Mediaboss Marketing

Progressive lawmakers and education advocates on Friday condemned federal Republican lawmakers' foray into the nationwide attack on people of color and the LGBTQ+ community as the GOP-led U.S. House passed the so-called Parents Bill of Rights Actlegislation that critics said is aimed at banning books and further ostracizing marginalized communities, while providing no improvements to children's safety at school.

Like legislation passed in at least six states and introduced in at least 26, the Parents Bill of Rights Act (H.R. 5) claims it will protect public school students by requiring schools to make classroom curricula publicly available and provide parents with a list of reading materials in school libraries.

School districts would also be required to inform parents about violent activity that takes place at schools, hold at least two parent-teacher conferences per student per year, and make budget information public.

The legislation was passed a day after the American Library Association (ALA) released a report showing that a record-breaking 2,571 book titles were the subject of "challenges," or demands that they be removed from schools or public libraries, in 2022a 38% increase from the previous year.

"Conservatives have weaponized hate and fear to try to tear our schools apart, with students who just want to learn and thrive turned into pawns in their political games."

Ninety percent of the attempted book bans were part of challenges to multiple books, suggesting they are increasingly being driven by right-wing groups such as Moms for Liberty instead of individual parents who have concerns. The ALA said this trend began in 2021, as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantiswas pushing legislation to ban accurate classroom discussions about the history of racial injustice in the United States.

Schools in Florida have now removed dozens of book titles from shelves, including The Life of Rosa Parks and Who Is the Dalai Lama? as officials assess whether the material is appropriate for children.

"Forty percent of banned books are reported as significantly addressing LGBT issues," said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) on Thursday as the House debated the bill. "When we talk about progressive values, I can say what my progressive value is and that is freedom over fascism."

Speaking about marginalized people and children, Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) said the legislation is the work of a political party that is "trying to 'write us out' of the curriculum."

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) expressed outrage at the notion that Republicans are seeking to protect children by limiting their access to material dealing with LGBTQ+ issues and American history, considering that have blocked numerous pieces of gun control legislation even as gun violence has overtaken car accidents as the leading cause of death of children in the United States.

"Since Columbine over 20 years ago, more than 344,000 students in our country have experienced gun violence at school," said Tlaib. "Some of our children attend schools with unsafe drinking water. Others go to school in districts attempting to erase Black history from our classrooms by banning books like The Life of Rosa Parks. These are some of the real obstacles to our children thriving."

"When this bill was considered in committee, Democrats offered amendments that would keep firearms out of classrooms, remove lead pipes from our schools, and prevent censorship of Black history. But every single amendment aimed at the real threats to our children was voted down by these MAGA Republicans," she added. "It makes me angry to see how conservatives have weaponized hate and fear to try to tear our schools apart, with students who just want to learn and thrive turned into pawns in their political games."

The National Education Association noted that the legislation, which the Democratic-led Senate is not expected to take up, offers solutions to a number of problems that don't widely exist and promotes a "toxic vision of parental engagement" in schools.

The bill "contains a list of provisions already ensured by local and state law, including, but not limited to, a parent's right to view a school's budget or speak at a public school board meeting," wrote Tim Walker, a senior writer for the organization.

A survey released by Navigator this month showed that parents' top concerns about education are "making sure their children learn what they need to be successful, keeping them safe from gun violence, and protecting their mental health" and that having a "say in what their kids are learning" is not a high priority for a majority of parents.

A poll by National Public Radio last year also found that 76% of parents believe their children's schools keep them well-informed about the curriculum and classroom activities.

"At least in my experience, teachers have always been able to be accessible to parents, and I don't know what these parents' rights bills will do other than give more power and pathways to things like book banning and elimination of resources," York, Pennsylvania teacher Ben Hodge told Education Week recently.

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten said the bill is an example of "divisive performance politics" by the GOP.

"Every day in classrooms and communities around the country, parents and educators work tirelessly together to make the lives of our kids better and provide them with the knowledge they need to excelwith books, art, and music; tutoring programs and capstone projects; and counseling to help them navigate life, tackle challenges, and deal with trauma," said Weingarten. "The true work of partnering to support families and help our kids do well involves having meaningful discussions about the real things affecting our students and what we, as a country, must do to help."

Read the original post:
Progressives Slam Passage of GOP 'Book Banning Bill' - Common Dreams

One of the most significant literary movements to emerge from India the All-India Progressive Writers Movement (AIPWM) had its roots in the political revolution that formed the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in 1917 and its consolidation.

Though AIPWM has left behind a rich literary legacy that aimed to bring to the surface various sufferings of people in India, it became controversial soon after its creation. Accused of using the plight of a common man to push a Marxist agenda backed by the Soviet Union, it was eventually dismantled.

Under the banner of socialist realism an ideological catalyst in the early 20th century the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union merged all its existing literary organisations to create the Writers Union of USSR. As it gained complete agency over Soviet literature, the Writers Union came to play a vital role in sustaining communist doctrine by influencing fiction and distributing it to the masses.

Soviet fiction became popular in other parts of the world. A few years after the Writers Union had been established, the socialist intellectuals of India, who at that time had been scattered throughout the country, joined together to organise the first All-India Progressive Writers Conference in Lucknow. The meeting was led by renowned Urdu writer Sajjad Zaheer and the presidential address was delivered by none other than Jawaharlal Nehru.

One of the most influential literary movements of the Subcontinent was inspired by Marxist ideology emanating from the Soviet Union. The partition of the Subcontinent and the movements close alignment with political ideology led to its undoing as well

A LITERARY MOVEMENT IS BORN

Lucknow in the 1930s was a roaring hub of zestful voices and endless discourse.

Four years prior to the conference, a collection of nine short stories and one play, titled Angaarey, was published in Urdu, authored by four young writers: Rashid Jahan, Ahmed Ali, Mahmud-uz-Zafar and Sajjad Zaheer. The book was considered so controversial that it was banned months after its publication and the authors faced a trial in Lucknow for hurting communal sentiments.

As copies of Angaarey were burnt in a public display of hostility towards emerging liberalism in literature, Ahmed Ali would call Angaarey a declaration of war by the youth.

In 1936, the same year when the first All-India Progressive Writers Conference took place, the Communist Party of India formed its farmers wing and, at the annual session of the Indian National Congress, the Communist Party of India united with the Congress Socialist Party to challenge the right wings longstanding authority. A cultural and political shift was inevitable, and it would come to life by introducing a new ideology to the masses through a literary movement.

The manifesto of the All-India Progressive Writers Association (AIPWA), formed as a result of the conference, called for the spirit of progress by introducing scientific realism, to rescue literature from the conservative classes and for the literature produced to focus more on the basic problems of existence such as hunger and poverty.

Sajjad Zaheer, who had co-authored the manifesto for the conference a year earlier in London, was elected as the Secretary General of AIPWA. Although at this point in his career he was recognised primarily for his literary works, he would have to take on a political role and begin organising linguistic associations on a provincial scale.

ENTER PREMCHAND

Among the sea of notable writers in the Subcontinent during the early 20th century was one prolific genius called Premchand. Premchand wrote about the common man and his struggles. He pioneered the exploration of social hierarchies and caste systems in India through fiction. He wrote about the hardships of women and highlighted their noble femininity. There was sensitivity woven deeply in his works, which made Premchand a venerated author in both Urdu and Hindi literature, with over a dozen novels and two hundred short stories under his belt.

Premchand was elected as the President of AIPWA, which gave the movement the credibility it needed to establish itself as a legitimate literary one. Sajjad Zaheer was a known communist and it was in the interest of the movement to appoint an apolitical figure in a leading position. Zaheers political stance was far more detectable for the public than Premchands subtle and nuanced takes that evolved with his writing throughout his career.

In his presidential speech at the first conference, Premchand outlined the objectives of the movement by stating that its purpose was to create an atmosphere in India that would help progressive literature flourish. The members of the movement wanted to promote a creative literary life that encompassed reading papers, holding discussions and thorough criticism. He was confident that AIPWA would become a mode through which a literary renaissance in India would take place.

One of the primary objectives of the movement was to promote purposeful art and literature, something that was inspired by the Writers Union of the USSR. Premchand emphasised how there was a need to renounce religious revivalism and create works that would devote all of mans energy to economic and political freedom.

Premchands senior post in the association was a tactful decision, primarily because it was used to deflect allegations about the associations pro-communist agenda, aimed at Sajjad Zaheer. The emergence of the left was uplifting the common people culturally as well as politically. They were being systematically disillusioned towards a system that had long been working against them. With broken promises of reforms and fair wages, they were awakening to class consciousness, which only further helped the work of AIPWA prosper.

PARTITION AND DIVISION

After the partition of the Subcontinent in 1947, Pakistan and India inherited institutions and political ideologies that had existed under British rule. Sajjad Zaheer was sent to Pakistan by the Communist Party of India to revive the momentum of Marxist literature, after many Hindu and Sikh writers moved out of the newly formed state. He set up the All-Pakistan Progressive Writers Association (APPWA) and also founded the Communist Party of Pakistan (CPP) in 1948 and became its first Secretary General.

But anti-communist sentiments carried from British India had infiltrated Pakistani politics; APPWA had to earn the publics trust and gain credibility through its work once again.

Prominent figures during this time, such as Saadat Hasan Manto, were writing about conflicted views towards the Partition, which resonated deeply with the masses. Krishan Chander wrote Hum Wehshi Hain [We Are Barbarians] about the mass murders of 1947. The association wanted to produce literature that used the Partition to catalyse a communist revolution, but notable figures of the movement, such as Krishan Chander and Saadat Hasan Manto, were writing about what it meant to be a human during a traumatic period in history, witnessing agonising bloodshed and dealing with the loss of an identity.

Furthermore, Pakistans first long-term plan for economic development relied heavily on the private sector. It was inevitable that the country would lean towards capitalism and, subsequently, APPWA was accused of anti-nationalism by reactionary writers who criticised the organisations Marxist agenda.

PAKISTAN AND THE MOVEMENT

During the first few years of Pakistan, all factions of the state were looking to form a unified social identity in order to artificially manufacture homogeneity. The progressive writers wanted to adhere to a rigid framework that was distinctly Marxist, but liberals and nationalists wanted to explore and interpret humanism, state and morality under their own terms. Much like the case with the Writers Union of the USSR, progressive writers were having trouble producing original work that had unique dynamics and explored their individual style.

The first meeting of APPWA was held at the YMCA Hall in Lahore, in 1949. To show their support, the Soviet Union had sent four delegates to the conference, all four of whom had received the Stalin Prize for Literary Excellence.

The halls of the conference were adorned with life-sized pictures of Russian authors Maxim Gorky and Vladimir Mayakovsky. The writers attending the meeting drafted a new manifesto based on contemporary Urdu literary trends in Pakistan and assessed that writers and poets could no longer remain politically neutral. They had to be more dogmatic in their works and assertive in propelling the movement forward.

Mian Iftikhar-ud-Din had established a publishing house in 1947 called Progressive Papers Limited and Faiz Ahmed Faiz had become the first editor of its weekly magazine, called The Pakistan Times. The Pakistan Times became a medium through which young intellectuals of Pakistan were influenced by the work of the Progressive Writers Movement. The magazines affiliation with notable figures such as Faiz Ahmad Faiz and Ahmad Nadeem Qasmi, who had established themselves as prolific Urdu writers at this point, added to the appeal of the movement.

The up-and-coming generation of writers were bringing a youthful, arguably politically naive, perspective to the socio-cultural domain of Urdu literature. They romanticised a socialist future and juxtaposed it with present-day conditions of poverty and class struggles in Pakistan, defined by a Marxist lens.

DISSOLUTION OF THE CPP

The split of the All-India Progressive Writers Association after Partition significantly abated the fierce trajectory of the movement.

Progressives in India were facing anti-Urdu discrimination and experiencing difficulty in having their work published, whereas the progressives in Pakistan were facing political challenges that halted their growth and reach. Every act of rebellion from APPWA was met with vicious retaliation by the government. Additionally, CPP was now under constant surveillance of the Government of Pakistan, which considered it critical to contain communist ideology from seeping into the rest of the nation.

From its inception, the government of Pakistan had remained wary of the CPPs agenda. With a plethora of problems arising during the infancy of Pakistan, a political party destabilising the country from within was the last thing the country needed.

Regardless, the members of the CPP and Marxist intellectuals of the Progressive Writers Movement remained driven in their mission to spread the principles of socialism by finely lacing them in the literature produced for the public.

It was the over-ambitious nature of the CPP and its plan to swiftly bring about a communist revolution that became the reason for its downfall. In 1951, the CPP reached the peak of its controversy when its members Sajjad Zaheer and Faiz Ahmad Faiz were caught colluding with Maj Gen Akbar Khan in his scheme to overthrow the government of Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan through a military coup. The plotters were arrested and the CPP banned.

DEATH OF APPWA

In 1951, APPWA was declared a political party right around the time when the CPP was outlawed. Over the next seven years, the association faced extreme difficulty in redressing its position.

In 1958, the heart of APPWA, Progressive Papers Limited, was accused of colluding with foreign communist states and Gen Ayub Khan used these allegations as an opportunity to dismantle the hub of the Progressive Writers Movement by forcibly auctioning off the assets of the company for Rs. 4.6 million. The Progressive Writers Movement officially died in 1958 and its members swiftly scattered throughout Pakistan to seek other employment positions.

THE LEGACY

The goal of the Writers Union of the USSR, which had subsequently inspired the Progressive Writers Movement, was to create purposeful art and literature. It was meant to uplift the working class by understanding them and their struggles on an individual level. The writers were supposed to possess a close understanding of the adversity the working class faced.

However, it was the class difference between many of the notable progressives and the people they were writing about that created dissonance between the two. At some point, the Marxist literature that was written for the masses became leisure reading for the elites.

In 1919, Vladimir Lenin had written a letter to Maxim Gorky, an author he greatly admired, and criticised him on his growing distance from the people he was writing about. Lenin wrote: If you want to observe, you must observe from below, where it is possible to survey the work of building a new life in a workers settlement in the provinces or in the countryside. There one does not have to make a political summing up of extremely complex data, there one needs to observe.

The letter would have been perhaps equally relevant for the progressives of the Subcontinent.

Despite its weaknesses and its failure to sustain itself, the Progressive Writers Movement bequeathed a rich literary legacy to contemporary readers and writers in Pakistan, seeking to inspire works of fiction similar to Angaarey and other writings that came into being during this era. And in spite of everything, it did develop a collective consciousness to resist oppression that sustains in many writers and readers to this day.

The writer is an academic and historical social researcher

Published in Dawn, EOS, March 26th, 2023

Excerpt from:
HISTORY: THE RISE AND FALL OF THE PROGRESSIVE WRITERS ... - DAWN.com

1. Six progressive takeaways from Bidens State of the Union speech  The Hill
2. Biden Will Tout His Accomplishments Tonight. Progressives Have Notes  Rolling Stone
3. Progressives call on Biden, Democrats to do more for working families  KATU

Excerpt from:
Six progressive takeaways from Bidens State of the Union speech - The Hill

The Progressive movement was a political and social-reform movement that brought major changes to the United States during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. During this time, known as the Progressive Era, the movements goals involved strengthening the national government and addressing peoples economic, social, and political demands. Progressives saw elements of American society that they wished to reform, especially ending the extreme concentration of wealth among the elite and the enormous economic and political power of big business.Ellis IslandWilliam Williams papers, The New York Public LibraryThe U.S. population nearly doubled between 1870 and 1900. Increasing immigration and urbanization had helped the shift from small-scale manufacturing and commerce to large-scale factory production and enormous national corporations.Gilded AgeCarol M. Highsmith Archive/Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (digital file no. LC-DIG-highsm-13913)Starting in the 1870s, a period of excessive materialism and political corruption took hold in the United States. Called the Gilded Age, this era featured the concentration of enormous amounts of wealth among a small elite. Industrial activity and corporate growth explodedfrom 1863 to 1899 manufacturing production rose by more than 800 percentbut the profits largely went to a small number of entrepreneurs called robber barons, who established monopolies and hoarded their wealth. Meanwhile, many laborers lived in poverty and had little power.The leaders of the Progressive Era worked on a range of overlapping issues that characterized the time, including labor rights, womens suffrage, economic reform, environmental protections, and the welfare of the poor, including poor immigrants.Standard Oil strikeLibrary of Congress, Washington, D.C.Labor unionscontinued to press for better economic and working conditions. Prominent issues at the time were the demand for an eight-hour workday, restrictions on child labor, higher wages, and workplace safety conditions.sweatshopLibrary of Congress, Washington, D.C. (neg. no. USZ62-19966)Laborers often worked in sweatshop conditions. They worked extremely long hours, received little pay, and toiled in factories with few safety regulations. On March 25, 1911, a fire broke out in a clothing factory in New York, New York. The overcrowded and unsafe building had doors that had been locked to prevent theft, and 146 workers, mostly young immigrant women, died in the flames or fell to their deaths trying to escape. The uproar over this tragedy, known as the Triangle shirtwaist factory fire, led to the creation of the Factory Investigating Commission in New York. The commissions research led to the passage of more than 30 health and safety laws, including fire codes and child labor restrictions.Upton SinclairEncyclopdia Britannica, Inc.Journalist Upton Sinclair belonged to a class of investigative reporters called muckrakers, because they were said to rake up the muck, or dirt, hiding in society. Sinclair spent time investigating labor conditions in Chicago, Illinoiss meat slaughterhouses and packaging plants and used his findings to write the novel The Jungle (1906). He had hoped to bring to the publics attention the poor conditions the workers suffered, but people were more affected by the vivid descriptions of disgusting and unsanitary practices in the food-processing facilities. Public sentiment and U.S. President Theodore Roosevelts own reaction to the novel led to the passing of regulations for the food industry, including the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act, both in 1906.Jacob Riis: New York City tenementLibrary of Congress, Washington, D.C. (digital file no. 3a18572)Increased urbanization meant huge jumps in population density. Urban centers soon had many neighborhoods full of overcrowded, dangerous, unsanitary tenements. Photojournalist Jacob Riis captured powerful images of the suffering he witnessed in poor New York City neighborhoods and published them in his 1890 book How the Other Half Lives. People were shocked and touched by seeing the pictures and pushed for legislation and aid that would help the poorest Americans. Progressive leaders such as Jane Addams, one of the founders of the settlement house Hull House in Chicago, worked within the neighborhoods to improve conditions, helping immigrants and other disenfranchised groups access necessary services.Economic reformers wanted to curb the excesses and inequalities of the Gilded Age. Public sentiment was against monopolies, and legislators worked to regulate the massive corporations that wielded economic and political power. In response to monopolies in the railroad and steel industries, the Sherman Antitrust Act, passed in 1890, helped to break up and prevent monopolies and trusts. Beginning in 1902 muckraker Ida Tarbell wrote a series of articles, later published as The History of the Standard Oil Company (1904), exposing corruption behind one of the largest trusts, the Standard Oil Company.1912 presidential electionLibrary of Congress, Washington, D.C.In the 1912 presidential election Wisconsin governor Robert M. La Follette failed to win the Republican nomination, as did former president Theodore Roosevelt who had left the White House in 1909 but now hoped to secure another term. Instead, the Republicans decided that incumbent President William Howard Taft should represent them in the general election. La Follette had formed the National Republican Progressive League in 1911, and the League became the Progressive Party (better known as the Bull Moose Party) in 1912. After Roosevelts quest for the Republican nomination failed, the Progressive Party chose him to be its presidential nominee. (The partys popular nickname of Bull Moose was derived from the characteristics of strength and vigor often used by Roosevelt to describe himself.) The Bull Moose ticket of Roosevelt and vice presidential running mate, Hiram W. Johnson, split the Republican vote, resulting in a win for the Democrats under Woodrow Wilson.With Americas entry intoWorld War I, the Progressive movement fractured. However, many of the organizations founded during the Progressive Era, such as labor unions and professional and civic groups, continued to play significant roles in American society.

Read the original here:
The Progressive Era | Key Facts | Britannica

America is made up of two chief political parties, the Republicans and the Democrats. Of course, there are other political parties, such as Libertarians and Independents. Since the time of FDR, however, there has been a discussion of progressive policies. Yes, these policies are chiefly associated with the Democratic Party, but, the average person typically may not be able to decipher the differences in a a progressive or liberal. Mistakenly, there are those who believe that progressives and liberals are one and the same.

The polarization of America is thought to be split between two factions: the Conservative right (thought to be Republican) and the Progressive left (thought to be Democrat). However, the Democratic party of today is really becoming more split as Progressive Democrats and Liberal Democrats no longer share the same views on typical Democratic policies.

In short, the answer is both yes and no.

First, the Democratic Party is associated with both liberals and progressives. There is some debate as to why more individuals are beginning to gravitate more towards the term progressive rather than being called a liberal. A Georgetown University study found that many individuals believed the liberal term carried a negative connotation, therefore, it became more acceptable to be called a progressive.

However, this is not accurate. While some traditional Democrats carry the label of liberal with pride (think renowned attorney Alan Dershowitz), others prefer to be labeled a progressive, and it has nothing to do with a negative connotation.

Progressives have distinct policy ideas when it comes to economics.

A liberal may believe in the concept of using taxpayer money to assist those in need or to overall better society. They may not believe in a large government; in fact, many of them favor a smaller government, particularly where the everyday life of individuals is concerned.

Progressives want the government to not only utilize taxpayer money to correct an issue, but they want government regulation to correct the problem as well.

When asked, a progressive will likely agree with this distinction; most progressives are said to favor individuals over corporate interests. The liberal is more likely to embrace free speech and equality for all.

Classic liberals are influenced by the writings of those such as John Locke, and they are more supportive of individual freedoms and chief supporters of the Constitution and the rights given to Americans via the Bill of Rights.

Progressives are beginning to be aligned with Collectivism. Ironically, liberals of just a decade ago were beginning to acquire such a label, and this is likely why the group began using the term progressive to describe their policies.

In answer to the original question, a registered Democrat may be more moderate, given to individual freedom but fiscal responsibility (Senator Joe Manchin is a good example). This Democrat may identify as a liberal. However, there are registered Democratic voters who identify as progressives (Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez proudly identifies as a progressive Democrat). These individuals favor not only social spending initiatives, such as free daycare for families making less than a certain amount, but they also believe the government should have an active hand in regulating certain industries.

There are multiple factors in this split in the Democratic Party. When Bernie Sanders ran for president in 2016, his successes (albeit small ones) told the nation that more and more voters particularly younger voters firmly believed in the more progressive policies embraced by the Vermont Senator, who has often referred to himself as a Democratic Socialist.

However, the Democratic Party nominee, Hillary Clinton, used many more liberal-sounding phrases in her campaign speeches. A reference to cooperative solutions to societal problems such as Together We Can or Build Back Better focus on the more liberal ideas that individuals working together can improve the country.

Progressives believe that certain institutions (the banking industry, for example) are holding those who are marginalized back. The only way to prevent this is to set up government regulations that monitor the activities of said institutions.

As of late, more establishment Democrats tend to support increasingly progressive policies. However, in the case of the Build Back Better legislation, some more moderate Democrats have deemed the bill fiscally irresponsible. President Joe Biden who used to be consider more of a moderate liberal Democrat, has been pulled more towards the progressive left as he has sought support for his agenda.

Progressivism is a political philosophy that supports social reform. Ironically, it is not a new term in politics. It can be traced back to the Age of Enlightenment, when proponents of the idea believed that an individuals life could be improved based on the advancement of technology, social organization, and economic development.

In the twentieth century, progressivism morphed once more as industrialism brought about social change in both America and in Europe. In America, President Franklin Roosevelt offered progressive policies such as the social programs he promoted in the New Deal (the Works Progress Administration, for instance).

It was during the twentieth century that progressivism began to take the form it holds today. Economic inequality was a huge focus of progressivism; they cited monopolistic corporations as a part of the problem and sought to increase regulation that would give the government more control over how these businesses operated.

One must note that some factions of progressive supporters also supported certain controversial tenets such as eugenics, which proponents believed would benefit overall public health.

The most modern version of progressivism is one in which supporters aim to represent the interests of ordinary people through political change and the support of government actions.

Some believe that the term liberal garnered a negative connotation when Newt Gingrich used it repeatedly to describe his Democratic opponents. They also infer that the term progressive has been adopted as a more acceptable label.

However, while Gingrich might have made the term liberal a bad word in politics, a progressive and a liberal are truly different in their philosophies.

Liberalism came into favor during the Age of Enlightenment as well. Philosophers such as John Locke wrote about the ills of a monarchy as well as a state religion, among other topics.

Liberals are like progressives in that they favor ending monopolies in businesses, but they believe in free trade as well as a market economy.

Traditional liberals believe in individual rights. They support a democratic government that allows for freedom of speech and freedom of the press as well as promotes civil rights of every person.

Before 1920, the main opponents of liberalism were communism and socialism; however, after WWII and the Great Depression, liberalism was more associated with the expansion of the welfare state.

Liberals of the twentieth century can be credited with many improvements to the American way of life, such as the promotion of civil rights for all (regardless of race or gender) and universal access to education.

Liberals today still believe in the civil rights of all individuals regardless of race, socioeconomic status, ethnicity or gender. Liberals also fight for some government regulation of corporations and government entities as they initially did.

Progressives may hold the same idea regarding equal rights for all, but, when progressives today speak, they tend to speak of the marginalized individual.

The problem often lies in the approach that liberals and progressives take when tackling a problem.

Most liberals are not comfortable taking progressive stances against large corporations. Some say this is because the big corporations fund the liberal Democratic candidates campaign, and this may be somewhat true. However, most liberals understand how a free market society works. They also understand that numerous regulations cost businesses large and small a great deal of money money that will be recouped somehow, usually in the price of goods. This hurts consumers, and liberals understand that this will not improve anyones economic status.

However, progressives believe that, overall, they are standing up for the little guy, even if that means taking on large corporations or other establishment entities. Some progressives are left-leaning, and want to distinguish themselves from other Democrats. At the same time, there are others who support legislation that is meant to both progress society as well as provide economic progress.

Even Bernie Sanders has lamented that a person cant be both a moderate (liberal) or a progressive.

Progressives in Congress have worked further to separate themselves from the moderates and Classical liberals of the Democratic Party. The Progressive Caucus has been a part of Congress since 1991; there are about 100 members, mostly from the House of Representatives. One Senator serves on the committee. The current caucus is chaired by outspoken Representative Pramila Jayapal and includes individuals such as Ilhan Omar and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

The rest is here:
Progressive vs. Liberal: What are the Biggest Differences?