The self-described "progressive" Ken Brociner wrote in the March 2, 2008 edition of In These Times: "The term 'progressive' has evolved a great deal over the past 35 years. By the ’70s, many ’60s veterans had concluded that working 'within the system' had become a viable option. As a result, many leftists stopped using rhetoric and slogans that had marginalized them from the political mainstream. Labels like 'radical', 'leftist', and 'revolutionary' sounded stale and gratuitously provocative. And so, gradually, activists began to use the much less threatening 'progressive.' Today, 'progressive' is the term of choice for practically everyone who has a politics that used to be called 'radical.'

A popular perception currently is that political progressivism (or leftism) represents idealism and a bold revolutionary spirit -- "the courage to change," as some modern politicians have put it. By contrast, many deem the political "right" (or conservatism) synonymous with social reaction or counter-revolutionary tendencies.

But without a historical, political, and cultural frame of reference, these definitions tell us little about the principles that either side upholds. The established traditions of different cultures vary greatly, and thus progressivism or leftism, i.e. the inclination to change the existing order, means something very different in each culture.

Consider that the aforementioned term -- "counter-revolutionary" -- was invented by the terrorists of the French Revolution to stigmatize their opponents as the latter were being led to the guillotine. The first "counter-revolutionaries" were in fact the very people in whose name the revolution had triumphed, the Catholic peasants of the Vendee. A quarter of a million such enemies of the radical future were slaughtered in the Jacobin Terror of the revolutionary Year II. The peasants of the Vendee were not opposed to the changes of 1789 -- the constitutional reforms of the Monarchy, the Declaration of the Rights of Man, the enfranchisement of the Third Estate - but to the revolutionary dictatorship that followed. It was the new liberated order, the Republic of Virtue and the Cult of Reason (and the Reign of Terror required to make its citizens reasonable and virtuous) that inspired their resistance and made them counter-revolutionary or conservative. 

The radical ethos of the French Revolution became the wellspring of a socialist revolt against bourgeois order that culminated in the establishment of the Soviet empire. On the other hand, the libertarian ethos of the American Revolution inspired the conservative opponents of the Soviet tyranny, a counter-revolution based on individual rights, free markets and democratic constitutions. The revolutionary societies that followed this latter path formed an alliance of free nations that would eventually confront the Soviet empire. The Cold War is often presented as a power struggle with no particular historical dimension. But it is more accurately seen as the climactic phase of the conflict between these contending traditions. 

When these two traditions confront each other in their historic conflict, progressivism and conservatism (left and right) become inverse images. Within the Soviet bloc, progressive or "left" signifies counter revolution -- capitalism, liberalism, democracy; "right" means the defense of the conservative status quo (the Marxist dictatorship, communism, socialism). In the West, it is just the opposite: To be conservative within a revolutionary tradition simply means to conserve the paradigm peculiar to that revolution. To be conservative, or on the "right," in the context of the democratic West means to preserve the liberal, individualist and free-market framework that is its historic achievement and to act on the non-utopian premises that are its philosophical foundation. Among the highest values of the contemporary right in America are: individual freedom, the rule of law, private property, and limited government. The progressive left, by contrast, favors group identification and group rights; separate standards of behavior and performance for different groups; public or governmental control over private property; and generally greater governmental involvement in -- and oversight of -- the affairs of the populace.

In this section of DiscoverTheNetworks, the category titled "Liberal/Left/Progressive: Definition, Nature, Worldview, and Goals" examines the various core beliefs and ultimate objectives associated with the terms "liberal," "left," and "progressive." In his September 12, 2002 article, "The Psychology Underlying 'Liberalism'" (published by FrontPageMagazine.com), John J. Ray offers a comprehensive analysis of this topic.

The category titled Historical Perspectives examines the intellectual origins of leftism, its precepts, and how these have evolved over time.

The Political Correctness category examines a phenomenon that -- according to the Free Congress Foundation publication "Political Correctness": A Short History of an Ideology -- is "an alien system of beliefs, attitudes and values" that "seeks to impose a uniformity of thought and behavior on all Americans and is therefore totalitarian in nature." "Its roots," adds this document, "lie in a version of Marxism which seeks a radical inversion of the traditional culture in order to create a social revolution…."

The category titled Tactics of the Left focuses on the strategies employed by leftists in pursuit of their political and social objectives.

The category titled Radical Road Maps is devoted entirely to James H. Hansen's 2006 treatise, "Radical Road Maps: Uncovering the Web of Connections Among Far-Left Groups in America," published by WND Books. In explaining the scope of his work, Hansen writes: "This book examines the significant groups of the Far Left in America today and discusses how they connect and interact, how they operate, what they profess, and why this matters."

The New Left category examines the movement that emerged in the 1960s as a rejection Stalinism's "excesses," and as a means of preserving the utopian communist dream without having to support (or be associated with) Stalin’s atrocities.

The Postmodernism category explores what Gary Jason describes in "Socialism's Last Bastion" as the mindset that "views the whole Enlightenment project as a failure." "It is socially subjectivist in epistemology," adds Jason, "holding that the 'world' is what we socially construct, and each 'group' (racial, gender, linguistic, ethnic, national or what have you) constructs the world according to its group identity. Postmodernists are egalitarian and collectivist in matters ethical and political."

The category titled Philanthropic Generosity of Liberals vs. Conservatives explores the issue of who is more inclined to donate money to charitable causes -- liberals and leftists on the one hand, or conservatives on the other. In his January 22, 2007 article, "Faith, Hope, and Charity: Who Gives to Whom, and Why" (published by The Weekly Standard), Martin Morse Wooster reviews Arthur C. Brooks' empirical research on this topic.

The category titled Leftist Lobbying and Advocacy examines how special-interest groups influence U.S. legislators. In his March 2007 article "The Liberal Lock on Congress" (published by the Capital Research Center), Matthew Vadum writes that such organizations "want to raise taxes, take away consumer choice, engineer social changes, and further regulate the environment, while weakening government’s ability to defend Americans from terrorist attack."

The category titled Liberal/Leftist "Hate" Speech and Character Assassination cites numerous examples of mean-spirited rhetoric and ad hominem attacks that the Left typically characterizes as the exclusive provence of conservatives.

The category titled Individual Rights vs. Government Intrusion explores the balance between individual liberty on the one hand, and its erosion by political and judicial forces on the other. This category features resources that discuss governmental influences on such matters as drug legalization, childrearing, childhood education, gun rights, hiring practices, property rights, eating habits, driving habits, smoking, and gambling.

The category titled Leftist Lies About Marriage and Family scrutinizes the Left's implication that the traditional nuclear family is an increasingly outmoded institution in the West, as evidenced by a purportedly skyrocketing divorce rate. In a May 11, 2007 piece titled "The Press Catches up with the Truth about Divorce" (published by TownHall.com), Michael Medved addresses what he calls "the myth of America's 'soaring divorce rate,' and the pernicious lie that '50% of all marriages end in divorce."

The category titled Euston Manifesto examines the document that Martin Walker, in his article "The Left Thinks Again" (published by MonstersAndCritics.com), characterizes as "a statement of principles in support of democracy, freedom of speech and ideas, and firm opposition to terrorism, all forms of totalitarianism and all soft-headed apologies for it."