[pixelbro]

Not all change is progress. Make America Great Again is a fundamentally reactionary platform, and nothing about the goals of Project 2025 is "progressive". Cute wordplay, though, good job using denotation to oppose connotation.

[_heimdall]

"Progress" as a goal is only meaningful with a defined direction. But I disagree with you, definitionally any change is progressing towards something.

This is precisely the issue I have always had with considering oneself "progressive". The end goals you are aiming for are the important factor to call out, the fact that you are simply progressing means only that you don't want to stand still.

[robmccoll]

Progressivism and the idea of being "progressive" or "a progressive" are defined ideologies. Within the political spectrum they have their own meaning. Arguing semantics in this way is not particularly different than saying "I saw a Republican turn left coming out of a doorway, so are they really on the right?"

[_heimdall]

Mind sharing, or linking to, what the defined ideology is?

My understanding of progressivism, as it is commonly used in the US, is that its based on often unspoken assumptions that the goals being progressed towards are "good" or "right" and that others' goals, therefore, are not. That isn't really a progressive ideology in my opinion though, and sounds more like an elitist approach to authoritarian rule.

[c0nducktr]

I'll assume you're asking in good faith, you could start by looking at the wikipedia page for progressivism, and continue from there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism

[_heimdall]

It was a genuine question, thanks for assuming that.

I still don't get what the underlying ideology is though (sorry if I'm being obtuse here).

> seeks to advance the human condition through social reform – primarily based on purported advancements in social organization, science, and technology.

"Advance" here has the same issue as "progressive" - it needs direction to be meaningful. This doesn't say what we would be advancing towards, though it does say a few ways we may be able to get there.

For comparison, liberalism and conservativism are much more clear.

Conservativism can be (very roughly) boiled down to "don't break a good thing." Said differently, keep a high bar for change and default to trusting the people before us got here for good reason.

Liberalism can be similarly boiled down to prioritizing individual freedoms and liberty.

With wither of those two there will be a slew of political initiatives or programs that are based on those principles, but the underlying principles are clear.

That's what I've yet to grasp with progressivism, when you peel away all the programs and initiatives what is the underlying principle and what is the specific direction to progress or advance towards? As far as boundary cases go, what does progressivism look like once that goal is reached - does it become conservative?

[lantry]

If you read just a bit further in that article it is rather specific:

> While many ideologies can fall under the banner of progressivism, both the current and historical movement are characterized by a critique of unregulated capitalism, desiring a more active democratic government to take a role in safeguarding human rights, bringing about cultural development, and being a check-and-balance on corporate monopolies.

[robertlagrant]

I agree. Conservative is a slightly less manipulative term than progressive. Progressive implies "we're the goodies"; conservative "we want to keep the current state of things".

[lantry]

But the "Make America Great Again" movement is explicitly regressive because they want to return America to its "past glory". All of trumps messaging has been about how great the US used to be, before it was hijacked by communists/the left/transgenders, and that he will protect you from the cultural changes taking place. This is reactionary/regressive. You can play word games with "progress to the goal of returning america to the past" but it's just spin. People know what "progress" means.

[_heimdall]

I don't disagree at all, I think many of Trump's talking points could fit with a "regressive" label.

I don't think its really word games when talking about progressivism today. Trump could claim the banner of progressive in the sense that he's trying to progress towards a future he believes is better for all of us, while Democrats are attempting to conserve what they built. Personally I see that as a bullshit word game, but that doesn't mean the words are actually used improperly there.

If someone tells you they are progressive, what is the end goal you expect they mean? Its totally possible that banner is shorthand for a specific goal or direction and I just completely missed the boat there.

[lantry]

> Trump could claim the banner of progressive in the sense that he's trying to progress towards a future he believes is better for all of us

He could, but he hasn't.

> totally possible that banner is shorthand for a specific goal or direction

It is, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism