What do "Progressives" want?

[Kirkrapine]

It sounds more like preservation of the status quo by the status quo’s vested interest than a willfully coordinated meta-enterprise.

It is -- and all the more immovable for that reason. See this thread.

 

[phrodeau]

(edited)

They peeled back government control over the means of production.

Imposing tariffs and boosting subsidies. Great way to peel back control.

 

[Kirkrapine]

Imposing tariffs and boosting subsidies. Great way to peel back control.

Tariffs are, at any rate, a venerable Republican tradition. Throughout the 19th Century, both Whigs and Republicans incessantly called for a high protective tariff. It was part of the Whigs' "American System" (which Lincoln as a Republican heartily endorsed) -- protective tariffs, internal improvements (in transportation infrastructure, that is, roads and canals built and financed by the federal government), and a national bank.

Of course, the point of the tariff was always to protect the growing American industrial sector from more-advanced foreign competition in the domestic market -- to prevent foreign competition from strangling American industry in the cradle. That made sense at the time; but now that American industry is fully developed, as much as any country's in the world, it makes sense no longer.

The economic value of protectionism is not something that can be dictated categorically; it depends on circumstances of time and place. And this is neither the time nor the place.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Imposing tariffs and boosting subsidies. Great way to peel back control.

I didn't accuse them of being liberals....just less controlling than the highly socialistic "progressive" Dumz.

 

[runsilent]

I don't think the dems are all bad. They have some good ideas but then some dickweed gets a tax law passed on soda. A tax everyone pays because they have decided soda is bad for you. Hey soda is not your thing but ask yourself what is next.

If you think soda doesn't matter to you ok. Fried food are bad for you. How about a tax on anything fried. You think that couldn't happen? That's what the soda people thought.

 

[bellisarius]

So what have we got so far? Essentially two 'lists' and some scattered single issue desires, most of which were covered in the two lists.

One list is basically a laundry list of rationalizations to justify the wholesale armed robbery of the citizen. No real surprises on that list.

The second list is is essentially a 'victims' list for a Stalin/Mao style purge. Verification of the validity of an observation I made earlier in the thread. No surprises here either.

I'm somewhat surprised that no one advocated the annexation of Canada so we'd have our own Siberia to send the 'politically incorrect' to.

 

[SpeareChucker]

So what have we got so far? Essentially two 'lists' and some scattered single issue desires, most of which were covered in the two lists.

One list is basically a laundry list of rationalizations to justify the wholesale armed robbery of the citizen. No real surprises on that list.

The second list is is essentially a 'victims' list for a Stalin/Mao style purge. Verification of the validity of an observation I made earlier in the thread. No surprises here either.

I'm somewhat surprised that no one advocated the annexation of Canada so we'd have our own Siberia to send the 'politically incorrect' to.

They don't know what they want.
Tie this together with the other thread about angry subgroups and Saul David Alinsky.
That's why they have lists and one item desires, the Progressives are a bunch of splinter groups who act on a quid pro quo basis. You come and protest for may cause, even if you're not really into it, and I'll come protest for your cause, even if it doesn't light my fires. The lists just tell them when to be "triggered and outraged."
The proof of this was in the pussy-hat marches. Reporters would go into the crowd (notice I didn't say mob, even though they were using a lot of over-the-top angry rhetoric) and ask people what they were protesting and not only did they get a whole host of answers, but some people really didn't have an issue other than solidarity with their fellow SJWs.

 

[SalviaDivinorum]

Seriously, what is the goal of your agenda? Give it to me point by point. And if you can, tell me how you intend to get there.

If you don't know what "Progressives" want, how come you're so sure you don't want it?

 

[Saint Peter]

What do "Conservatives" want?


Lower taxes?

Fiscal responsibility?

Family values?

 

[bellisarius]

If you don't know what "Progressives" want, how come you're so sure you don't want it?

I read Das Kapital and the Communist Manifesto long ago and decided I want nothing to do with any of it.

 

[Saint Peter]

What do "Conservatives" want?


Lower taxes?

Fiscal responsibility?

Family values?

*crickets*

 

[SpeareChucker]

*crickets*

Start a thread if that's the topic you want to discuss moron.

 

[Saint Peter]

Start a thread if that's the topic you want to discuss moron.

I do not want to discuss you.

 

[SalviaDivinorum]

I read Das Kapital and the Communist Manifesto long ago and decided I want nothing to do with any of it.

Oh, so your thread is just a cheap rhetorical trick with no serious idea behind it? Colour me shocked!
Shame, progressivism predates Das Kapital by about a hundred years and fuelled many different political ideas, including capitalism and classical liberalism.

 

[SpeareChucker]

I do not want to discuss you.

Learn to read or stop engaging in ascription.

 

[SalviaDivinorum]

What do "Conservatives" want?

*crickets*

It's what they want the poor to live on.

 

[Saint Peter]

So what have we got so far? Essentially two 'lists' and some scattered single issue desires, most of which were covered in the two lists.

One list is basically a laundry list of rationalizations to justify the wholesale armed robbery of the citizen. No real surprises on that list.

The second list is is essentially a 'victims' list for a Stalin/Mao style purge. Verification of the validity of an observation I made earlier in the thread. No surprises here either.

I'm somewhat surprised that no one advocated the annexation of Canada so we'd have our own Siberia to send the 'politically incorrect' to.

What do "Conservatives" want?


Lower taxes?

Fiscal responsibility?

Family values?

Cat got your tongue? Sure it does.

You cannot honestly address my post without showing your true colors.

Give your lapdog AJ a belly scratch. He deserves it.

 

[SpeareChucker]

Distraction...


The topic is Progressives? I don't like that. Too close to home.

LOOK! CONSERVATIVES!​

 

[BotanyBoy]

Oh, so your thread is just a cheap rhetorical trick with no serious idea behind it? Colour me shocked!
Shame, progressivism predates Das Kapital by about a hundred years and fuelled many different political ideas, including capitalism and classical liberalism.

Not as it's understood in modern politics, in that sense "progressivism" is little more than a rebranding of socialism and is about as capitalistic or liberal as Comrade Lenin.

Go read their platform, it's open advocation of government control over the means and markets.

 

[SpeareChucker]

Petey, if you're not a coward, start a thread or defend your Progressive buddies.



Most of us are convinced that you are too cowardly to defend your convictions.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Petey, if you're not a coward, start a thread or defend your Progressive buddies.



Most of us are convinced that you are too cowardly to defend your convictions.

Most of them can't even admit the basic idea behind their convictions.

 

[SpeareChucker]

Not as it's understood in modern politics, in that sense "progressivism" is little more than a rebranding of socialism and are in no way capitalistic or liberal.

Go read their platform, it's open advocation of government control over the means and markets.

Indeed. When Socialism proved to be unpopular, it was rebranded as Progressive (the American variant of the Fabian Society), and when people caught on to what was going on, they rebranded themselves as Liberals while branding Liberals as Conservatives, forcing the creation of the label Libertarian.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Indeed. When Socialism proved to be unpopular, it was rebranded as Progressive (the American variant of the Fabian Society), and when people caught on to what was going on, they rebranded themselves as Liberals while branding Liberals as Conservatives, forcing the creation of the label Libertarian.

Pretty much.

Gotta say it's worked well for them though.

You're average low information/uneducated M'arican actually thinks socialism is "progress" and liberal. I've had no less than 5 "liberals" try to explain to me how totalitarian state control over the means of production and distribution of goods and services is TOTALLY liberal and in no way socialistic, not even a tiny bit.

Dictionary doesn't know shit, it's wrong, encyclopedias are all wrong, text books are all wrong....the very liberal totally patriotic American thing to do is ban guns and have a state controlled centrally planned economic and social interactions. They genuinely think that shit....

 

[SalviaDivinorum]

Not as it's understood in modern politics, in that sense "progressivism" is little more than a rebranding of socialism and is about as capitalistic or liberal as Comrade Lenin.

Go read their platform, it's open advocation of government control over the means and markets.

You mean the way it's understood in contemporary US political discourse, which really isn't a universal definition.

For Europeans, democratic socialism is not the same as communism - many countries live and prosper under democratic socialism. And conservatism is not one, uniform philosophy either - liberal conservatism is not the same as fascism.

You don't have to look very hard at ANY political ideology before you'll find at least a handful of shitty extremists factions under its banner, but if you want a constructive debate on an idea, it's helpful to agree on a definition.

Constructive debate on lit - what am I saying...

 

[phrodeau]

What do "Conservatives" want?


Lower taxes?

Fiscal responsibility?

Family values?

Voter suppression?

Weakened alliances?

Trade wars?