420stalin69, 2 months ago (edited 2 months ago) The qualifier “progressive” is used to describe a liberal who supports progressive social issues. Supporting gay rights or feminism etc, that’s being a “progressive” (loosely speaking, it can be defined better than that.) You seem to want to insist all liberals are progressive liberals but they aren’t. That’s why the qualifiers “classical liberal” or “liberal conservatism” exist. In some countries the “Liberal” party are the socially conservative faction of society. You’re wrong to conflate liberalism with progressivism. That’s why they’re different words. You’re also wrong to imply that progressive stances are “owned” by “liberals”. You want to say “progressive liberal” is a tautology…. But it isn’t.
The qualifier “progressive” is used to describe a liberal who supports progressive social issues.
Supporting gay rights or feminism etc, that’s being a “progressive” (loosely speaking, it can be defined better than that.)
You seem to want to insist all liberals are progressive liberals but they aren’t.
That’s why the qualifiers “classical liberal” or “liberal conservatism” exist.
In some countries the “Liberal” party are the socially conservative faction of society.
You’re wrong to conflate liberalism with progressivism. That’s why they’re different words.
You’re also wrong to imply that progressive stances are “owned” by “liberals”.
You want to say “progressive liberal” is a tautology…. But it isn’t.