What is a "Progressive"

In response to THIS and THIS:

A great many people on the left side of the aisle love to call themselves “progressive.” It’s got a nice ring, a futuristic forward looking moving on never stepping back kind of resonance. Furthermore, being “progressive” puts one in the company of people like Michael Moore, Howard Dean, Hillary Clinton, Bono, Maurice Strong, Noam Chomsky, Kofi Annan, Cindy Sheehan, Barack Obama, Wolf Blitzer, and ninety-nine percent of the Hollywood elite? They all call themselves “progressive”.

It begs the question, what are those of us who do not fall into the “progressive” camp? The term gives us little choice, leaving only one possibility; “regressive.” The term “progressive”, and usually those who wear it, leave little room for any positive alternative for those of us on the other side of the aisle. It says a lot about the superciliousness of the "progressive" class.

On the other hand, consider for a moment the term “conservative”. Being “conservative” carries with it both positive and negative connotations. It conjures the image of one who moves forward carefully and who deliberates before jumping. There is nothing superior about the term. Likewise the term “liberal”, although initially equated to “libertarian”, has as many negative connotations as it does positive. “Liberal” suggests freedom as much as it does recklessness and lack of control.

“Progressive” suggests exclusivity and elitism. If you are not within the clique and do not share the left of center utopian ideology of the club, you are not progressive, and hence, regressive and to be scorned. Those who proudly wear the badge ooze superiority (every single one of them), viewing those who are not “progressive” as backwards, or radical, or holding society back, as opposed to moving it forward. How utterly arrogant, pompous, elitist, and condescending a notion.

The fact of the matter is that the word “liberal” previously worn with pride is now a handicap to recruiting individuals into the ideology. A new term had to be hatched, and “progressive” has become the new nomenclature of those who scorn anything right of center. Sadly though, it’s the same old utopian socialism in a new wrapper; if you don't move society forward in a socialist utopian manner ... you're regressive.

So, what is a “progressive” anyway? Here's an apt description that gives us a good start:

“The physical and semantic veneer applied to an old-time sociologist Liberal attitude which sufficiently disguises traditional Leftist Redistributionism as a market-friendly, Third Way moderate social philosophy which wants to use the means of successful Capitalism to accomplish the ends of Benign Utopian Socialism. A (progressive) encourages Market success so it might be regulated into traditional redistributionist social programs to help the very victims that the old-fashioned (liberals) created. A "progressive" is an old Socialist with a new look and the same old goals: Che Guevara with a shave and a credit card, Jane Fonda waving an American flag, Karl Marx with a stock portfolio.”

In the end, it all comes down to the fact that "Progressive" sounds better than post-modern Marxist ... so simply consider it a re-packaging job that'd make even Fenton Communications chortle. Or perhaps, Fenton did the re-packaging itself.