"Progressive"

[Michael Hoover]

> I wonder
> what Bob LaFollette meant by the term when he named his
> magazine.  He was no kind of socialist.
> Joseph Noonan

RL writes in _La Follette's Autobiography_ (pp. 334-341) that he "would not 
unjustly decry Wall Street or ignore the necessity of a great central market 
to provide capital for the large business undertakings of this country."  On 
one hand, he acknowledges "the rights of capital and the service which 
capital can render to a great producing nation."  On the other hand, RL
states that the government is supposed to guarantee "equality of opportunity 
for all capital" in the same way that it guarantees equality of opportunity 
for all men.  He goes on to say that "fair competition...has been suppressed"
by inter-state corporations and big banks who receive "special favors in
legislation."  RL apparently did not get bashed in the press until he
asserted that the "money power" that has "gained control of our industry 
and government" had also taken over the press.

Above seems to be theory that government could be used to make capitalism 
work more equitably (no political state as instrument of ruling class 
here!).  Rather than capitalist social structure, RL's target was abuses
of economic system through monopolies and graft.  His politics attempted 
to combine populist-tinged wish to return to pre-corporat economy of small 
businesses/producers and "free markets" with "good government" leadership 
acting in "public interest" which he thought meant rational, well-planned, 
honestly executed policy.    Michael Hoover