Politically Progressive - Believing and/or working towards substantive equality among a citizenry.

There’s a start anyways.

I personally have disdain for the term “progressive” especially as it’s equated with left-leaning politics. For example, when state economic policies are also the dictate of progressiveness, such as having a well-funded welfare state, social equity programs, etc.

It’s particularly upsetting, because using the word “progressive” with those things is pretentious and arrogant. It’s no different than the politically charged phrases “pro-life” and “pro-choice”.

To be “pro-life” means to support the right to abortion means your “anti-life”.

To be “pro-choice” means to not support the right to abortion means your “anti-choice”.

To be “progressive” means anybody who does not fall into center-left ideologies, in particular, economic policies means your “anti-progressive”.

For this reason I don’t have any respect for that phrase. It’s a loaded word.

I call myself nothing other than a libertarian. I’m for liberty. I don’t label myself with ridiculous words like “progressive” that are designed to make an implicit value judgment against those who disagree with me.

Depends on what framework you want to define it in, Stage.

As a broad principle, politically progressive is the opposite or counterweight to politically conservative. It describes a willingness to consider new approaches or solutions, and the recognition that change in an environment (economic, cultural or physical) sometimes necessitate change in policy. Conservatives, on the other hand, place a higher value experience, tradition, and proven solutions. This is a continuum, not a set of polar opposites.

The word has been coopted by a number of political movements over the years. In the US, the first “progressive” movement at the turn of the century stood for women’s suffrage, social welfare legislation for women and children, workers’ compensation, farm relief, and arms limitations, all of which we’d call “leftish” - but they also called for easier recall of judicial decisions, easier amendment of the U.S. Constitution, injunctions to limit strikes, and other measures which were “progressive” for their day, but that we’d now see as conservative.

The word now has no practical value at all as a political descriptor. In the context of a theocratic fascist state, capitalism is a “progressive” movement. Our little URQ friends are trying to infect it with the same linguistic toxicity they used to poison words like “feminist”, “socialism” and “liberal”….but that sort of debate is at the lower levels of the litter basket.

I think I’ve said this before: progressive, while being a decent enough term to generally discuss a wide-ranging group of thought, shouldn’t equate only to “moving forward”. I mean, if we are to assume this, and assume that conservative means “protect what we have” or “move back”, where do I as a political centrist stand? Do I simply want to accept the status quo?

Well, I think that anybody who reads my blog will see that I don’t particularly stand for the status quo all the time. I like to move forward too. And I believe that conservatives want to move forward as well, but in a different way. The reality is, whether we want to move forward or not, the world will move forward without us. And the question becomes, how do we as politically-minded people deal with this?

I suggest that the term “progressive”, “centrist” and “conservative” applies more to how each individual responds to a particular situation as it materializes.

I understand that cutting off peoples’ hands is viewed as an effective deterrent in some quarters as well.

The point is that “effectiveness” of a deterrent, which is the criterion you introduced in defense of Tent City, is not the only consideration.

The recent spate of attention was triggered not so much by Tent City (which I think most of use were aware of), but by Diva Rachel’s praise of it.

….with his own clone as the warden.