Make Liberalism Great Again: a 6 Step Plan by TaraElla

[rogerashton]

2. I, too, am in some sympathy with the article, but

1) The reason many non-conservatives identify as "progressives" is that the conservative-dominated media managed to make "liberal" a dirty word.

2) The term "authoritarian left" is red-baiting. The division among socialists is between revolutionary and "evolutionary" socialism. Revolution is a struggle, and struggles demand more discipline than a tea party does. I reject the revolutionary socialist position myself -- I wouldn't be a Democrat nor on this board otherwise -- and I reject it in part because it leads to authoritarian government which in turn is subversive of socialism. But revolutionary socialists (Trotskyists, for example) have different views on that. They advocate something like "permanent revolution," not authoritarianism.

3) In addition to the liberties the article mentions, "classical" liberalism advocated liberty also in the disposition of property (and implicitly that all property is private property.) How is "liberalism" in that sense different from the conservatism of, e.g., the National Review?

I think we on the Democratic left need to live in the real world. Opposition to the conservative ascendancy demands energy and commitment. You have to be for something. Being for something will make you a progressive (if you succeed.)