It does seem like there's a split on this thread about
- whether the US progressives relate to global progressives in any way except by name
- how the right views the political spectrum by name of everything to the left of it
Exactly.
> Folks on the US left exhibit similar symptoms when talking about the right.
Yeah, for a good while there, everyone who wasn't a staunch progressive was described as uniformly "far-right".
> I responded initially because I think distinctualizing US progressives and global progressives is important. I don't want to see US progressives, their policy, or their values gain more traction; I am on board for a party that reflects global progressivism, it's policies, and it's values.
I disagree with your politics, but I agree on the importance of this distinction.
> whether the US progressives relate to global progressives in any way except by name
I think US progressives are roughly "global progressives" plus identity stuff. Some US progressives care more about identity than economics, but there aren't any US progressives who flat-out reject left-wing economics even if they don't care as much about it, and there are relatively few US progressives who flat-out reject left-wing identity doctrine even if they don't think it's terribly important (e.g., Sanders).
> how the right views the political spectrum by name of everything to the left of it
The right generally doesn't distinguish between different "bands" (in the sense of a frequency band in a frequency spectrum) on the left of the spectrum any more than the left distinguishes between different "bands" on the right of the spectrum. Some right-wingers use "leftist" for everyone left of center and others use "liberal" for left-of-center, but in both cases they're using a single term for "left-of-center" and thus failing to distinguish. You see the same thing with people on the left referring to the right homogeneously as "conservative" or "right-wing" or "far-right". Few on either side recognize the nuanced beliefs on the other side.
I agree with the last paragraph. Anyone that does not understand the various striations of politics but attempts to speak on broad groups negatively without that understanding does immeasurable damage to discourse.
I think we agree here. Most "progressives" outside of the US are a lot more likely to focus on class distinctions while US progressives are preoccupied by identity.
Liberal doesn't have any consistent meaning in the US. (Like, nearly every point on the spectrum uses it differently
> Similarly, “leftist” means something different in an American context than it does in your “global” context
Not particularly. Except in the propaganda of the American Right, where it is one of a pile of indistinct labels like Marxist, liberal, Communist, woke, critical race theory, etc., applied indiscriminately to everything they disagree with.