Conquer Club

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:04 pm**

Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote:
Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote:The thing for me is that the label "progressive" seems almost exclusively a term used by the US right at the moment as a way to somehow denigrate opponents. The definition is a bit flaky, and mostly provincial when it comes to political philosophies. Progressivism has existed as a political term in the past, but with varying meanings.

What's odd about this one is that it mostly seems to be defined by people who disagree with the so called progressives, while so few of those identified in that way accept or use that label.

It just seems to be thrown around as a way for conservative minded people to label a person or policy they don't agree with.

Hilary Clinton called herself an early 20th century progressive while she was running for president.

She may well have done, but I'm not sure she was using the term in quite the same way we are here, or the way it's being used now as an example of a political philosophy. Can you tell me what she meant by it?

Most people who label themselves as that don't realize what the REAL Progressives in the early 1900s were striving for. They explored and fought for eugenics, segregation, and governmental control. Birth control was developed in order to keep undesirables from procreating. They then realized that they were pushing too hard out in the open for their ideals, so they chose to begin a more subtle approach at subverting the Constitution in order to transform the country into what they wanted it to be: a socialist utopia. 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. They then began teaching (both in public and in the schools) that the government is the only solution to society's problems, real or conceived. It was early 20th century progressives that have given us the big-government culture and problems we have today.

So it's a century old term dredged up today? And with little relevance to any political position held by any so called progressive.

This thread is looking like a strawman.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:08 pm**

Symmetry wrote:The thing for me is that the label "progressive" seems almost exclusively a term used by the US right at the moment as a way to somehow denigrate opponents. The definition is a bit flaky, and mostly provincial when it comes to political philosophies. Progressivism has existed as a political term in the past, but with varying meanings.

What's odd about this one is that it mostly seems to be defined by people who disagree with the so called progressives, while so few of those identified in that way accept or use that label.

It just seems to be thrown around as a way for conservative minded people to label a person or policy they don't agree with.

This is where not living in America starts to kick in...

Hillary Clinton, Obama, FDR, Wilson, Carter, have all used the word progressive to describe themselves, and plenty of Republicans as well (which I hold exactly the same amount of disdain for). In my opinion, what I understand progressive to be has not changed one iota over the last century. the definition is not wobbly for me, nor is there a need for me or others to try to find a way to change it to fit our argument or p.o.v.

I was just listening to the Mike Papiantono show, and his bumper says braggingly "progressive doses....to be repeated daily" Gingrich, Romney, Mccain, Teddy Roosevelt, GW Bush, and Nixon all had progressive leanings. Progressive is not a word to be used from conservatives to liberals in anyway whatsoever. To do this is to not understand progressivism in America.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:08 pm**

Symmetry wrote:
ViperOverLord wrote:
Symmetry wrote:The thing for me is that the label "progressive" seems almost exclusively a term used by the US right at the moment as a way to somehow denigrate opponents....

Hmmm__ There was a time 15 years ago in which people proudly wore the progressive label while peddling their own line of corruption.

I really don't know. BBS posted a few definitions of what it meant in another thread, but they were from right wing sites that weren't exactly sympathetic to whatever progressivism is supposed to be.

Is it just a conservative pejorative for liberals?

I would say it's the opposite. It has been for liberals who don't like the way conservatives have ruined the word "liberal". This has changed, though, thanks single-handedly to Glenn Beck. Now both words are like poison.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:10 pm**

Symmetry wrote:
Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote:
Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote:The thing for me is that the label "progressive" seems almost exclusively a term used by the US right at the moment as a way to somehow denigrate opponents. The definition is a bit flaky, and mostly provincial when it comes to political philosophies. Progressivism has existed as a political term in the past, but with varying meanings.

What's odd about this one is that it mostly seems to be defined by people who disagree with the so called progressives, while so few of those identified in that way accept or use that label.

It just seems to be thrown around as a way for conservative minded people to label a person or policy they don't agree with.

Hilary Clinton called herself an early 20th century progressive while she was running for president.

She may well have done, but I'm not sure she was using the term in quite the same way we are here, or the way it's being used now as an example of a political philosophy. Can you tell me what she meant by it?

Most people who label themselves as that don't realize what the REAL Progressives in the early 1900s were striving for. They explored and fought for eugenics, segregation, and governmental control. Birth control was developed in order to keep undesirables from procreating. They then realized that they were pushing too hard out in the open for their ideals, so they chose to begin a more subtle approach at subverting the Constitution in order to transform the country into what they wanted it to be: a socialist utopia. 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. They then began teaching (both in public and in the schools) that the government is the only solution to society's problems, real or conceived. It was early 20th century progressives that have given us the big-government culture and problems we have today.

So it's a century old term dredged up today? And with little relevance to any political position held by any so called progressive.

This thread is looking like a strawman.

In her 2008 campaign for president, Hillary Clinton referred to herself as a modern progressive who stems from the progressive era of the early 20th century. You can see that yourself at about the 45 second mark of the video below. So if she's going to label herself as similar to those beliefs, shouldn't we go back and find out what those individuals actually believed? And when you do, you find the things like what I previously posted.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:11 pm**

Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote:
Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote:The thing for me is that the label "progressive" seems almost exclusively a term used by the US right at the moment as a way to somehow denigrate opponents. The definition is a bit flaky, and mostly provincial when it comes to political philosophies. Progressivism has existed as a political term in the past, but with varying meanings.

What's odd about this one is that it mostly seems to be defined by people who disagree with the so called progressives, while so few of those identified in that way accept or use that label.

It just seems to be thrown around as a way for conservative minded people to label a person or policy they don't agree with.

Hilary Clinton called herself an early 20th century progressive while she was running for president.

She may well have done, but I'm not sure she was using the term in quite the same way we are here, or the way it's being used now as an example of a political philosophy. Can you tell me what she meant by it?

Most people who label themselves as that don't realize what the REAL Progressives in the early 1900s were striving for. They explored and fought for eugenics, segregation, and governmental control. Birth control was developed in order to keep undesirables from procreating. They then realized that they were pushing too hard out in the open for their ideals, so they chose to begin a more subtle approach at subverting the Constitution in order to transform the country into what they wanted it to be: a socialist utopia. 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. They then began teaching (both in public and in the schools) that the government is the only solution to society's problems, real or conceived. It was early 20th century progressives that have given us the big-government culture and problems we have today.

this is all 100% correct. Some Progressives were even drummed out of America, such as Margaret Sanger (founder of planned parenthood).

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:13 pm**

narthuro wrote:
Symmetry wrote:
ViperOverLord wrote:
Symmetry wrote:The thing for me is that the label "progressive" seems almost exclusively a term used by the US right at the moment as a way to somehow denigrate opponents....

Hmmm__ There was a time 15 years ago in which people proudly wore the progressive label while peddling their own line of corruption.

I really don't know. BBS posted a few definitions of what it meant in another thread, but they were from right wing sites that weren't exactly sympathetic to whatever progressivism is supposed to be.

Is it just a conservative pejorative for liberals?

I would say it's the opposite. It has been for liberals who don't like the way conservatives have ruined the word "liberal". This has changed, though, thanks single-handedly to Glenn Beck. Now both words are like poison.

+1, although I noticed the shift to progressive long before I ever heard of Glenn Beck. It happened when AirAmerica launched, around 2003-4

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:17 pm**

Phatscotty wrote:
Symmetry wrote:The thing for me is that the label "progressive" seems almost exclusively a term used by the US right at the moment as a way to somehow denigrate opponents. The definition is a bit flaky, and mostly provincial when it comes to political philosophies. Progressivism has existed as a political term in the past, but with varying meanings.

What's odd about this one is that it mostly seems to be defined by people who disagree with the so called progressives, while so few of those identified in that way accept or use that label.

It just seems to be thrown around as a way for conservative minded people to label a person or policy they don't agree with.

This is where not living in America starts to kick in...

Hillary Clinton, Obama, FDR, Wilson, Carter, have all used the word progressive to describe themselves, and plenty of Republicans as well (which I hold exactly the same amount of disdain for). In my opinion, what I understand progressive to be has not changed one iota over the last century. the definition is not wobbly for me, nor is there a need for me or others to try to find a way to change it to fit our argument or p.o.v.

I was just listening to the Mike Papiantono show, and his bumper says braggingly "progressive doses....to be repeated daily" Gingrich, Romney, Mccain, Teddy Roosevelt, GW Bush, and Nixon all had progressive leanings. Progressive is not a word to be used from conservatives to liberals in anyway whatsoever. To do this is to not understand progressivism in America.

On the contrary, it's proof that it's not a real position. It's not a political philosophy, it's entirely an American political meme, It's poorly thought out and entirely flexible such that any candidate or policy can and could be labelled progressive.

Progressive has a meaning as a word, certainly, but if you're unwilling to take it at its base value and instead imply a type of Progressive politics there is some onus on you to explain why you're doing so and what you mean by it, whatever the bumper sticker told you.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:22 pm**

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

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:23 pm**

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

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:24 pm**

Symmetry wrote: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.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:30 pm**

I was unaware that "progressive" was deragatory or negative in any way. Or "liberal" for that matter. I don't think someone who is progressive or liberal cares if they are identified by others as progressive or liberal. "Teabagger" is another story.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:33 pm**

Symmetry wrote:
ViperOverLord wrote:
Symmetry wrote:The thing for me is that the label "progressive" seems almost exclusively a term used by the US right at the moment as a way to somehow denigrate opponents....

Hmmm__ There was a time 15 years ago in which people proudly wore the progressive label while peddling their own line of corruption.

I really don't know. BBS posted a few definitions of what it meant in another thread, but they were from right wing sites that weren't exactly sympathetic to whatever progressivism is supposed to be.

Is it just a conservative pejorative for liberals?

Conservatives and liberals (and advertisers) used the term. But the term was more heavily used by liberals (to describe themselves/motives).

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:35 pm**

My politics a quite simple compared to some of you it seems.

The way I vote has always been the same

Ronald Reagan
George Bush
Bill Clinton
Al Gore
Barrack Obama

Now before anyone says hey you just changed from one party to the other is all, you are incorrect.

I have always voted this way, I watch them during their campaign and the one who seems to be lying the least is who I vote for. Always have always will.

So right now I know who has the democrat's locked up just waiting for the Gop to decide, then whoever seems to lie the least will get my vote.

Now that by todays standards is progressive to some, crazy to others, And just plain damn stupid to party hardliners.

Its better than flipping a coin or voting for some dumbass because that was the best that party could come up with. I.e george w. what a maroon

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:36 pm**

Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote: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.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:38 pm**

Symmetry wrote:
Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote: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.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:40 pm**

jgordon1111 wrote:My politics a quite simple compared to some of you it seems.

The way I vote has always been the same

Ronald Reagan
George Bush
Bill Clinton
Al Gore
Barrack Obama

Now before anyone says hey you just changed from one party to the other is all, you are incorrect.

I have always voted this way, I watch them during their campaign and the one who seems to be lying the least is who I vote for. Always have always will.

So right now I know who has the democrat's locked up just waiting for the Gop to decide, then whoever seems to lie the least will get my vote.

Now that by todays standards is progressive to some, crazy to others, And just plain damn stupid to party hardliners.

Its better than flipping a coin or voting for some dumbass because that was the best that party could come up with. I.e george w. what a maroon

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).

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:42 pm**

ViperOverLord wrote:
Symmetry wrote:
ViperOverLord wrote:
Symmetry wrote:The thing for me is that the label "progressive" seems almost exclusively a term used by the US right at the moment as a way to somehow denigrate opponents....

Hmmm__ There was a time 15 years ago in which people proudly wore the progressive label while peddling their own line of corruption.

I really don't know. BBS posted a few definitions of what it meant in another thread, but they were from right wing sites that weren't exactly sympathetic to whatever progressivism is supposed to be.

Is it just a conservative pejorative for liberals?

Conservatives and liberals (and advertisers) used the term. But the term was more heavily used by liberals (to describe themselves/motives).

Right...because who is against "progress"?

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:43 pm**

Maybe they just voted for the person they thought was lying the least at that time, and would benifit the country from what they were saying.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:45 pm**

Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote:
Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote: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.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:50 pm**

Hey I've got a great idea. Let's generalize about people we disagree with and refuse to try and understand them. Now THAT'S progressive.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:59 pm**

Symmetry wrote: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.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:01 pm**

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.

Posted: **Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:11 pm**

The Bison King wrote:Hey I've got a great idea. Let's generalize about people we disagree with and refuse to try and understand them. Now THAT'S progressive.

You get a feel good point.

Posted: **Sun Feb 12, 2012 12:01 am**

Symmetry wrote:
ViperOverLord wrote:
Symmetry wrote:The thing for me is that the label "progressive" seems almost exclusively a term used by the US right at the moment as a way to somehow denigrate opponents....

Hmmm__ There was a time 15 years ago in which people proudly wore the progressive label while peddling their own line of corruption.

I really don't know. BBS posted a few definitions of what it meant in another thread, but they were from right wing sites that weren't exactly sympathetic to whatever progressivism is supposed to be.

Is it just a conservative pejorative for liberals?

I thought "liberal" was a conservative pejorative for liberals? Besides, when have conservatives cared for progress (other than their own financial progress, of course).

Posted: **Sun Feb 12, 2012 12:02 am**

Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote:
Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote:The thing for me is that the label "progressive" seems almost exclusively a term used by the US right at the moment as a way to somehow denigrate opponents. The definition is a bit flaky, and mostly provincial when it comes to political philosophies. Progressivism has existed as a political term in the past, but with varying meanings.

What's odd about this one is that it mostly seems to be defined by people who disagree with the so called progressives, while so few of those identified in that way accept or use that label.

It just seems to be thrown around as a way for conservative minded people to label a person or policy they don't agree with.

Hilary Clinton called herself an early 20th century progressive while she was running for president.

She may well have done, but I'm not sure she was using the term in quite the same way we are here, or the way it's being used now as an example of a political philosophy. Can you tell me what she meant by it?

Most people who label themselves as that don't realize what the REAL Progressives in the early 1900s were striving for. They explored and fought for eugenics, segregation, and governmental control. Birth control was developed in order to keep undesirables from procreating. They then realized that they were pushing too hard out in the open for their ideals, so they chose to begin a more subtle approach at subverting the Constitution in order to transform the country into what they wanted it to be: a socialist utopia. 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. They then began teaching (both in public and in the schools) that the government is the only solution to society's problems, real or conceived. It was early 20th century progressives that have given us the big-government culture and problems we have today.

Holy crap! Who taught you this bullshit? I mean, how does a thinking alleged scientist buy into this hokum?

Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote:
Night Strike wrote:
Symmetry wrote: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.

All the sugar in that kool-aid is going to ruin your health.

Conquer Club

R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?

Re: R U Progressive?