Progressive means solving problems while including everyone in the social order. Some of the tasks are quite abstract, such as producing justice in the courts. More rudimentary is producing technology. Using the products of technology to solve problems is an objective test of constructivity.
In producing a product, standards are required based on objective reality. The products only work when aligned with the laws of nature. This means producing products creates standards.
Conservatives do the opposite. They try to talk their way into success, while their deeds are the opposite of their words.
It is said that actions speak louder than words. The actions tell the truth about the words. In fact, the words can be omitted, and the actions say the same thing.
Actions can be misrepresented or lied about. Wars are often said to be the answer to something. So-called freedom fighters were supposedly creating freedom by fighting a war against farmers in Nicaragua.
Creating products doesn't have that problem. The products either work or they don't. Some imagining is temporarily possible, such as the claim that renewable energy is solving society's problems. But time gradually corrects the falsehoods, as renewables bankrupt economies and force a reversion back to traditional energy sources.
In other words, a product that has to function for a constructive purpose straightens out the truth about standards of constructivity. Laws of nature always prevail over lies, when something complex has to work properly. The mismanagement of nuclear reactors show the price of incompetence.
The more demanding the products are, the more demanding the standards are which are required for producing them. Steve Jobs was up against social problems as demanding as the technical problems in creating the smart phone. He had to fight tooth and claw against opponents every step of the way. (Rational persons considered him to be nice and friendly.) The reason is because the incompetents who push their way into power create obstacles to progress. Getting the products produced requires correcting the standards.
In this way, producing products corrects social standards. Doing this is liberal as well as progressive, because it widens the social order to include more persons. The essence of liberalism is to include more persons in the benefits of social activities. Conversely, the austerity of conservatives removes people from the benefits of the social order. If it is not being done for the people, who is it being done for and why?
Government by Dictatorship
Government by dictatorship shows what the opposite of progressive is. Instead of rationality to solve problems, control through fear and intimidation is the purpose.
Reductionistic government seems attractive to some persons, because it makes claims without the burden of explanations. The bliss of ignorance will supposedly produce a flawless result.
Chaos is viewed as a superior standard by some persons. Chaos is achieved by striking out randomly at opponents removing rationality from ordered existence. It's the absence of specifics that can be pinned down as explanations that prevents rationality from replacing chaos.
The promoters of chaos over rationality firmly believe that rationality is the cause of problems and darkness is the answer. If it doesn't come out of nowhere with them arbitrating the result, it isn't truth or intelligence.
Reducing reality to rubble is the first task of chaos promoters. Lies and contradictions have the purpose of removing reality as an obstacle in their path to get what they want out of life with no ability to handle reality in a competent manner. The purpose is defined by the result rather than the process.
Detached Solutions to Problems
The divergent approach to solving problems stems from a detached relationship to reality. Irrational persons are certainly driven to solve their problems, but they are devoid of real mechanisms due to an absence of objective reality. They don't know that there is such a thing as objective reality. So they assume that problems only exist because someone wants them to exist, and all they have to do is not want them to exist.
The net result is to identify problems and will them away instead of going through processes that would actually work. Willing problems away is like throwing rocks at them. Corrupters don't understand what rational persons have been doing for the past five thousand years, and supposedly throwing rocks at problems is the first attempt anyone has made to solve them.
Implications Instead of Words
Corrupters must argue through implications, because words defeat them. If words defeat them, they need to be defeated, because words clarify.
What are implications? They are really weird things. They are constructed tangentially to be used/misused later. The word game is a micro example. Define a word in a logical way, and then misuse the word giving it the wrong meaning in application. Making improper associations of that nature is what implications are.
No Such Thing as Corruption
Since corrupters know of no other method of doing things than through corruption, they assume there is no such thing as corruption. How can corruption be corruption, if it is the only possible standard to exist? Yet they assume there is something extremely wrong about the approach of their enemies. It couldn't be corruption, because they cannot understand corruption. Corruption is as complex as the complexities which it replaces or destroys.
What then is wrong with the enemies of corrupters? There is no analysis. The wrongs are supposed to be self-evident. Rational persons expect some explanation for being attacked, but none ever exists. There are all sorts of subjective something in attacks, but subjective nonsense is never an explanation.
Fifty Billion People
The planet could sustain 50 billion people easier than it is sustaining 7 billion, if resources were developed instead of squandered. There would be advantages, as it would increase the constructivity of society and strengthen social structures. One of the reasons why there is so much wantonness at this time is that rip off is too easy. Less of a reason to rip everyone off would be a benefit to everyone.
Agriculture would be a push-over, if the ground were not squandered for other purposes. It wouldn't have to be. Drip irrigation would allow organic food to be produced everywhere. It allows hilly and hard ground to be used. Beef should be grown on cellulose rather than starch, even now. Organic cellulose is easy to produce, while organic starch is almost impossible to produce. When not fed starch, beef doesn't have the fat of prime rib, but the fat is not that good for health. Cooking without so much fat is easy.
A lot of persons are concerned about too much garbage. It doesn't have to be a concern. Garbage is already being moved long distances. Piling it up has advantages in creating useful hills. A lot of persons don't understand how much available space exists in the western US. Greens worry about methane, but there wouldn't really be such a thing as a "stronger" greenhouse gas, even if there were such a thing as greenhouse gases. More absorption only means the gas saturates sooner by using up all available radiation. Carbon dioxide saturates in 10 meters under near-surface conditions. Shortening the distance is not increasing the heat.
Some persons worry about crowding; yet the most desired places to live are the most crowded, such as NY City. Going vertical is no concern to developers.
There sure is no concern about running out of rare minerals at the present rate of squandering with supposed renewable energy and electric vehicles. Lower technology does not require rare minerals. Society would probably be better off with lower technology, because it is less fragile and longer lasting.
What is Liberalism
There is an underlying meaning to liberalism, but it mostly disappeared after conservatives undertook the defining and explaining of liberalism in 1981. No one in Washington dared call themselves a liberal afterwards. I call myself a pre-1980 liberal, attempting to get back to the original meaning.
The way liberals were describing themselves before conservatives took over the world in 1981 was as promoters of "equal opportunity." It's not an easy thing to promote, since the lower classes and minorities are always less equal than the rich and powerful.
The methodology was to improve the social order and make it work so smoothly that misfits could get through the various processes needed for doing some of the things more privileged persons do. It might be surprising how important infrastructure was for that purpose. Good highways are more critical to the lower classes, because they can't afford to spend as much on auto repairs as the rich can, which seems to be why conservatives refuse to patch potholes in the roads. Creating encumbrances in the paths of the lower classes is a first concern of conservatives, as shown by the fact that immigrants must now fill out three times as many pages in applying for entrance and voting laws make voting impossible for a lot of low class persons.
The basis for liberalism is simply solving human problems. There is something cold blooded about most conservatives in not caring how much misery they create for the lowly. The arguments of conservatives always use convenience and economic trivia as the excuse for make low class persons more miserable.