Over the past few years, there has been a shift among those on the left side of the political spectrum to scrap the claim to being "liberal" and adopt the label "progressive."

Hillary Clinton's self-description prompted this shift as "a progressive who likes to get things done." The term "progressive" connotes an even more leftist stance than traditional liberalism. However, when leftist policies seem excessively extreme, some may blame those who identify as progressives rather than criticizing liberalism as a whole.

Gerard Baker penned an opinion piece, Don't Blame Liberalism for Illiberal Progressives, in the Wall Street Journal on July 10th.

I've noticed a recent trend of concerted efforts to defend the reputation of liberalism, and this article appears to be another example of such actions. Rush Limbaugh once prophesied that if Americans truly understood liberalism, we wouldn't be in the current state we are in. He even went so far as to say that even those who align with our side don't fully understand liberalism.  

The recent years have seen attempts from both sides to sway public opinion that progressivism is in no way analogous with liberalism. 

Science is now being employed to make sure you know that progressivism and liberalism are two completely different theories. During a recent segment on Fox News, Steve Doocy brought up a study that revealed an interesting trend among 12th-grade students in the United States. According to the study, boys in this age group were becoming more conservative in their beliefs and values, while girls were shifting towards a more left or liberal viewpoint. While discussing this trend on air, Doocy appeared to pause for a moment before he opted to label the young women as "progressive" rather than using the term "liberal."

On its website, the Center for American Progress describes itself as a group of dedicated progressives who view progressivism "in its most complete form developed as a new liberalism…" Eric Alterman, in his book The Cause: The Fight for American Liberalism from Franklin Roosevelt to Barack Obama, says that progressivism is a morphed liberalism.

Human sexuality is the example Mr. Baker used to demonstrate illiberalism in attempting to sexualize children, saying that it is by no means liberal but an authoritative characteristic of the left that is a natural manifestation in the cultural West. It seems that the current strategy is to blame progressivism, which advocates for using the state to address societal problems. Progressives want to break up the family, sexualize your kids, and control the economy with the strong arm of the government.

There exists a perspective within the libertarian community that attempts to distinguish classical liberalism from perceived deviations, too, such as the Progressive movement that emerged in the late 1800s.

The argument put forth by some is that Radical Republicans and Progressives were not true liberals because they were willing to wield government power to bring about social change. However, this perspective overlooks the fact that the distinction between these groups and classical liberalism was more related to their methods, even though they shared the same objective of making society more egalitarian.

The progressive nature of liberalism can sometimes lead to unintended consequences that can weaken social bonds and unique qualities. One of the reasons for this is that as people become more aware of the remaining non-liberal elements of society, they strive to eliminate them to maintain a liberal stance. However, efforts to eradicate certain inequalities may reveal new ones, causing liberalism to push towards more radical solutions constantly. When this happens, for example, in the perversion of human sexuality, people start to blame progressivism.

Unfortunately, liberalism's noble goal of promoting human well-being often leads to reducing all aspects of life to political calculations. This approach limits politics to power struggles between conflicting individual interests, bureaucratic regulations, and superficial formalities. It is a common issue among liberals that they fail to address the question of which version of liberalism can effectively solve our problems.

Regardless of the version chosen, history has demonstrated that it will eventually lead to the current exaggerated forms of progressivism. As Harvard Professor of Constitutional Law Adrian Vermeule has said, "Historically speaking, progressivism is an offshoot of liberalism, but it is not as though it is a betrayal or distortion of it, or as though one could return to a liberalism that does not give rise to progressivism."

Image: Pixabay / Pixabay License