Obscurity without the "Indie" label?

All right, first I am going to type out a paper on indie culture that I wrote about a year ago, then I will compare it to my musical tastes.

Technically "indie" means "independent," which means an artist that is self-managed, or are managed by a label of any size calling themselves "indie." Since the music, lyrics, pitches and rhythms, don't change (maybe the production quality), it shouldn't be called a genre.
In other words, with today's accessible technology, you can't tell from listening whether or not it's independently made.
"Indie" is more about the culture than the music. It's all about obscurity: If you like stuff no one's really heard of, you win! So it's not about the music at all, the music is just a veil to hide the agenda behind. Oh no he said the word "agenda" that must mean he's an evil haterrrr
Progressive and experimental music, on the other hand, is not obscure because it's lacking in musical skill or creativity. On the other hand, it has too much of those attributes for the general public to handle! Thus, it's about the music, and it just happens to be obscure. If a progressive band can achieve popularity without altering their music, that's great. (See Yes, Pink Floyd and Rush.) But since indie culture revels in obscurity and the music doesn't matter too much, an indie band becoming popular (See Death Cab) is no longer attractive because they no longer bring sought-after glory for liking something obscure.
So progressive and indie- they sometimes overlap. Both are generally obscure, but for different reasons. Both tend to be elitists, but for different reasons.
Indie: Must like stuff no one else does so as to look cool. The actual music they listen to, as long as it's unpopular (for any reason), could be any genre.
Progressive: Likes really good music. Unfortunately most people don't, so the bands are sometimes obscure.