6 responses

  1. Hector Maturana
    May 5, 2015

    Excellent information.

    Reply

  2. AM
    June 1, 2015

    Whoever wrote this certainly took several swipes at Liberals. The whole point of an “educational” article is to educate, not spout more bias.

    Reply

    • Larry
      June 6, 2015

      A quick read of the summary will tell you all you have to know about this so-called educational article. It is riddled with errors in grammar and usage to say nothing of the generalizations and baseless opinions.

      Reply

  3. Joyce Clemons
    July 5, 2015

    Progressivism and liberalism in the United States today are increasingly hard to distinguish apart and also are tending rapidly toward Marxism. It’s way too easy today to see the influence of American Fabianism. William Ayers decided to make the classroom the frontline of his revolution. He learned it from his predecessors. Ayers, formerly of the SDS, Students for a Democratic Society. SDS, which split from the League for Industrial Democracy. The League for Industrial Democracy, which is simply the Intercollegiate Socialist Society, renamed.
    John Dewey was a Fabian Society member. W.E.B. DuBois was a socialist who joined the American Communist Party late in life. Howard Zinn: America’s leading revisionist historian, a poor scholar and an ardent communist. Gloria Steinem: Member of the Democratic Socialists of America. Most people today would call all of them progressives or liberals.

    Reply

  4. Bryan J Howard
    February 2, 2018

    This would benefit greatly from having a ‘Liberals believe in: a, b, c vs. Progressives believe in: x, y, z’ bulletpoint overview, followed by a explanation by of their stances on issues – economic, political and social –
    rather than the history of the ideas.

    The differences between historiacal and contemporary positions might also be worth considering, as well.

    Reply

  5. Deb cha
    May 21, 2018

    The affectations evident in the author’s writing style obscures the information thereby interfering with the author’s main objective, which (presumably) is to communicate. While I’m sure there is good information here, it is too tedious to read because the author appears to have prioritized pretense over clarity.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top
mobile desktop