I graduated college that year and it was immediately apparent that everything I had just learned about how the economy was “supposed” to work was one big lie. Millennials were saddled with debt and then thrust into an economy losing 800,000 jobs a month when President Obama took office in 2009. To answer New York Mag’s question in a word: 2008. On the cover of When did everyone become a socialist? /oPkugfpFl4- NYMag Communications March 4, 2019 I can’t help but chuckle at (tongue-in-cheek?) headlines like this, given well-known facts like how millennials largely prefer socialism to capitalism. In more than a word, you first need to understand the major event that shaped the politics of the largest generation in history in order to understand the rise of progressivism from that generation. At the same time I see nothing progressive about Labour's policies, which seem to be drifting back into the past.*Anti-imperialism is a central tenet of socialism, and foreign policy is a major arena where leftists and liberals differ, but I’m going to ignore this complex topic for the purposes of this explainer, since economics is a more broadly understandable fault line. This might indeed be progress to get away from the bi-lateral bickering between government and opposition. In that sense I think David Cameron and the coalition have every right to use the word since they have already broken the mould and set up a coalition government. When defining the meaning of "progressive", in the political sense, I think of it as defining policies for change, quite literally "progress" and not for remaining with the status quo. The word "progressive" did indeed take centre stage in the recent election. They did however openly commit to and steal the Tory policies in order to win the middle ground. The Blairites used to love to use the term radical which had very much come to the fore in the Thatcher years even though there was absolutely nothing seriously radical about any of their policies. I think it is a demonstration of how pivotal the centre ground has come to mean in UK politics in the last 15 years. Maybe this new usage of 'progressive' has had our modern leaders studying the history books? Matt, Bristol, Englandĭon't you just love the way politicians squabble over buzz words! The more so recently. Tellingly, these 'progressives' ended up scattered across the political spectrum - although some ended up in what became the Labour party, others ended up in what are now the Conseervative and Liberal Democrat party. They differed very mcuh among themselves in how much they respected the existing leaders of the nation, and how much they identified with the 'working classes' personally. Very few of them are describable as 'social democrats'. They could also favour measures that would actively involve the state in financially benefitting the underprivileged, but were not always uniform in this. They were often in favour of handed back governmental conntrol to the regions, away from London-centric vested interests. Those who claimed the name stood for ongoing reforms to the constitution and structure of British state and society, opening up access to education, the franchise and opportunities for employment and social betterment and for the 'lower classes' and other previously excluded groups. Before WW1 and back into the 1880s it tended to be used interchangeably with 'Radical' (which was usually, though not exclusively a factional term for a branch of the Liberal Party). Since WW2 (at least) it has been regarded as almost uniformly a synonym for 'socialism' or 'social democracy'. As the article briefly alludes to, Cameron and Clegg's coimbined use of the word 'progressive' is much more akin to late 19th and early 20th century British usage of the word than it is post-War usage.