R U Progressive?

[Woodruff]

I was unaware that "progressive" was deragatory or negative in any way. Or "liberal" for that matter.

Oh, you're new to this forum. Well welcome aboard, thegreekdog, I hope you enjoy it here.

Ok sure, the terms themselves aren't derogatory or negative. But the conservatorium here on this site have taken false meanings for the two terms and run with them such that the only way they ever use them is in a derogatory or negative manner.

[Woodruff]

i had to google search 'progressivism'. it is funny, because i thought it might be some new school of thought, but in fact it just appears to mean the favouring of change and progression over conservation of the old order.

in this sense, gorbachev, hitler, stalin, mandela, gandhi, martin luther king, george washington, copernicus - they were all progressivists.

in all of these topics i see people who are scared of change. i am not sure why.

Prezactly.

[Woodruff]

There are a lot of people that voted for Reagan and Obama. That baffles me since they are so far apart (at least in rhetoric).

Sure there are difference, but not nearly as much as you seem to believe.

[maasman]

My definition of progressive is trying to change society for the better. Pretty simple and hard to argue against.

[natty dread]

Progressives are better than regressives.

[PLAYER57832]

[/img]

Now this thread is balanced for liberals and conservatives alike. Personally, I think both are pretty funny.

-rd

This is backwards. I know more liberals who are good at math and science... and who are liberal because of that knowledge, than the reverse.

A lot of business leaders are young Earth Creationists.

[PLAYER57832]

either you are an overall collectivist or you are an overall individualist, you can't be both. There is no gray area here Symm.

It is a certain political philosophy in America, it's been here for a long time, it's in every students history books with an entire chapter labeled "the progressive era". It's basic knowledge here.

Their principles have not changed one bit

In fact, there absolutely is ONLY grey area here.
The word for folks who think only one side bears attention is "fanatic".

[PLAYER57832]

It was the early progressives who started putting out the notions that the founders were rich, white racists and that God and religion had nothing to do with the beginning of the country.

Yeah, becuase of course women, minorities and poorer non land-holding individuals had complete and full access to the government all along!

It was HISTORY, not "progressives" that put that "notion" into people's minds... as in women could not hold property; all women and men who had no land and anyone of color were not allowed to vote.. etc.

Oh yeah, and employers were able to tell their employees not just to go to church, but which church to go to... the "liberal" employer might actually hire a couple of jews.. maybe.

[Baron Von PWN]

Hmm, not sure if I see that as a convincing argument. Looks a lot like you're saying progressivism exists and it's bad, because it exits and it's bad.

Wait, what?? I clearly stated what early progressives believed. Yet now you're saying that I just made up the label and made up it being bad? I'm pretty sure that eugenics, segregation, etc. are all bad in and of themselves. And the early progressives supported and encouraged (and in some other cases, founded) these actions and beliefs. They called themselves progressives. I did nothing to make up the term.

Ok... that is an argument for historical progressives having had bad ideas. How does that relate to modern progressives? You aren't claiming modern progressives are in favour of those things are you?

I mean why don't I look up what stupid shit republicans believed 100 years ago and then say "look look republicans are bad and evil!"

[Phatscotty]

So we're pretty much agreed that this is just a vaguely defined slang term entirely bound to current US partisan politics?

The fact that it's a label is relatively unimportant. What's important is the radical and oppressive viewpoints behind that label.

Which is pretty much my point here. That it is a label for other things, specifically a bunch of stuff that conservatives dislike. Furthermore, given that the label has no real manifesto behind it beyond the ways that certain groups of conservatives define it, it's basically not a political position at all.

Except that there IS a real manifesto behind the label of progressivism. And it's a very dangerous and oppressive one.

Hmm, not sure if I see that as a convincing argument. Looks a lot like you're saying progressivism exists and it's bad, because it exits and it's bad.

First you have to introduce yourself to what progressivism is and it's history, then perhaps you will stop defending it.

It is a history of absolute evil and the most hardcore of any racism you have ever seen.

[Phatscotty]

Hmm, not sure if I see that as a convincing argument. Looks a lot like you're saying progressivism exists and it's bad, because it exits and it's bad.

Wait, what?? I clearly stated what early progressives believed. Yet now you're saying that I just made up the label and made up it being bad? I'm pretty sure that eugenics, segregation, etc. are all bad in and of themselves. And the early progressives supported and encouraged (and in some other cases, founded) these actions and beliefs. They called themselves progressives. I did nothing to make up the term.

Ok... that is an argument for historical progressives having had bad ideas. How does that relate to modern progressives? You aren't claiming modern progressives are in favour of those things are you?

I mean why don't I look up what stupid shit republicans believed 100 years ago and then say "look look republicans are bad and evil!"

Like ending slavery?

[Phatscotty]

i had to google search 'progressivism'. it is funny, because i thought it might be some new school of thought, but in fact it just appears to mean the favouring of change and progression over conservation of the old order.

in this sense, gorbachev, hitler, stalin, mandela, gandhi, martin luther king, george washington, copernicus - they were all progressivists.

in all of these topics i see people who are scared of change. i am not sure why.

perhaps you should keep looking, until you get to the parts where they reversed all progress made in slaves realizing freedom, or maybe the part about how they wanted to force black people and mentally ill people have abortions, or maybe the part about re-segregating our military, or maybe even the part about how the progressive party is constantly trying to tear apart our constitution. Maybe when you come to realize that progressivism is the complete opposite of freedom, you can get a little deeper understanding.

[Baron Von PWN]

Hmm, not sure if I see that as a convincing argument. Looks a lot like you're saying progressivism exists and it's bad, because it exits and it's bad.

Wait, what?? I clearly stated what early progressives believed. Yet now you're saying that I just made up the label and made up it being bad? I'm pretty sure that eugenics, segregation, etc. are all bad in and of themselves. And the early progressives supported and encouraged (and in some other cases, founded) these actions and beliefs. They called themselves progressives. I did nothing to make up the term.

Ok... that is an argument for historical progressives having had bad ideas. How does that relate to modern progressives? You aren't claiming modern progressives are in favour of those things are you?

I mean why don't I look up what stupid shit republicans believed 100 years ago and then say "look look republicans are bad and evil!"

Like ending slavery?

Classic scotty ignores point.

Besides It was 1912 slavery had ended. lrn 2 history.

[Phatscotty]

My definition of progressive is trying to change society for the better. Pretty simple and hard to argue against.

Similarly, my definition of conservatism means people like to conserve, and my definition of liberalism is people like liberty.

[Phatscotty]

either you are an overall collectivist or you are an overall individualist, you can't be both. There is no gray area here Symm.

It is a certain political philosophy in America, it's been here for a long time, it's in every students history books with an entire chapter labeled "the progressive era". It's basic knowledge here.

Their principles have not changed one bit

In fact, there absolutely is ONLY grey area here.
The word for folks who think only one side bears attention is "fanatic".

yeah, sure, I know plenty of people who call themselves a collective individualist

[AAFitz]

With the right medication yes, but if I mess it up, I tend to be a little more regressive.

[the carpet man]

Phatscotty, you appear to be talking about a specific political party rather than progressivists in general.

would you vote for someone who would keep everything exactly the same as it is now? because if you want anything of the present changed, then you are a progressivist in that respect

i am not sure why you started talking about forced abortion or slavery, as these sound like very specific examples of the past. i can not think of any current politicians of the world who advocate a return to slavery or eugenics.

[AAFitz]

Phatscotty, you appear to be talking about a specific political party rather than progressivists in general.

would you vote for someone who would keep everything exactly the same as it is now? because if you want anything of the present changed, then you are a progressivist in that respect

i am not sure why you started talking about forced abortion or slavery, as these sound like very specific examples of the past. i can not think of any current politicians of the world who advocate a return to slavery or eugenics, publicly.

fixed

[the carpet man]

erm.. okay. i think i am done in this thread. the title tricked me, but i this seems actually just another thread discussing US politics. which i find very boring.

[john9blue]

this person is a "progressive" in the same way that someone on the neo-con right is a "tea partier" or a militant atheist is a "free-thinker"

a.k.a. the label is completely misleading

[AAFitz]

erm.. okay. i think i am done in this thread. the title tricked me, but i this seems actually just another thread discussing US politics. which i find very boring.

That's too bad because your posts are usually the hit of any thread. You will most sadly be missed.

[Woodruff]

perhaps you should keep looking, until you get to the parts where they reversed all progress made in slaves realizing freedom, or maybe the part about how they wanted to force black people and mentally ill people have abortions, or maybe the part about re-segregating our military, or maybe even the part about how the progressive party is constantly trying to tear apart our constitution. Maybe when you come to realize that progressivism is the complete opposite of freedom, you can get a little deeper understanding.

I must say...You don't seem to really understand what a progressive is at all. Where do you get this crap? It's certainly not from reality.

[Night Strike]

perhaps you should keep looking, until you get to the parts where they reversed all progress made in slaves realizing freedom, or maybe the part about how they wanted to force black people and mentally ill people have abortions, or maybe the part about re-segregating our military, or maybe even the part about how the progressive party is constantly trying to tear apart our constitution. Maybe when you come to realize that progressivism is the complete opposite of freedom, you can get a little deeper understanding.

I must say...You don't seem to really understand what a progressive is at all. Where do you get this crap? It's certainly not from reality.

A progressive is NOT someone who just wants to move the country forward and to make progress. That's apparently what you believe it is, and you're dead wrong (literally in some cases).

[Baron Von PWN]

perhaps you should keep looking, until you get to the parts where they reversed all progress made in slaves realizing freedom, or maybe the part about how they wanted to force black people and mentally ill people have abortions, or maybe the part about re-segregating our military, or maybe even the part about how the progressive party is constantly trying to tear apart our constitution. Maybe when you come to realize that progressivism is the complete opposite of freedom, you can get a little deeper understanding.

I must say...You don't seem to really understand what a progressive is at all. Where do you get this crap? It's certainly not from reality.

They are conflating the past with the present, that's what going on.

[Timminz]

Okay. So, progressives are people who support eugenics, segregation, and governmental control, and who spout contradictions that have been thought up by someone who disagrees with them? Is that the definition we're working with here?

I'm going to go out on a limb here, and wager that no one exists today fitting that description, and that anyone who may have labelled themselves as such were either lying, or working from a different definition from the one put forward in this thread.