‘Progressives’ is the Wrong Name for Liberal Democrats

Masksby Patricia L. Dickson   8/6/14
In recent years, Liberal Democrats have adopted the name Progressives. Is the name appropriate? Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines progressive as moving forward or onward, happening or developing gradually over a period of time, or characterized by progression. If Liberals are indeed progressives, how is it that they deploy pre-Civil Rights era rhetoric to combat any Republican opposition to Democrat initiatives? The same goes for Republican initiatives that Democrats oppose.

Liberals, and their media allies instantly compare voter ID laws to poll taxes and literacy test that were outlawed in the 1965 Voters Rights Act. However, neither will acknowledge that it is regressive to claim that black Americans in 2014 (post-Civil Rights Act) are unable to secure something as simple as a photo ID. In addition, how can Liberal females call themselves progressives if they cannot afford their own birth control? How is that progress? Yet, Democrats accuse Republicans of wanting to take the country back to the 1950s.[pullquote]In addition, how can Liberal females call themselves progressives if they cannot afford their own birth control? How is that progress?[/pullquote]

Leftist Geraldo Rivera compared The Drudge Report’s headlines about the threat of diseases that could possibly be brought over with the influx of illegals crossing our borders to what he calls “fear mongering” that happened when the Irish, Chinese, and Jewish immigrants came to America in the 19th Century. Although women can obtain a safe abortion from a number of clinics throughout the U.S., Nancy Pelosi and other Liberal women claim that any cut in funding would force women back to back alley abortions with coat hangers.

Liberals assert that racism is still a factor in hindering black Americans from succeeding in 2014, yet fail to produce any actual proof. Successful black conservatives such as Dr. Ben Carson and Thomas Sowell who were born into poverty and pulled themselves up by their own efforts are dismissed as Uncle Toms because they disprove the narrative. Even Morgan Freeman stated to leftist Don Lemon on CNN, that race is no barrier to success today and that both of them are proof.

Democrats have to continue to bring up the past in order to inflame hearts and to remind their base of their victimhood. Obviously, the race industry wishes that America were still under the pre-Civil Rights Jim Crow era because of the constant references to it. The NAACP’s magazine Crisis reminds black America that things have not changed in fifty years. The public education system (run by Democrats) has rewritten history books to encourage kids to live in the past. The universities have taken up the Liberal mantle with its Black and Women studies programs along with the recent White Privilege Conferences. All of this is an effort to remind us of the past rather than acknowledging America’s progress.

Any day of the week, MSNBC (the FORWARD channel) will constantly remind one of the past. MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry compared Governor Rick Perry (R-TX) and his decision to send National Guard troops to the border to southern Democrats blocking African American children from integrating into previously all-white public schools in 1957.

Anyone who believes that Liberals are indeed progressives should look at how their policies have affected Americans. Fifty years of so-called “progressive” policies have created women like Julia who depend on the government from cradle to grave. Their policies have enslaved poor black Americans and other minorities so that they will forever be dependent on government handouts. The public school system has dumbed down our kids so that more who cannot read or do arithmetic are graduating form high school. How is that for progress?


PatriciaDicksonPatricia Dickson blogs at Patricia’s Corner.
About Author  Author Archive  Email • (1733 views)

Share
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to ‘Progressives’ is the Wrong Name for Liberal Democrats

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    One should always look at anything the Left says as being the opposite of the truth, and one will rarely be wrong. Thus, they used to be called liberal until that became too toxic a label — yet no one is more illiberal than the left (as Allen Drury observed over 40 years ago). Now they call themselves progressive, but no ideology likely to win in America today is more regressive. The best descriptions are totalitarian (or one of its branches, such as fascist or Marxist) and Orwellian, so naturally they’ll never use those (unless it’s to project them on their political enemies).

  2. David Ray says:

    Glad to hear that Morgan Freeman had a flash of common-sense. I remember him from The Electric Company on PBS and have enjoyed him in his movies. Hence I got bummed to hear him slandering the Tea Party as “racist” (with no case to back it up).

    Is that the only cry-baby debate point liberals have?? (These intellectual light-weights might wanna realize that those videos they’ve cited were staged by “Crash the Tea Party” frauds.)

  3. NAHALKIDES NAHALKIDES says:

    Actually, the fact that the Left is now hiding behind the “progressive” label is good news, in a way, for it means that “liberalism” (really meaning Leftism) has acquired a bad name, so they’re trying to rebrand themselves. Ironically, they’ve gone full circle back to “progressive” when they only started calling themselves “liberal” after they made the “progressive” brand toxic as well back in the 1930’s!

    I say by all means, let’s identify today’s Left with the American progressive movement of a hundred years ago. Let us remember the failures of Woodrow Wilson and the progressive fondness for communism, and let us reclaim the word “liberal” for our side – the side of liberty. But above all, let us challenge the Left’s ideas, something they’re very afraid of.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      I say by all means, let’s identify today’s Left with the American progressive movement of a hundred years ago. Let us remember the failures of Woodrow Wilson and the progressive fondness for communism, and let us reclaim the word “liberal” for our side – the side of liberty.

      In a sense, the defines the issue, Nik. Conservatives have an institutional memory. The Left tends to fly on the fumes of a utopian dream. The vision is like a drug and clouds out the reality of past failures. There is always the exalted “feeling” that it can be done right.

      Sowell concisely defines this contrast as the constrained or “tragic” view of mankind (conservatism) vs. the unconstrained or “utopian” view (liberalism). And that “constrained” part is vital, for even if one thoroughly believed in the utopian vision of the Left, if one took note of the problems, failures, and just acknowledged the plain idea that you have to make choices in this life and can’t have it all, then the excesses and destruction of one’s exalted “vision” would necessarily be limited.

      But the vision of the Left knows no constraints. They are not willing to make adult choices. By rights, the evidence is ample and abundant regarding the failure of collectivism and statism, as well as the evidence in favor of freedom and limited government. But we are a culture that is now willfully blind…about this, CO2, Islam, Hamas, and many other things.

      The changes of labels from liberal to progressive to liberal and then back to progressive is in line with a movement that thrives on the loss of institutional and cultural memory. Indeed, such a changing of the names is meant to thicken the fog. We exist here at StubbornThings to try to shine a light into the fog, but too many people are fat, happy, and dumb at the moment to bother with weighty issues.

  4. “Progressive” is another leftist lie. They know darn well that they are taking us right back to communism, to statism, to tyranny so they call themselves “progressives” in the hopes of hiding that fact.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Everything about them is false. For that matter, even their party name is a lie; Democrats today seek to nullify through the oligarchy of the juristocracy any popular referendum they oppose, and support executive despotism as long as the executive is one of them. So liberals are illiberal, progressives are regressive, and Democrats oppose democracy. For that matter, opposition to pro-black racial discrimination is called racist. Truth is almost invariably the exact opposite of what they say.

  5. Rosalys says:

    “…developing gradually over a period of time.”

    This is why the Progressives called themselves Progressives, because the anarchistic, blow-everything-up approach wasn’t winning them much support. I’d say they have been very successful taking the gradual route over the past century.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      The idea of Fabian socialism (as Philip Crane once pointed out) was that the socialists should infiltrate, and eventually take over, key institutions such as education and communications. The implication, of course, was that once they had control they would exclude those who disagree with them, which is in fact happening in many organizations today. Their notion was that once they had such control, opposing views could effectively be excluded. This would allow socialism to be “freely” chosen. Obviously, they realized that it could never triumph if people were exposed to the alternative. (Think of that the next time you see a play by George Bernard Shaw, one of the leading Fabians, who once celebrated Jack the Ripper for drawing attention to the poor of Whitechapel — by horribly murdering some of them.)

  6. Well my articles are making over to leftwing blogs and they are not happy with me.

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/06/1317235/-No-Blacks-Don-t-Vote-Republican-Because-of-Bad-Republican-Policies#

    If you notice, the author starts out by disparaging The American Thinker website and distinguished Col Allen West. He did not originally post a link to my article in his so-called response; however I have been on twitter with him today and he claims he has now added it (probably a little to late for his readers to notice). But why did he not include a link to my original article to begin with? Is it that he is so afraid that just maybe one of his readers will continue reading conservative articles over at the AT and in turn leave the plantation? Anyway, I have been debating with him on twitter for about an hour. I want to post our conversation so that you all can read it , but I have not figured out how just yet.

    Patrici15767099 I responded to your article on why blacks should vote GOP. I say they shouldn’t. @AllenWest http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/06/1317235/-No-Blacks-Don-t-Vote-Republican-Because-of-Bad-Republican-Policies

    Patricia Dickson ‏@Patrici15767099 · 11h
    @chrisLrob @AllenWest I noticed that you did not provide a LINK to my original article so that your readers can read the ENTIRE article.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Patricia, I hold you in very high esteem. And how in the world is Allen West “disgraced”? Man oh man. That’s a lot of kool-aid someone has been drinking.

      Keep up the good fight and as someone posted here recently, remember “They hated me first.”

  7. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Democrats have to continue to bring up the past in order to inflame hearts and to remind their base of their victimhood. Obviously, the race industry wishes that America were still under the pre-Civil Rights Jim Crow era because of the constant references to it. The NAACP’s magazine Crisis reminds black America that things have not changed in fifty years. The public education system (run by Democrats) has rewritten history books to encourage kids to live in the past. The universities have taken up the Liberal mantle with its Black and Women studies programs along with the recent White Privilege Conferences. All of this is an effort to remind us of the past rather than acknowledging America’s progress.

    That’s a fantastic point, Patricia. I view “Progressives” as decidedly regressive. They want to go back and try yet again the failed scheme of Communism.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      I’ve long referred to the Black/Women’s/etc. studies programs as liberal madrassas, since that’s their basic purpose. I will also note the comment by Kevin Cosby (a black preacher in Louisville) who, when criticized for allowing Anne Northup (who has at least one adopted black child) to appear at his church, pointed out that many liberals seem to think this is still the 1960s. This led me to refer to such people as Rip Van Winkle liberals.

  8. Some thoughts on what I am learning by personally engaging with Liberals (so far only black ones) are they are frightened to death of black conservatives. A black writer from The Daily Kos has all but begged me not to talk to poor black children about conservative policies. He started out by telling me that I needed to back up the statements that I made in my article with proof. I told him that first of all, he was not my intended target, the poor black people that want to improve their lives are. Secondly, my own personal life experiences are my number one proof. That is when he began to panic. There is nothing more powerful and credible than a personal experience.

    Another thing that is stunning to me is that Democrats actually believe that they OWN black Americans and no one else has the right to talk to them. I thought that was the case, however now I am certain. The more I conversed via twitter with the black leftwing writer, the more he kept telling me that he hoped that I was not telling poor black kids my conservative beliefs. Why does it matter to him what I am saying to poor blacks? The main conflict between the two of us was school choice (vouchers). Although he did not admit it, I think he may be a public school teacher.
    The reason that I put my email address at the bottom of my articles is so that people can email me. I want to engage with people who are bold enough to let themselves be known via their personal email address. The following is an email that I received from a black female who is angry with me because of what I am saying about black Americans. One can tell by her email that it is no use trying to reason with her (mainly because I am not sure she is literate enough to understand).

    “I am a black voter and te article i just read does not speak for black voters i know the republican party has become the party of no. no todo governing no to anything good for all americans. I was a reagan demócrat but this party is not reagans party so please stop saying why blacks vote one way or another if you have never been black in this congress or shall i say since obama took office a”

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Let me use my humble talents to parse and explain that:

      I am a black voter and te article i just read does not speak for black voters

      Note that StubbornThings generally espouses a traditional American, Christian, and conservative philosophy. I could further nuance that and give the various sub-categories. But nowhere do we speak for “white voters” or “black voters.” Thinking in those terms is the fruit of the Democratic Party which has tribalized people into various victim identity groups. I should hope to hell that Patricia’s articles do not speak to “black voters” for I was under the understanding that underneath the skin, we were all the same. If she is speaking to “black voters” then she is either condescending to them or believes “black voters” are some different and foreign species of human beings. And I’m sure that is not the case.

      i know the republican party has become the party of no. no todo governing no to anything good for all americans.

      I give the lady credit for at least repeating this sound-byte more or less correctly. But it is just a sound byte. Surely any parent would not want to be known as “the parent of no” because he or she must occasionally say “no” to some bad things that their children want. Sound bytes and slogans are not a good substitute for thinking, but they are good at anti-thinking and keeping people from questioning their political masters.

      I was a reagan demócrat

      This is almost certainly a lie and is the kind of subterfuge and manipulation common from those on the Left. And if this person did like Reagan (who was staunchly conservative), they should generally not like Republicans because today’s Republicans are Democrats Lite. This kind of anti-thought also is a central part of Libertarianism where slogans replace actually dealing with reality.

      It’s too bad that black Americans have bought into this poisonous garbage being spread by the Left and Democrats. As Rush says, we conservatives want everyone to do well.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        Rush Limbaugh noted that there were seminars on how to lie on talk radio, which included pretending to be Republicans. On one occasion, a woman got on and started to identify herself as a Democrat (she got out the first syllable of her real party, and I don’t think she meant to identify herself as a dipshit) before claiming to be a Republican. I was listening at the time, and that’s something I won’t forget.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          There are many similarities between the Left/Democrats and Islam in regards to the belief that their cause is so just, and their enemies so dangerous and evil, that lying is allowed.

          I don’t need to lie about conservatism nor do I want to. And, by the way, it’s my opinion that Libertarianism shares this lying trait to some extent.

          • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

            it’s my opinion that Libertarianism shares this lying trait to some extent.

            But to a lesser extent as the dope does a good job of lowering one’s I.Q. in any case. Sometimes they are just confused.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Currently, the Democrats know that they need their virtual ownership of the black vote to win. Since political victory is their sole basis of virtue, they naturally think this means that anything that gets in the way of that — such as the example of conservative blacks — must be destroyed. And thus, so must such dangerous examples, which is why they’re so virulent against Clarence Thomas, Mia Love, Allen West, etc.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        anything that gets in the way of that — such as the example of conservative blacks — must be destroyed. And thus, so must such dangerous examples, which is why they’re so virulent against Clarence Thomas, Mia Love, Allen West, etc.

        Part of the Democrats message to blacks is “you can’t make it without us”. Such a message is an open display of a racial view; a view which clearly holds blacks are somehow inferior to others thus need help from the Democrats to make it in this country.

        I don’t understand how so many black people can swallow this rubbish. It would piss me off.

        • Timothy Lane says:

          That’s why they push the victim-group culture. It provides them with a ready-made excuse for their failure to improve their lot while encouraging them to hate the opposition (and thus pre-emptively ignore their arguments). The fact that it leaves the blacks (and the country as a whole) worse off is of course irrelevant to them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *