As for this particular topic, I hope I can add (constructively, as admonished ) to the definition of “progressive.” Perhaps you’d like the perspective of a Libeqrat. (A what? Heh, don’t go googling that or stampeding to your dictionaries….it’s just a term my friends and I have coined for libertarian-influenced progressives who focus on LIBerty, EQuality and RATionality.)

My tiny group believes that each and every person on the planet is equally, fully and substantively entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. (We kinda Americans we were supposed to hold that truth to be self evident. Silly us.) Progressives most certainly believe in that ideal — though we have an approach to the ideal that separates us from other ideologies. Namely, we recognize that government and collective action are do not necessarily threaten an individual’s pursuit of happiness. In fact, the lack of government and collective action can threaten the pursuit of happiness we hold so dear. If I may quote from our own blog:

“Simply put, real world circumstances often militate against the pursuit of happiness and in favor of pure survival. At such a point, the choices an individual makes in order to survive can hardly be deemed voluntary or consensual, and her lack of ability to pursue her own happiness is unconscionably low.”

Progressives seek proactive governments who ensure that no individual finds herself in such circumstances. Contrast that with the orthodoxy of the Libertarian Party, which would advocate a purely laissez faire approach to government, in which people are

“. . . free, in sort of a “survival of the fittest,” “sporting match without a referee,” “welcome to the jungle” sense of freedom, but how exactly is that a good thing without some sort of enforced measure of Equality? If the government stays out of EVERYTHING, we have merely beheaded the de jure tyranny of government oppression only to have the head of de facto tyrannies of corporations, pollution, bigotry and poverty grow in its place. Sure, markets are good, but not entirely self-regulating in a completely beneficial way. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are threatened by unrestrained powerful private people, and the government must act affirmatively, for Freedom, Equality, Safety and Happiness to have real substance. Otherwise, the vast, vast majority of people end up impoverished, discriminated against, physically sick and powerless. If they can’t turn to the government for collective help, they can’t turn anywhere. To wit, government must provide social programs that provide an economic safety net and to produce social equality as much as humanly possible.”

From those basic ideas, we as Libeqrats, would hope that other issue stances logically follow. Indeed, we want Health and health care for everyone. It’s simply part of ensuring that each and every one of us can pursue our own happiness — the founding ideal of the United States. And indeed, we want a measure of Prosperity for everyone — at least enough to allow everyone to pursue happiness in the real world. And yes, we also want Peace for everyone, since, after all, the self evident truths apply to all people, not merely all Americans. Our particular challenge, and one about which I debate with my friends, is how to resolve the apparent tension between freedom and equality, under which some sort of collective action will somehow interfere with individual liberty.

Anyway, I hope that wasn’t too academic, and might actually prove constructive in your debates. I’ve bookmarked your site, and hope to be back here more often.

What is Progressive? A major prerequisite optimism and today I find my own optimism being sorely tested. I feel a very strong empathy towards Cindy Sheehan and her views about the Democratic party in particular. I sincerely hope Cindy is only suffering temporary battle fatigue and not giving up the fight entirely.

Another severe test of optimism are details emerging about the so-called benchmarks in the latest version of the supplemental appropriations bill and the full extent of the capitulation by the Democratic party. According to Ann Wright, retired U.S. Army colonel, the most important “benchmark” is the passage of oil industry privatization legislation by the figurehead Iraqi Parliament.

What Congress Really Approved: Privatizing Iraq’s Oil for US Companies
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/052607Z.shtml

This is most disturbing aspect of this “benchmark” is the fact that oil industry privatization has been a primary aim of the Bush Administration from the very beginning of this conflict and now it is being handed to them by a Democratic controlled legislature. The Democrats have proven just how complicit they are in this corporate grab for oil. Cindy Sheehan is right and our only hope now is that the Iraqi Parliament will be more independent then the US Congress. What a sad state of affairs.

Now we must ask for action from our ‘list’.

I will digest this post, commit to taking even more private progressive action through communicating with our legislators, in addition to my efforts to reach out to my fellow citizens online and in person. I will also work with you to refine and promote this worthwhile meme.

I wish regular_guy had been present at our last gathering, as his comments re: the fundamental difference between campaigning and governing were given more weight in the lucid comments of one of our guests. Despite the difference in perspective within our budding group, I believe we can agree that we now have a solid start in defining what progressives value and what we all hope to achieve.

Bravo.