similarities and differences between Progressives and Social Democrats?

[The Crawling Chaos]

They seem similar to me, as it seems both believe in a welfare state with economic controls. But neither want to go Full Monty with socialism by completely eliminating private market economics. Other than the occasional progressive, neither seems to want to nationalize industry.


Both want to "use" the capitalists and regulate the economy for the "public good".

Just happenstance, or are there common influences?

This is a follow up to a much earlier question on differences between Social Democrats and democratic socialists.

[apeman605]

Its a distinction without a difference. Socialists are socialists are socialists.

[MagpieRhino]

I will admit to not being sure, but as a guess I would think social democracy was more concerned with the economic system whereas progressives were more concerned with social issues

[Captain Obvious]

Social Democracy is a form of progressivism.

I take progressivism to be a non-revolutionary stance on political change that is critical about traditional hierarchy and prejudice and supports rational humanist reforms. It is therefore quite broad.
Integral to the idea of progressivism is a concept of 'progress' which can mean any number of things.

I'd say that progressivism is perhaps most clearly defined against conservativism, which is the belief that there is something valuable about prevailing structures or institutions (be it the US constitution, the aristocracy, religion, the family, traditional morality, etc) so we best leave them be as disturbing them may have negative unintended consequences. This is opposed to progressivism which believes we should be trying to use reason and technology to constantly make things better. Again, I'd say progressivism and conservatism are very nebulous ideas and depend entirely on the cultural and historical context they operate in (for example, a member of the Russian communist party in this day an age is probably best considered a conservative rather than a progressive, whereas in 1917 they were definitely for an ideal of progress).

Social Democracy, in its current form (Lenin once called himself a social democrat, but wouldn't be considered one now by anyone with any sense) is generally tolerant of the capitalist market and private property, but wants to mitigate it's excesses and shortcomings through state activity. This includes: providing welfare, education, supporting workers rights to organise, workplace safety laws, environmental regulation, etc. It is somewhat similar to liberal democracy (like say that of Obama), only it leans further to the left and advocates a higher level of redistribution and takes a more restrictive stance toward business.
You can see the differences between liberal democracy and social democracy clearly in the very different policies of the Democratic Party in the US compared to Nordic Social Democrats.

But contemporary social democracy is not like socialism (either democratic socialism or revolutionary socialism) in that it does not seek to abolish capitalism altogether and democratise the economy under worker control or command it under party control. It still permits capitalism.

If you wanted to put it very crudely: social democrats are the left, liberals are the centre-left and socialists are the far-left.

Most social democrats are also socially quite liberal, and advocate civil rights, anti-discrimination, skeptical about war, and so on. But this is not always the case (see the Australian DLP for an example of socially conservative social democrats)