The Progressive Revolution: Putting an end to Liberalism

Now that I have your attention :evilgrin: ...

Simply put, the framing of the term "liberal" has taken the right forty years. Reclaiming that term will take a minimum of another forty for the left.

We don't have forty years to reclaim this term. Jettison it, it has served it's purpose and is now useless for us.

I am a Progressive. This is a frame that has a positive connotation. It denotes forward motion. Progressives move America Forward. The term denotes increased productivity and prosperity, core values of the left and values all hold dear.

By defining ourselves as Progressives, we win in another way. Since we progress, our opponents must, by definition, REGRESS. This makes those who are opposed to the Progressive Revolution Regressives. This is a doubly negative connotation and evokes a positive response to us and our frames while evoking a negative response to our opponents and their frames when it is used.

Progressive pundits must abandon the use of both the term "liberal" AND the term "conservative." An example of a Progressive pundit response follows:

Paul: Bob, you regressives on the right always want to spend money we don't have so that you are taxing people the instant they are born. Bob, stop these rightwing regressive policies and get on board for an America that progresses to the future.

Here is an example of language that is used to frame our objectives in a positive light while associating our opponent both as being opposed to a common sense positive frame and directly as a negative frame. We have now caused the opponent to lose twice. Once because they are defined via a negative term and another because they oppose progress or moving the nation forward.

So from now on, I'm a Progressive fighting the Regressives on the right. This is the Progressive revolution.

It doesn't matter what we call ourselves. Weather it be Democrat, liberal, progressive of the Purple party. They will find a way to smear it.

Call yourself progressive, whatever. I will continue to call myself a liberal because its a term that I am proud of. I refuse to bow to them by using a different term therby justifying their bullshit.

I am proud of liberal programs, I am proud of liberal history. Its not something that I am willing to abandon just so next week some Repug can get on the news and say "well the liberals now calling themselves Progressives... blah blah"

We've allowed the Regressives to frame the debates by defining the terminology from the outset. This has been a drastic strategic error for the Progressives. They will always frame the debate in terminology that allows their ideas to become postive and common sense, thus making them the "good guys" at the visceral level and making all who oppose these frames "bad guys" before the debate is even engaged.

...is that the DLC has already stolen it for their PNAC spin off sickeningly named the "Progressive Policy Institute" (as if there were one fucking thing progressive about imperialism.

Now put that shit out of business and put Marshall in prison where his treasonous ass belongs (along with all the other PNAC'ers) and then I'll be all for the name change.

They forgot the natural negtive connotation of the opposition. Thus, they failed to push the Progressive frame to define them and their core values.

By claiming both the term "progressive" and defining our opponents as "regressive", we complete an otherwise incomplete frame.

Nasty under the surface, but effective overall.

And keep in mind, the Regressives on the right were even more nasty that this when they began making "liberal" a dirty word.

Jesus Christ ... Liberal
Conservatives aren't who they say they are...

:D

and in every other country it refers to Economic not Social policy.

Neo-Liberalism is unregulated Market, essentially.

I agree about using the word Progressive.

It casts the Neo-Cons as the Dinosaurs they are.

And I am PISSED that Kerry didn't feature the Apollo Project for launching the Green Revolution. All other topics could've stemmed from this. Even National Security.

I would hope everybody would learn to adopt this language. It's win-win for us.

Besides the fact that I personally like the concept of liberalism and that I identify myself as one, it's just stupid (not ignorant, lacking in circuitry) to cringe and cede the field. If not fought, it's just another snivelling admission that we're spineless.

You don't have to embrace the tag of liberalism, but the more they can goad and demoralize us by the mere mention of the term, the more we lose. It's pathetic fucking denial. Unless faced, it'll be some kind of wolfbane they can pull out at any moment, and you'll run while trying to avoid it. The more you avoid it, the more they'll attack. The magical key is this: they're so cocksure of their ascendency that they can't conceive of anyone accepting the label and standing right up in their face. As Bill Maher (no friend to the left) says: "look the word up; there's nothing wrong with that word."

It's much better to rub their noses in it, look them in the eye and TELL them you're a liberal; that's going to put their simplistic hateminds on tilt and leave them slobbering with scattered fragments of pomposity like "hating America".

Learn from the Nazis: they attack their opponents' strengths.

If nothing else, whey they deride "liberalism", you HAVE to fight that, whether you identify as such or not. If you don't, they've proven once again that you believe in nothing, and are lying through your teeth.

:eyes:

Thet'll win elections like it did this year, and in 2002, and in 2000....

You are dead on correct. We have failed to capture the essence of the art of language. Lackoff makes an excellent point.

Republican speech is disciplined. That is why their talking heads are interchangable. They all use the same terms and images.

Our speech is not disciplined. This is a huge problem when you are trying to mass market ideas.

The concept of liberalism is sound but the term is dead. The term liberalism is so largely and vaguely defined that continuing to use it is pointless. It has been given a negative connotation quite successfully.

There is no reason to do battle with the right over the definition of a term. There are far more meaningful battles to undertake. The time is well past to shift the frame. Progressive - Regressive has a good conceptual dynamic.