I haven't yet stated whether evidence tends to favor conservatism or liberalism.  The evidence, however, greatly favors one of the two ideologies over the other.  Once I've made enough posts on this blog, the answer should be clear.

In the meantime, let me say this:

I find it disturbing that I often hear liberals described as progressive, yet I don't hear conservatives described as progressive.

How can this be?  I don't feel that there is anything about liberalism that makes it the exclusive domain of progressiveness.

The literal definition is this: to be progressive means to advance, to improve things.  To improve things means to improve existing policies or select new policies that are supported by the bulk of the evidence.

Such policies could be either liberal or conservative, depending on which topic you investigate. Liberals don't have a monopoly on progressiveness.

Perhaps those who call liberals progressive aren't using the literal definition?  If you were to instead define progressive ideology as the ideology that is least applied throughout American government (meaning its use would be considered a progression away from the current dominant ideology), that would be conservatism.  There is no doubt that liberal ideology permeates government policies.

So, as you see, there is no reason liberals should be automatically described as progressive. My blog will periodically examine just how "progressive" liberalism is.

10/24/2010 06:05:28 am

Oh for the love of Pete.

Liberalism(in the US - liberal has a different global or philosophical meaning)is associated with progressiveness because it has historically been the force that pushed for fundamental changes within society.
Abolition, civil rights, women's rights, international law, progressive taxation, trade unions, environmentalism.

Conservatism is defined by Webster as "a disposition in politics to preserve what is established". That is the opposite of progressive, which is defined by Webster as "making use of or interested in new ideas, findings, or opportunities".

Obviously, you cannot confound liberal and conservative with democrat and republican. While in the US the democrats are considered the liberal party and the republicans tend toward conservatism, there is a distinction.

10/24/2010 08:08:29 am

Kelly makes the point that I was going to. The reason is in the name CONSERVatism. it deals with conserving parts of society, or if changing society it is usually back to some previous time.

10/24/2010 10:44:27 am


I never stated that I didn't understand why liberalism was considered progressive in the past. I get it. They advanced things like civil rights, etc.

Much of that progressiveness has already been established. My point is that liberalism as it is today is not very progressive at all, because much of it is illogical, and thereby it's impossible to be progressive in the most important sense, which is improving through new ideas.

10/25/2010 05:19:25 am

Are you familiar with the work of British author G K Chesterton? He expressed himself very similarly to you. For instance he said that "Liberals exist to make mistakes. Conservatives exist to stop them form being corrected".

10/25/2010 07:29:16 am


I'm not familiar with him. Thanks for the heads up. I will add him to my reading list!

Alice O. Nunez
10/26/2010 01:45:54 am

Particularly on the matter of taxation, "progressive" refers to the fact that the tax rate increases as you go from one tax bracket to the next. It doesn't really have anything to do with "progress" in the sense you're using it.

Reader 79
11/11/2010 03:00:35 pm

No progress of any kind can be made when we must deal w/ the whining ("we want our country back!") obstructionist party of NO. These people have made it their goal in life to return our country to the dark ages & turn it into a 3rd world christianocracy.

Frankly, I'm scared as hell for my children.

11/11/2010 03:00:59 pm

Reader 79,

If policies in place are mostly illogical, then I think it's entirely rational to say "no", we want rational policies.

The debate should center on determining what the most rational policies are, regardless of whether they are liberal or conservative.

It's important to realize that just because some aspects of liberalism were at one point considered progressive, that doesn't mean that other aspects of liberalism are progressive.

Something can only be progressive if it's a change from current policy AND is logical. If not, it's a step backward.

It's wrong to assume that the way the country was in the past was in all respects backward. When a country moves forward with illogical policies, then moving backward in time is actually a step forward.

I do think that religiosity is likely a very negative influence on society overall.

11/11/2010 03:01:19 pm

what specifically makes liberalism illogical?
yes, i know that question could garner a very lengthy reply, whether right or wrong, but im curious what points youre willing to argue against at least 100 years of intellectual policy makers.

11/11/2010 03:01:38 pm

Just because policy makers tend to espouse liberal views in America doesn't mean they are logical views. After all, there aren't enough people with 180 IQs around to even fill the 100 spots in the Senate alone.

I never said all liberal ideas are illogical. I said that a great percentage of liberal views (versus conservative) are illogical.

Do you expect me to go into a lengthy reply here instead of saving my ideas for further blogs?

Just review my site, you'll see some examples of illogical liberal views.

11/11/2010 03:01:53 pm

Well, "conservatism" is derived from the fact that they're more likely to stick to "traditional" values.


Leave a Reply.