The word "progressive" in the political arena has become more prominent over the last decade or more. What do we mean when we use the word progressive ?
In the US, "progressive" is a synonym for baby-eating filthy, totalitarian socialists. I would like to see other definitions, if available.
anything you want it to. when used by politicians, the implication is usually that they are pro "something different from the status quo" its just really another means for politicians and commentators to imply "change" without having to commit themselves to anything specific
"Change, change, change! Enough! As if things weren't bad enough already!" For Conservatives the above is a motto to be reflected unthinkingly in policy. For Progressives it is anathema to be fought unthinkingly against. For normal people it's a humorous play on words.
Yet I am sure I can remember David Cameron claiming that a policy he was proposing was "progressive". I think it was at PMQs in a response to a question from Red Ed, he was probably just trying to wind him up.
In modern parlance, everybody has to be in favour of "change" and "reform". It is impossible for anyone, anywhere on the political spectrum, to proclaim themselves to be opposed to change and reform. So those words have become content-free; they mean nothing at all. There is however scope for political figures to argue for change in a retrograde direction. For example a truly unscrupulous chancer could set up a party specially designed to attract reactionary elderly voters who hanker nostalgically for the days when all the faces in the High Street were white, when the sun never set on the British Empire, when gays stayed in the closet, and when Britain would have nothing to do with those nasty foreigners who start at Calais ....
here is another wee prediction from the F.T. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cf88dd8a-b2b5-11e4-a058-00144feab7de.html#axzz3Rdap9xCE
I think it's 42% likely that rival clans within the SNP will begin slaughtering each other before the next election.
how's this for progressive politics. survival of the fittest. The Highland Clan Wars [Archive] - Civilization Fanatics' Forums
Yes There is a grain of truth in Pete's characterisation of some UKIP supporters but it fails to grasp the real issue. The EU isn't working, but then very few other places are either, and the world economy has stalled. I sense a paradigm shift in England with Labour and Conservative unlikely to get an overall majority any time soon. Protest votes are going to nationalist parties who are characterised as being well intentioned but dim north of the border and nasty south of the border. Deals will be done, although some leaders are being very clear over what their minimum conditions for support will be, but that will change. Watchers of politics are in for an interesting time.
As I have noted before, if two or more parties form a coalition, none of the parties involved will be able to implement their manifesto policies in full. The first thing each coalition partner has to do is to dump whichever manifesto promises the other partners refuse to accept. That's inherent in the whole concept of coalition - and it will be no good people whinging about broken promises, etc. No party could possibly give any clue in advance of an election which of their promises they intend to break the following day, obviously. They have to be "very clear" in asserting that they will not do what they know very well they are going to have to do. And that's politics.
Caricatured more accurately, in both cases. Vastly exaggerate distinguishing features to create a grotesque which is lifelike but utterly artificial, either for comic or political effect or both. Some people call it reactionary, some call it satire, some call it desperation. Delete according to preference/prejudice. That's politics too.