Can't a "Progressive" also be a "Patriot"?

The Patriot Post magazine

The Patriot Post frames current policy and culture issues in the correct constitutionally constructionist context established by our Founders, and supported today by the plurality of Americans who uphold the most basic tenet of our Republic: "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

The Progressive magazine

The Progressive is a monthly magazine of investigative reporting, political commentary, cultural coverage, activism, interviews, poetry, and humor. We stand against militarism, the concentration of power in corporate hands, and the disenfranchisement of the citizenry. The Progressive champions peace, social and economic justice, civil rights, civil liberties, human rights, a preserved environment, and a reinvigorated democracy. Its bedrock values are nonviolence and freedom of speech.

I call myself a "progressive." I want things to move forward.

I have recently (in another thread) asked for a 'definition' of "patriot" in ATSers' own words.


Being intrigued by the responses, I decided this might be a decent OP - as we approach the 'primaries' in this POTUS election cycle.
For my part, I believe I am both - a "patriot" AND a "progressive.

I realize that not all ATS members would accept that - and so, I want to ask you all.....

Is it possible in your opinion for a person to legitimately claim 'both' descriptives as accurate to their individuality? To be both 'patriotic' and 'progressive'?

(In my opinion, it very much is.)

Whichever: If you think "no way", or if you think "of course", or you think "I don't know", please contribute.

Thanks....

Weren't the original founding fathers exactly that? They wanted to break free from monarchy and aristocracy through revolution and create a constitutional republic -- which was pretty darn "progressive" for their time?

a reply to: MystikMushroom

I believe and think so, MM.

But I also realize there are many members and readers who would disagree.
Thought I might 'turn on a fan, open a window' and possibly air out the room.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

If you believe you are a patriot, that should be all that matters. I pretty much have never cared what anyone else thought about who or what I am. It's always been about what I think of who and what I am, and if I'm ok with me, everyone else can go pound sand if they don't like it.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I think of myself as a libertarian and a patriot. These are my labels because I like what both stand for.

One thing I did find weird was that the Patriot article you mentioned said it upheld the constitutionality based on the idea that

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

This is from the Declaration of Independence, not the ConstitutionLink. The bill of rights defines what liberties citizens of the united states are afforded by the government.

a reply to: Blazemore2000

Appreciate that....

what I'm trying to get at is the "stereotypical" reactions of ATS at large; is it possible to reconcile the two?

I'm not so sure at this point, in today's 'climate.'

a reply to: BuzzyWigs


That depends on your definition of "progressive." Conservatives can say they want "progress." Progressives can also say they "love their country." Sweet. But alot of those identifying as patriots wont believe you. I think people don't like "labels" and argue about semantics, but everyone knows in their heart what the heck it is they're trying to do. If you think you're a patriot, you are. If you're arguing semantics youre not. But itll all get sussed out so I try not to pay too much attention. Who am I to judge?

a reply to: hubrisinxs

Interesting! Good catch!!

So - if I want for Bernie Sanders to win the election, can I be considered a "patriot"?

a reply to: breakingbs

I gave you the working definitions (for purposes of this thread) in the OP.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I mean completely upturning the apple cart on England was pretty revolutionary, carried out by patriots...it was wholly "progressive".

I'm fairly certain the British loyalists in the colonies would have considered our founding fathers quite "liberal" or "progressive".

a reply to: MystikMushroom

I agree 100%.

(I supersize with you..... )

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

The contorting of what a progressive is what the issue is.

If you mean Libertarian, then yes.

If you mean the current Progressives? No.
You can't be a patriot by forcing others to do what you want. You can't force others to accept others either.

The current Progressive uses force to achieve their end.

I think what we're going to see in this thread is that labels mean entirely different things to different people. Where you come from politically and socially colors your perception of those labels.

As they say, "One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist"....

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

To the extent that a progressive wants to move away from or otherwise destroy the core values of his nation and its laws, he is not a patriot.

Though I think your definition of a progressive is actually the mission statement of sorts of the company, progressivism has a proven track-record of attempting to engineer society to some abstract goal ("equality", "economic justice", or insert abstract ideal here), without care for the unseen consequences, often leading to dire results and sometimes atrocities. When asking "to what end progressivism progresses to", a progressive can only offer a favourable word, without considering the real flesh and blood people, the concrete societies, or the institutions it seeks to form into their abstract model.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom


As they say, "One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist"....

Unless in your non-fighting times you are raping young boys, committing female genital mutilation and beheading Christians and non-believers.

A patriot is someone that loves his or her country and is willing to defend said country.
They feel it has a strong base and that base should be protected.
The base meaning the constitution.

A progressive wants to change the country to make it better in places they feel it lacks.
Can a progressive truly love their country if they want to change the social structure?
I understand they want to make the country better in their own way.
That's where the divide comes in, and we all have an opinion of what's the best way.

That is my best explanation/opinion.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

I think what we're going to see in this thread is that labels mean entirely different things to different people. Where you come from politically and socially colors your perception of those labels.

Yes.
I hope we can sort it out here (or at least begin to) ....civilly. It's an important question (to me, at least).

a reply to: macman

And how is any of that "freedom fighting"? -- none of the people engaging in any of that are fighting for freedom. T

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs


Is it possible for a person to be both 'patriotic' and 'progressive'?

No.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

When asking "to what end progressivism progresses to", a progressive can only offer a favourable word, without considering the real flesh and blood people, the concrete societies, or the institutions it seeks to form into their abstract model.

With all due respect, I totally disagree with this.

"Progress" is an open-ended concept.
Are we making progress? (I consider the well-being of all citizens of our country when I wonder about progress).
Or are we stagnating?