
Good post, Boo. After reading this, I skipped on over to Digby’s and listened to John Lennon’s perfect definition of progressive.
It’s simple, really. We’re caught between pushing the envelope and not worrying our pretty little heads.
I think the progressives stand for more than just civil liberties and a very clear and limited role in foreign affairs for the federal government.
I think it is a vision thing where each person is given the opportunity to develop his talents and realize his/her potential. Thus, we need our young people out of mines and mills and into public schools, we need a forty hour week and an eight hour day, so our workers have something left at the end of the day and week, we need decent wages and workmen compensation for injuries on the job, we need pensions and insured bank deposits, we need a network of strong unions, we need a national health care program funded and run by the federal government, we need a fair tax policy based on means and ability to pay. We need a caring and concerned government.
In this complex age of ours we also require state and national governments to control those who have too much power and too much money so they don’t abuse the privileges and rights and opportunities of those less well off than they are. This is a constant struggle, and, often times, the rich and elite work harder (or their representatives do) to protect and enlarge their wealth than the progressives do to limit and restrain them. Witness the recent fiasco of greed by the wizards of Wall street who rush to Washington for a bailout when their Ponzi like schemes in derivatives collapse around them. No conditions on this financial assistance either.
One way you can tell Progressives is to check their enemies: the neocons and conservatives and republicans who never tire of bad mouthing those who stand for progress for all classes in our culture. The latter groups, the haves, seek to protect the wealth they control. They, certainly, don’t want to share it with anyone else..
At the core it’s a matter of selfishness vs selflessness and of things vs dreams and vision. I think the latter will eventually win but it is such a long and hard struggle.
I think that’s a good summary – progressives have a greater belief in the rights of the individual versus the rights of the state than most other Americans. Most progressives are also farther to the left on class issues, like single payer health care.
I disagree. I think what makes progressives progressive is that they value the rights of all over the rights of the individual. It’s the opposite of Libertarian. We support policies that help the collective good the most.
I don’t wholeheartedly agree with that. In any case, I wouldn’t have phrased it that way. Probably this is a distinction between progressives and libertarian progressives, and it is partly generational.
Libertarian progressives tend to oppose things like onerous gun control laws, smoking bans, and infringements on privacy that are aimed (at least, ostensibly) at the collective safety of the country. They are very likely to oppose drug laws, especially for marijuana. They are willing to live with some collective harm and risk in return for greater personal liberty. Where they differ from classic libertarians is in a greater commitment to human rights abroad and in support for government action in the health and education sectors, and in reducing wealth disparity, preventing dynastic families, and tackling poverty with direct assistance.
I should have mentioned, additionally, that progressive libertarians are in general agreement with Democrats about regulating business and the financial sector to protect the general welfare of the country.