Progressivism

The Red Rose is the symbol of both social democrats and democratic socialists.

Proponents and subideologies

Note: People marked with an asterisk are their countries' starting leaders.

Subideology	Description	Adherents
Default (None)	A moderate response to the excesses of capitalism, Progressivism, composed of moderate social democrats and center left progressives, intends to be a middle ground between social liberalism and social democracy, with a focus on economic efficiency, a moderate welfare state, and a major focus on social justice. Pragmatic and willing to compromise, Progressivism believes in gradual change over time, with a focus on making capitalism more humane while allowing for its best aspects to shrine through. Progressivism believes in allowing room for the free market to take over while maintaining a welfare state intended to catch those who would fall through the cracks. Rather than focusing on economic equality, Progressivism intends to fight against institutional problems that harm equality of opportunity. Racism, sexism and other 'isms' are the main enemy of Progressivism, who believe that it is the government's place to protect the weak. Economically, Progressivism believes that government management is inefficient and that, rather, the private market, with public oversight, could be beneficial to both parties. This extends to matters of infrastructure, healthcare, and even basic government operations. With this efficiency, poverty can be eliminated through saved welfare spending and opportunities for a better life.	Komninos Pyromaglou Plácido Fernández Viagas Kim Beazley Sr.* José Figueres Ferrer* Luis Cardoza y Aragón* Rómulo Betancourt* Edna Lott
Gaitanismo	To Colombia, Gaitanismo is not an ideology but a new national ideal for Latin America itself, and an inspiration for left-wing politicians across the region. Born with the entrance of Jorge Eliécer Gaitán into politics, Gaitanismo emerged as liberal socialism, staunchly anti-fascist populism, and a democratic alternative to Bolshevism. Eclectic in its social decisions, Gaitanismo aims to reach as broad a base as possible, to extend democracy through all levels of society. Replacing bourgeoisie and proletariat, Gaitanismo has the national country and the political country, the former the people, the latter the oligarchical elites. The national country must overthrow the political country to create a genuine liberal democracy, united as one by nationality, and a peaceful compromise between owner and worker. Socialist economic policies that welcome foreign investment and reforms that strengthen democracy are the trademarks of Gaitanismo. Geopolitically, it calls for inter-Americanism, namely close cooperation with the OFN and other liberal democracies to fund revolutionary reforms. Gaitanismo brought Colombia four golden years of peace and international admiration. The murder of its founder and the chaos of La Violencia only made Gaitanismo's flame grow brighter, and its legacy of success can be reclaimed, not only in Colombia but wherever Gaitán's flaming speeches left a mark.	Juan Bosch Guadalupe Salcedo Unda* Alfonso López Michelsen
Democratic Socialism	Democratic Socialism covers those who believe that socialism and democracy can not only be established, but that the establishment of one cannot be established without the other. Socialism and democracy are one and the same, no more capable of being removed than lyrics from a song, or rhythm from a poem. Democratic socialism thus places a high value upon democracy in both the workplace and in government, with all believing in a minimum input from workers in the production of goods and services. Typically, democratic socialists believe in a decentralized or market socialist economy, with a mix of both nationalized companies and small, private workers cooperatives and syndicates. Democratic socialism is typically reformist Marxism in nature, although it is not unheard of for revolutionaries to use the term. This particular strain of socialism was pioneered by European Social Democratic parties in the 19th and early 20th century, with a major base of support being unions, workers, and middle to upper middle class intellectuals. While social democracy gradually turned towards a regulated form of welfare capitalism, democratic socialists still maintain a loyalty to the creation of a socialist state based on human rights and democratic voting.	Michael Harrington Tommy Douglas Michael Foot Andreas Papandreou François Mitterrand Pierre Mendès France Achieng' Oneko Yasser Arafat Pridi Banomyong Jawaharlal Nehru* Nikolai Voznesensky* Alexander Yakovlev José Luis Romero Guillermo Estévez Boero
Social Democracy	Social Democracy is an umbrella term covering leftist movements that still wish to operate within a mostly capitalist framework. Proponents of Social Democracy still believe in markets, the ability of an individual to run a business and manage others as employees, and in the freedom to earn and spend money, while also advocating for vast social programs like welfare, free and public healthcare, shelter for the homeless, and good minimum wages among many others. While decidedly on the left end of the political spectrum, followers of Social Democracy and those of other leftist ideologies like Communism and traditional Socialism generally dislike each other, and they rarely intermingle or work together. Social Democrats do not advocate for the revolution and radical rebuilding of the system that their further-left counterparts do, and are more accepting of various other democratic ideologies.	Einar Gerhardsen Viggo Kampmann* Jens Otto Krag Axel Ivan Pedersen Tage Erlander Karl-August Fagerholm Peter Mohr Dam Atli Dam Emil Jónsson Hannibal Valdimarsson Gylfi Þorsteinsson Gíslason Puey Ungphakorn Indira Gandhi Arthur Calwell Gough Whitlam Uria Simango Manuel Pinto da Costa
Left-wing Populism	As the popular masses work all over the world in search of riches, hoping that they someday will attain the level of their masters; as inequality and hunger ravages even in developed countries; as the elites enrich themselves off the backs of the people, some people stand up and say "No". No to poverty, no to hunger, and most of all no to wealth disparity, for injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. Left-Wing Populism is the umbrella under which these people fall, although it is not an coherent ideology as much as it is a broad movement: combining anti-elites and left-wing rhetoric with populistic economic measures, those who claim an affiliation to it style themselves as the defenders of the "common people", opposing the economic elites and the establishment who oppress the poor and the little man. However, it is not too rooted in socialist theory, generally eschewing Marx or Lenin in favor of James Connolly or Léon Blum, and its most radical part is quite often its rhetoric, calling for the uprooting of the political and economic elites and for a fairer and juster society made by and for the people. And with a lot of effort and a tad of luck, such a society might even come true.	Behice Boran Lyubov Lysenko Alexander Yakovlev Viktor Polyakov Viktor Astafyev Abdulrahman al Bakr Clément Jumelle João Goulart Leonel Brizola Manuel Seoane
Left Kemalism	In prior decades, Kemalism held an almost monolithic presence within Turkish politics, encompassing left, right and centre. However, in recent years, Turkey's right flank has steadily drifted away from Kemalism's desire to emulate Western notions of progress, largely due to Kemalist prohibitions on religious expression and growing support for a model inspired by the fascist powers. As a response, many Kemalists have decided to emphasise the progressive aspects of their ideology and Atatürk's legacy, seeking to realign Kemalism to the left of centre, with a much greater commitment to social welfare. Emphasising populism and reformism, as opposed to their more nationalism-oriented orthodox cousins, Left Kemalists continue to espouse a Turkish national identity which may remain alienating towards certain minority groups.	Bülent Ecevit
Labour Zionism	"A land without a people for a people without land." Labor Zionism is the primary wing of the Zionist Movement as well as its left wing; it incorporates both socialist and nationalist elements in the attempt to merge a new Jewish national identity. This is done mainly through the use of both urban trade unions, most notably the Histadrut, which the majority of Jewish workers belong to, and the Kibbutzim, a rural commune that many a Labor Zionist will proudly boast of as the closest humanity has come to achieving true socialism. While initially many categorized the native Palestinians as "Shela Neelama" - the Hidden Question - modern Labor Zionists are split on how to best solve the "Palestinian Issue," with many advocating for an equitable and free two-state solution where both peoples may enjoy their right to self determination. A minority advocate for drastic measures such as expulsion of the Palestinians, who they see as lacking a concrete national identity and instead having an almost generic 'Arab' one, from the land of Israel. A smaller minority still advocates for confederation with their neighbors. Regardless, Labor Zionism remains defined by a simple creed: Zionism first, Socialism second.	David Ben-Gurion Golda Meir Shimon Peres
Popular Front	United we stand, divided we fall. No ideology exemplifies this so clearly as the Popular Front. Most typically drawn from a very, very broadly leftist set of ideologies, the Popular Front can include support from hardcore, insurrectionist communists all the way to democratic liberals and everything in between. Sometimes, in extreme cases, it can even include conservatives in the mix, though that is certainly a rarity. Often, these temporary arrangements are made when there is a significant shift in the status quo, or the threat of such a shift in some cases, and those opposed put aside their differences to fight against it, whether that be electorally, with armed conflict, or by other means. The concept of the Popular Front is as broad in its application as it is in its composition. The Front is usually forged first by finding some bare minimum ground, often of the moral variety, upon which to oppose the nascent threat. In other instances, a common matter of policy or ideology provides the adhesive element that keeps the Popular Front united, if the Front itself might lean more socialist or more liberal in its composition. And then its strategy is solidified, whether it is an agreement to vote in accordance with one another, or to support one another in terms of direct action and conflicts in the streets. The sheer variety of applications of the Popular Front, as it should be clear, makes it hard to define precisely. As such, it may not be considered much of an ideology at all, so much as a strategy that parties and groups of parties pursue to advance their ideologies.	Walther Bringolf Vasyl Stus Willy Brandt Lorenzo Tañada y Martínez Alfredo Palacios Líber Seregni
Social Radicalism	While many in the liberal sphere have utterly rejected Marxist principles and the ideologies that it spawned, others have found common ground on many of its more reasonable points. Equality is a common value between both the radicals and the socialists, after all, and much ground has yet to be gained until true equality is reached. While mainstream Radicalism will reject all socialists and socialist philosophy wholesale as a matter of principle, it is the Social Radical who finds common ground with them, reaching for their mutual goals and putting aside historical rivalries to do so. Above all else, the Social Radical aims for the establishment of equality, an end to want, and the elevation of social programs to aid in the former two ambitions. They are willing to make whatever compromises are necessary to end inequality in whatever forms it takes. Many further to their right call them idealistic, naive even, and those further to their left call them unimaginative, lacking in ambition or true dedication to the cause they profess. Despite this disdain they receive from both ends of the political spectrum, Social Radicalism continues to plow its own road ahead, to finish the work that the Enlightenment had started.	Arturo Umberto Illia Rodolfo Martinovic Luis Batlle Berres Amílcar Vasconcellos Manuel Flores Mora José Acquistapace Zelmar Michelini
Christian Progressivism	Christian Progressivism is a form of Christian Democracy in which a heavy amount of emphasis is put upon the ideals of justice, tolerance and the need to care for the poor and oppressed as preached by Jesus Christ. It differs from most other forms of Christian Democracy by virtue of a greater impetus for social change, as opposed to a call for conservatism, though it still maintains the belief that Democracy is the best means of achieving Christian values. Oftentimes, it seeks to interpret Christianity through the lens of modern knowledge, science and ethics, as opposed to those held at the time of the writing of the scriptures. In terms of economic policy, Christian Progressivism is usually in the center, though it can lean further to the left or to the right depending on the specific application. Socially, Christian Progressivism is usually center-left, being especially likely to be so on issues such as Civil Rights. However, Christian Progressives can often lean conservative on certain issues due to the fact that the ideology is still heavily based on Christian thought. Christian Progressivism also tends to place more weight on Christian values and morality, as opposed to adherence to specific Christian doctrine.	George Cadle Price* José Antonio Echeverría Luis Bedoya Reyes
Left-Wing Agrarianism	Since before the Russian Revolution of 1917, the world has known a uniquely Socialist blend of rural-oriented politics; Left-Wing Agrarianism. Born from the minds of men like Alexander Herzen and Pyotr Lavrov, this new strain of Agrarianist thought is primarily oriented around typical agrarian goals: prioritization of farming in the national framework, the promotion of the farmer in the ideals of the state, and an attempt at egalitarianism; though Left-Wing Agrarianism comes with its own set of rules. Conflicting with the typical Bukharinist-Marxist divide, Left-Wing Agrarianism heavily prioritizes the rural farmer in the everyday life and function of the state, and sees them as a class in of themselves, no matter how many times the unique strain of Socialism finds itself being called ideological heathens in doing so.
Liberal Socialism	A propagandist or an illiterate might well look at Liberal Socialism and say something along the lines of "there is no difference between a liberal socialist and a progressive democrat". This is wrong—a liberal socialist, unlike a progressive, will self-identify as a socialist, and has at least a theoretical aim the construction of a socialist system. Primary doctrines of liberal socialism include leveraging the market to further socialist goals, emphasizing welfare systems built via the construction of quality public services, and the expansion of public-private partnerships as an alternative to nationalizations. The liberal socialist ideology developed as the middle class grew in many nations through the 60s and 70s, and lost interest in outright socialism without becoming opposed to left-wing governance. Though liberal socialism insists that it remains socialist, this can be brought into question at times, especially when the policies of a nominally liberal socialist party seem similar to those of a liberal party. If this is the case, it is entirely possible that more orthodox socialist factions may reduce support or outright oppose a governing liberal socialist party, which in turn can cause massive rifts within the left wing of a multiparty democracy.	Anthony Crosland
Utopian Socialism	The earliest strand of its kind, Utopian Socialism has been used as both a label of endearment and insult by leftists through the years. Originally pioneered in the early 18th and 19th century, Utopian socialism is primarily based upon both a distinct dislike of class conflict and a belief in the perfectibility of mankind and of society in general. Whether it be through the creation of local communes, making industry more efficient through nationalization of certain goods and services, or just simply a moral belief in raising the entire society as a whole through government and local intervention, utopian socialists believe that mankind as a whole can be brought up to a higher standard of living than what capitalism can currently deliver to us. The biggest distinction between utopian socialists and their Marxist cousins is a distinct dislike of class conflict or revolution, believing instead that all classes would be willing to adhere to such a system through convincing. This places it in opposition to the materialistic worldview that Marxism and more pragmatic socialists who intend on creating working class coalitions to win power. While most utopian experiments have failed, many persist in their experiments, believing that, one day, a perfect system of humanity can be created, and that all of mankind can bask in its glory of a newer, better world.	Dmitri Shostakovich Mieczysław Weinberg Viktor Nekrasov
Eastern Progressivism	For most people on the left side of the American political spectrum, Franklin Delano Roosevelt is the defining leader. With his deep roots in the Democratic Party and brain trust of established experts, he built an array of programs that formed the foundation of the modern welfare state. But Franklin is not the only figure of inspiration. For some, the Roosevelt of Hyde Park was too establishment, too traditional. Some find their inspiration elsewhere—in the rolicking and unpredictable example of his distant relative Teddy who worked his way up through the corrupt New York system determined to change it. Eastern Progressives are inspired by this example. Familiar with established systems and convinced of the need for radical change, Eastern Progressivism is the ideology of reformers and public advocates. It is a movement dominated by large, old-money figures who—out of a sense of duty or for their political survival—have arrayed themselves against the institutions built by their ancestors long ago. They see an urgent need to advance science, economic development, and liberal political thought for the betterment of all people across society. While Eastern Progressives have much in common with their Western counterparts, there are several notable differences. First, Eastern Progressives are inspired more by large, established, and orderly cities like New York and Boston than by the openness of the American frontier. They are less gun-toting than their Western counterparts and built around established power centers. Second, this very familiarity with established power centers often makes them less willing to destroy them outright. Rather than burn the system down, Eastern Progressives are often more focused on renovating those systems and expanding them to include new groups and peoples.	Robert F. Kennedy
Western Progressivism	For good and ill, America's sense of nationhood is inextricably tied to the frontier. The great rivers and prairies of the west were a land of opportunity where any man, regardless of birth, could make his way forwards with nothing but grit and determination. And now, the American West is the epicenter of the latest attempt to make the United States truly live up to its creed of liberty and justice for all: Western Progressivism. While the Progressivism of the East Coast has long since turned to compromising with the traditional institutions and power brokers of the United States in the name of change, Western Progressives turn up their noses at this pragmatism. They see all the traditional institutions of political power, from corporations to machine politics to career politicians themselves, as nothing more than tools for the powerful to keep the common man down. Western Progressives have a reputation as being a more authentic representation of the will of those they represent than the politicians of DC, immersed as they are in backroom politics. But with this authenticity can come a lack of unity and purpose, and a refusal to compromise even when doing so is necessary to political success. Now, Western Progressivism has found its home with the Progressive caucus of the NPP, seeking to lead a new American Revolution to sweep aside the legacy of racial and class inequalities forever. They have risen a wave of popular disenchantment both with the inequality of American society and the corruption of Washington to the White House. But now, they must not simply agitate, but govern. Will this new generation of American dreamers finally change the country for good, or will they become that which they swore to destroy?	Henry M. Jackson
Others/Unknown		Svyatoslav Fyodorov