Politics & Policy

It’s Time to Retire the ‘Progressive’ Label

Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer lead Democratic legislators to unveil the Democratic party’s “Better Deal” for America (Reuters: James Lawler Duggan)
‘Socialist’ is a more accurate description of today’s Democratic base.

Over and over again, political pundits and journalists make constant reference to the Democrats’ “progressive base.” Without heavy progressive turnout, we are told, the House won’t flip in 2018 and Democrats will have to endure the most painful, humiliating victory Tweetstorm from President Trump.

This is likely true, but it raises an important question: What exactly is a “progressive” at this point?

The group of voters currently holding Democratic leaders (and let’s face it, donors) hostage has made it clear that the party’s next nominee for president must adopt certain policies, such as single-payer health care and a nationwide $15 minimum wage, to secure their support. Such policies will likely be sold by the press and Democratic leaders as a “Strong Progressive Agenda,” or something similar.

Yet such a description is vague at best and deceptive at worst. After all, Senator Bernie Sanders mainstreamed many of these policies in last year’s Democratic primary campaign, not as a Democrat but as an Independent who proudly calls himself a “democratic socialist.” Despite his outsider status, Sanders still received over 43 percent of the votes cast in his campaign against Hillary Clinton. And according to a poll done in 2016 by American Action Network, nearly 60 percent of Democratic primary voters viewed socialism as having a “positive impact on society.”

So one must ask why so many insist on using an outmoded nicety like “progressive.” While the term was originally used to describe those who supported a more active federal government and expansive welfare state in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, old-school progressives like Presidents Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson didn’t advocate for government control of the means of production, as many socialists do today. Setting aside whether or not their policies of trust busting or expanding the role of the executive branch produced desirable outcomes, neither of these men sought to fundamentally dismantle the nation’s market economy.

Sanders was asked in an interview with The Nation in 2015 about whether a socialist could be president. He responded that he wasn’t “afraid of the word” and had no problem defending its core tenets. So why are so many other people?

Old-school progressives like Presidents Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson didn’t advocate for government control of the means of production, as many socialists do today.

The answer likely has to do with marketing. “Progressive” remains a nebulous enough term that the average voter won’t make any immediate historical connections to the phrase; the historical failures of socialism, meanwhile, are well documented. The root of the word — progress — has generally positive connotations for voters. Thus when presented with a “progressive” policy, voters will think of an improved future, rather than some sort of rigid ideology. (Simple, yes. But, then, most sales pitches are.)

Of course none of this makes the efforts by Democratic-party officials and their allies in the media to shy away from the “S” word any less disingenuous. When so many members of the party openly celebrate socialism and support socialist candidates, using any other word to describe this political constituency is an act of absurdity.

Perhaps in an earlier time when the country was less divided politically and Americans were more suspicious of liberal welfare programs, a rebranding was necessary. Now, on the heels of a primary campaign in which Democrats nearly nominated a socialist for president, it’s safe to say that that moment has passed.

It’s time to move on as a society and retire “progressive.” “Socialist” might seem just as outdated, but if you’re worried about how people might judge you, perhaps you should reconsider your beliefs.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More
PC Culture

Kill Chic

We live in a society in which gratuitous violence is the trademark of video games, movies, and popular music. Kill this, shoot that in repugnant detail becomes a race to the visual and spoken bottom. We have gone from Sam Peckinpah’s realistic portrayal of violent death to a gory ritual of metal ripping ... Read More

Romney Is a Misfit for America

Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

What the Second Amendment Means Today

The horrifying school massacre in Parkland, Fla., has prompted another national debate about guns. Unfortunately, it seems that these conversations are never terribly constructive — they are too often dominated by screeching extremists on both sides of the aisle and armchair pundits who offer sweeping opinions ... Read More

Fire the FBI Chief

American government is supposed to look and sound like George Washington. What it actually looks and sounds like is Henry Hill from Goodfellas: bad suit, hand out, intoning the eternal mantra: “F*** you, pay me.” American government mostly works by interposition, standing between us, the free people at ... Read More
Film & TV

Black Panther’s Circle of Hype

The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first infantilizes its audience, then banalizes it, and, finally, controls it through marketing. This commercial strategy, geared toward adolescents of all ages, resembles the Democratic party’s political manipulation of black Americans, targeting that audience through its ... Read More