Proof that Americans are uninformed... "Progressive" is most positive political label. If people only knew what they actually are all about.
Comment 0
Cool
vote cool
vote uncool
Terms of Service Violation
strike inappropriate
not inappropriate
Other
sunlight
get permlink
Cool
|
Tagged with : fuck the 1 What are tags? |
Comments 1 through 100 of 243 shown.
Page
1
2
Yeah. The fact that "Libertarian" is only above "socialism" shows that people are fucking retards.
The wonderful thing about progressives is progressives are wonderful things.
osirisothedead: Yeah. The fact that "Libertarian" is only above "socialism" shows that people are fucking retards.
A true libertarian live in a shack in the woods, everyone else is a lying sack of shit that loves socialism and all its benefits but screams foul when someone else gets to use to use them.
A true libertarian live in a shack in the woods, everyone else is a lying sack of shit that loves socialism and all its benefits but screams foul when someone else gets to use to use them.
gradivus: A true libertarian live in a shack in the woods, everyone else is a lying sack of shit that loves socialism and all its benefits but screams foul when someone else gets to use to use them.
You're confusing a libertarian with an anarchist.
You're confusing a libertarian with an anarchist.
osirisothedead: Yeah. The fact that "Libertarian" is only above "socialism" shows that people are fucking retards.
Yes.. the left wing and the Progressives have done a good job lying to America and bad-mouthing the group that threatens them the most, the libertarians
Progressives are authoritarians, and authoritarians fear Libertarians. They do not like individuals and want collective unity, by force if necessary.
Yes.. the left wing and the Progressives have done a good job lying to America and bad-mouthing the group that threatens them the most, the libertarians
Progressives are authoritarians, and authoritarians fear Libertarians. They do not like individuals and want collective unity, by force if necessary.
osirisothedead: You're confusing a libertarian with an anarchist.
Like I said..... the Progressive have don e a good job lying to America about libertarianism. Look for a Somalia reference soon. Gradvius is a progressive, so you can expect the lies immediately.
Like I said..... the Progressive have don e a good job lying to America about libertarianism. Look for a Somalia reference soon. Gradvius is a progressive, so you can expect the lies immediately.
Thanks liberal driveby mainstream MSM media!
phil_herup: Yes.. the left wing and the Progressives have done a good job lying to America and bad-mouthing the group that threatens them the most, the libertarians
Progressives are authoritarians, and authoritarians fear Libertarians. They do not like individuals and want collective unity, by force if necessary.
I find that it's almost a truism that I will think the exact opposite of you in most every specific exchange.
Progressives are authoritarians, and authoritarians fear Libertarians. They do not like individuals and want collective unity, by force if necessary.
I find that it's almost a truism that I will think the exact opposite of you in most every specific exchange.
osirisothedead: You're confusing a libertarian with an anarchist.
A real libertarian doesnt need all our fancy socialized electricity and roads.
Everyone is some form of socialist(if you are part of society its inevitable), whether they want to admit it or not is another thing.
A real libertarian doesnt need all our fancy socialized electricity and roads.
Everyone is some form of socialist(if you are part of society its inevitable), whether they want to admit it or not is another thing.
pajamas: I find that it's almost a truism that I will think the exact opposite of you in most every specific exchange.
Thats because you are smart and Phil is borderline obsessive about assigning blame for all his problems on other who he claims wont take responsibility.
Thats because you are smart and Phil is borderline obsessive about assigning blame for all his problems on other who he claims wont take responsibility.
gradivus: A real libertarian doesnt need all our fancy socialized electricity and roads.
Nae true Libertarian.
Nae true Libertarian.
pajamas: I find that it's almost a truism that I will think the exact opposite of you in most every specific exchange.
So you think that libertarians are authoritarian?
... and that progressives are libertarian? That would be exactly opposite, and unfortunately for you, completely incorrect.
I am a very permissive social liberal, so I doubt you would disagree with me on a great may things in that area. I am also a fiscal conservative however. I like to protect the hard working taxpayer from the waste and greed of the government.
Are we really that different?
So you think that libertarians are authoritarian?
... and that progressives are libertarian? That would be exactly opposite, and unfortunately for you, completely incorrect.
I am a very permissive social liberal, so I doubt you would disagree with me on a great may things in that area. I am also a fiscal conservative however. I like to protect the hard working taxpayer from the waste and greed of the government.
Are we really that different?
gradivus: Thats because you are smart and Phil is borderline obsessive about assigning blame for all his problems on other who he claims wont take responsibility.
I don't assign blame for my problems on anyone. You are a loon who makes up shit.
I seek to clear up the lies and bullshit put forth by liars and bullshitters.
I don't assign blame for my problems on anyone. You are a loon who makes up shit.
I seek to clear up the lies and bullshit put forth by liars and bullshitters.
osirisothedead: Nae true Libertarian.
Libertarianism is as flawed as communism. "Every man for himself" is basically the antithesis of organized society.
Libertarianism is as flawed as communism. "Every man for himself" is basically the antithesis of organized society.
phil_herup: I seek to clear up the lies and bullshit put forth by liars and bullshitters.
By lying and bullshitting yourself to try and drown them out.
By lying and bullshitting yourself to try and drown them out.
My research shows the word sex is positively, nay, excitedly viewed by 98.543% of Americans.
As such, I'm forming the sex party.
As such, I'm forming the sex party.
gradivus: Libertarianism is as flawed as communism. "Every man for himself" is basically the antithesis of organized society.
As it's not every man for himself, your opinion is meaningless.
As it's not every man for himself, your opinion is meaningless.
Also, the difference between an anarchist and libertarian is the anarchist wants to see society end just for shits and giggles, libertarians want all the benefits of society, they just think it will magically keep functioning if everyone stops running the systems of society.
Name an example of a successful libertarian society.
Name an example of a successful libertarian society.
gradivus: Libertarianism is as flawed as communism. "Every man for himself" is basically the antithesis of organized society.
The last true American liberterians were the mountain men who head west into the wilderness more than 100 years ago and those going out in the wilderness in Alaska.
He's not in Alaska is he? That pretty much sums it up.
The last true American liberterians were the mountain men who head west into the wilderness more than 100 years ago and those going out in the wilderness in Alaska.
He's not in Alaska is he? That pretty much sums it up.
brazil: As it's not every man for himself, your opinion is meaningless.
Helping others is a form of socialism by definition, thank you for proving my point.
Helping others is a form of socialism by definition, thank you for proving my point.
gradivus: Helping others is a form of socialism by definition, thank you for proving my point.
They perform the mental gymnastics of reclassifying that as "charity", you know.
They perform the mental gymnastics of reclassifying that as "charity", you know.
gradivus: Helping others is a form of socialism by definition, thank you for proving my point.
Bullshit lie.
Bullshit lie.
In the Sex party everyone comes.
vet_curm: They perform the mental gymnastics of reclassifying that as "charity", you know.
Large groups of people organizing to help others who have less than they do? Yep, sounds like libertarianism to me.
vet_curm: The last true American liberterians were the mountain men who head west into the wilderness more than 100 years ago and those going out in the wilderness in Alaska.
He's not in Alaska is he? That pretty much sums it up.
Its a romanticized ideal that never really existed in any large numbers. Like cowboys.
Large groups of people organizing to help others who have less than they do? Yep, sounds like libertarianism to me.
vet_curm: The last true American liberterians were the mountain men who head west into the wilderness more than 100 years ago and those going out in the wilderness in Alaska.
He's not in Alaska is he? That pretty much sums it up.
Its a romanticized ideal that never really existed in any large numbers. Like cowboys.
I am up for the Sex Party. But there are realities of that.
gradivus: A real libertarian doesnt need all our fancy socialized electricity and roads.
Everyone is some form of socialist(if you are part of society its inevitable), whether they want to admit it or not is another thing.
List of Socialist Countries
Everyone is some form of socialist(if you are part of society its inevitable), whether they want to admit it or not is another thing.
List of Socialist Countries
pajamas: I am up for the Sex Party. But there are realities of that.
When it comes to sex, you are the 1%. ;-)
When it comes to sex, you are the 1%. ;-)
phil_herup: I am a very permissive social liberal, so I doubt you would disagree with me on a great may things in that area. I am also a fiscal conservative however. I like to protect the hard working taxpayer from the waste and greed of the government.
But the government is, by very definition, representative of the people. Which makes your definition look a little less sensible.
But the government is, by very definition, representative of the people. Which makes your definition look a little less sensible.
gradivus: Helping others is a form of socialism by definition, thank you for proving my point.
And not having complete state ownership of everything is a form of Libertarian.
What's your point?
And not having complete state ownership of everything is a form of Libertarian.
What's your point?
vet_curm: They perform the mental gymnastics of reclassifying that as "charity", you know.
Capitalism is pro cute puppies and ponies where socialism likes to falcon punch women to cause abortions.
Capitalism is pro cute puppies and ponies where socialism likes to falcon punch women to cause abortions.
gradivus: Its a romanticized ideal that never really existed in any large numbers. Like cowboys.
I don't think they'll have much success packaging and selling libertarianism back east like Hollywood did with the cowboys back at the beginning of the 20th century (and like they did before that with the "wild west" traveling shows).
I don't think they'll have much success packaging and selling libertarianism back east like Hollywood did with the cowboys back at the beginning of the 20th century (and like they did before that with the "wild west" traveling shows).
gradivus: I will wait for your examples of a libertarian society.
so vote republican: List of Socialist Countries
Anything not on the above list.
If your definition of "socialist society" is any society with the slightest involvement of the government in providing social services, then my definition of "libertarian society" is any society which allows self-organization in any area whatsoever.
In short, defining it the way you have leaves pretty much every country on the planet as both socialist and libertarian.
so vote republican: List of Socialist Countries
Anything not on the above list.
If your definition of "socialist society" is any society with the slightest involvement of the government in providing social services, then my definition of "libertarian society" is any society which allows self-organization in any area whatsoever.
In short, defining it the way you have leaves pretty much every country on the planet as both socialist and libertarian.
so vote republican: List of Socialist Countries
From your link..
This is a list of countries, past and present, that declared themselves socialist either in their names or their constitutions. No other criteria are used;
From your link..
This is a list of countries, past and present, that declared themselves socialist either in their names or their constitutions. No other criteria are used;
Sex Party slogans:
Hey. Hey. Ho. Ho. This turgid penis has got to blow!
Pussy power! * include thrusting fist*
Hey. Hey. Ho. Ho. This turgid penis has got to blow!
Pussy power! * include thrusting fist*
brazil: Capitalism is pro cute puppies and ponies where socialism likes to falcon punch women to cause abortions.
Okay, I LOL'd.
Okay, I LOL'd.
so vote republican: Anything not on the above list.
If your definition of "socialist society" is any society with the slightest involvement of the government in providing social services, then my definition of "libertarian society" is any society which allows self-organization in any area whatsoever.
In short, defining it the way you have leaves pretty much every country on the planet as both socialist and libertarian.
There are of course varying degrees of both. The countries that lean more actual socialist are better than the ones that actually lean libertarian.
Northern europe is a good example of a very socialist set of countries. Feel free to provide your own list of libertarian leaning countries.
If your definition of "socialist society" is any society with the slightest involvement of the government in providing social services, then my definition of "libertarian society" is any society which allows self-organization in any area whatsoever.
In short, defining it the way you have leaves pretty much every country on the planet as both socialist and libertarian.
There are of course varying degrees of both. The countries that lean more actual socialist are better than the ones that actually lean libertarian.
Northern europe is a good example of a very socialist set of countries. Feel free to provide your own list of libertarian leaning countries.
gradivus: From your link..
This is a list of countries, past and present, that declared themselves socialist either in their names or their constitutions. No other criteria are used;
So what's your criteria for your personal list?
This is a list of countries, past and present, that declared themselves socialist either in their names or their constitutions. No other criteria are used;
So what's your criteria for your personal list?
gradivus: There are of course varying degrees of both. The countries that lean more actual socialist are better than the ones that actually lean libertarian.
Northern europe is a good example of a very socialist set of countries. Feel free to provide your own list of libertarian leaning countries.
I would say those are libertarian countries. After all, those are the ones with the free drug laws, small armies, marriage equality, open immigration policies...
Yeah, they're quite libertarian.
Northern europe is a good example of a very socialist set of countries. Feel free to provide your own list of libertarian leaning countries.
I would say those are libertarian countries. After all, those are the ones with the free drug laws, small armies, marriage equality, open immigration policies...
Yeah, they're quite libertarian.
someone who may or may not be a new convert to the Cult of Rand
2012-01-02 09:44:23.0
login to vote
score 1
vet_curm: They perform the mental gymnastics of reclassifying that as "charity", you know.
Private charitable organizations certainly provided for the less fortunate far better in the late 19th and early 20th century. No on starved, or was homeless, and everyone had jobs, and health care!
Private charitable organizations certainly provided for the less fortunate far better in the late 19th and early 20th century. No on starved, or was homeless, and everyone had jobs, and health care!
so vote republican: I would say those are libertarian countries. After all, those are the ones with the free drug laws, small armies, marriage equality, open immigration policies...
Yeah, they're quite libertarian.
Not many shacks in woods, though.
Yeah, they're quite libertarian.
Not many shacks in woods, though.
gradivus: I will wait for your examples of a libertarian society.
Trying to cover your original ignorant statement by calling for papers?
Here you go, unless you can provide me a definition of socialism that comports with know definitions and supports your position about libertarianism, it just proves you're trolling.
Trying to cover your original ignorant statement by calling for papers?
Here you go, unless you can provide me a definition of socialism that comports with know definitions and supports your position about libertarianism, it just proves you're trolling.
jimmythehutt: Okay, I LOL'd.
Hey, if we're going to spew nonsese in unreasoned appeals to emotion to support positions, I may as well go for it.
Hey, if we're going to spew nonsese in unreasoned appeals to emotion to support positions, I may as well go for it.
brazil: Hey, if we're going to spew nonsese in unreasoned appeals to emotion to support positions, I may as well go for it.
Your politics raped my grandma.
Your politics raped my grandma.
osirisothedead: Your politics raped my grandma.
Libertarians live like this:
But socialists live like this!
Libertarians live like this:
But socialists live like this!
osirisothedead: Your politics raped my grandma.
When socialists run over baby carriages with their cars, they just keep driving. They figure someone else woill take care of it. Besides, babies are a sexually transmitted diesease the government should have cured.
When socialists run over baby carriages with their cars, they just keep driving. They figure someone else woill take care of it. Besides, babies are a sexually transmitted diesease the government should have cured.
Is this an act of "charity", or is she "nae true libertarian"?
(or else she is a libertarian, and she's being forced to feed the kid by evul government intervention!)
If you asked Barack Obama and a Libertarian whether is was okay to drop bombs on children from unmanned drones, which would say no?
Phailmitter, I presume?
so vote republican: If you asked Barack Obama and a Libertarian whether is was okay to drop bombs on children from unmanned drones, which would say no?
Wouldn't that depend on whether the children were socialists or not?
Wouldn't that depend on whether the children were socialists or not?
so vote republican: If you asked Barack Obama and a Libertarian whether is was okay to drop bombs on children from unmanned drones, which would say no?
Both would say it was needed collateral damage, but Obama would be willing to give the survivors aid.
Both would say it was needed collateral damage, but Obama would be willing to give the survivors aid.
phil_herup: I don't assign blame for my problems on anyone. You are a loon who makes up shit.
I seek to clear up the lies and bullshit put forth by liars and bullshitters.
Yeah, by posting links to satire sites.
I seek to clear up the lies and bullshit put forth by liars and bullshitters.
Yeah, by posting links to satire sites.
One of the things we can take from the poll is that the average person may not connect their ideas to their "ideological label" the same as the next guy does.
Nah, everything's gonna be fine.It's not like we live in a nightmarish world where the President of the U.S. says he can have anyone shipped off to who knows where based on mere suspicion of wrongdoing.
In addition, the men and women at the polls are staunchly a-political and do their best to make all the votes count.
:|
In addition, the men and women at the polls are staunchly a-political and do their best to make all the votes count.
:|
"Progressive" is a great label, some really good marketing. Very few people would want to say they're against "progress."
The terms "pro life" and "pro choice" play a similar game. Who would go on the record directly saying they're "anti life" or against people having choices?
This kind of bothers me about all of those terms. They have this built in implied superiority that is kind of dishonest.
The terms "pro life" and "pro choice" play a similar game. Who would go on the record directly saying they're "anti life" or against people having choices?
This kind of bothers me about all of those terms. They have this built in implied superiority that is kind of dishonest.
Worse, after being programmed that one must "progress" all the time no matter what, common sense gets tossed out along with tradition simply because they're not new.
There's everything right with making progress, but progressivism can be quite regressive at times.
But everything's fine. Americans will vote for change HARDER in 2012. That's the ticket.
There's everything right with making progress, but progressivism can be quite regressive at times.
But everything's fine. Americans will vote for change HARDER in 2012. That's the ticket.
gradivus: Libertarianism is as flawed as communism. "Every man for himself" is basically the antithesis of organized society.
Aw, but I *want* life to be more like it was in "Blood Meridian"
Aw, but I *want* life to be more like it was in "Blood Meridian"
iadtatami: Aw, but I *want* life to be more like it was in "Blood Meridian"
Mcarthy's best book IMHO.
Mcarthy's best book IMHO.
fatsean: Both would say it was needed collateral damage, but Obama would be willing to give the survivors aid.
Actually, no. He would just lie about it.
Actually, no. He would just lie about it.
so vote republican: I would say those are libertarian countries. After all, those are the ones with the free drug laws, small armies, marriage equality, open immigration policies...
Yeah, they're quite libertarian.
They also pay some of the highest taxes in the world, socialized medicine and schools, very little income inequality.
Just because a place isnt socially repressive doesnt make it libertarian.
Yeah, they're quite libertarian.
They also pay some of the highest taxes in the world, socialized medicine and schools, very little income inequality.
Just because a place isnt socially repressive doesnt make it libertarian.
brazil: Trying to cover your original ignorant statement by calling for papers?
Here you go, unless you can provide me a definition of socialism that comports with know definitions and supports your position about libertarianism, it just proves you're trolling.
I provided working examples of the most actively socialist states(not in name only but in actual practice). I would like you(who is arguing for the libertarian side) to post some examples of libertarian countries you think represent your ideals of libertarianism.
Here you go, unless you can provide me a definition of socialism that comports with know definitions and supports your position about libertarianism, it just proves you're trolling.
I provided working examples of the most actively socialist states(not in name only but in actual practice). I would like you(who is arguing for the libertarian side) to post some examples of libertarian countries you think represent your ideals of libertarianism.
gradivus: I provided working examples of the most actively socialist states(not in name only but in actual practice). I would like you(who is arguing for the libertarian side) to post some examples of libertarian countries you think represent your ideals of libertarianism.
Nonsense. You made up shit about libertarinism you can't back.
Nonsense. You made up shit about libertarinism you can't back.
brazil: Nonsense. You made up shit about libertarinism you can't back.
Im asking YOU to show ME some examples so I can learn what you consider libertarian societies.
This is how discussions work. You think I am wrong, well what do YOU consider to be right?
Im asking YOU to show ME some examples so I can learn what you consider libertarian societies.
This is how discussions work. You think I am wrong, well what do YOU consider to be right?
gradivus: Also, the difference between an anarchist and libertarian is the anarchist wants to see society end just for shits and giggles
You are free to believe what you want; but, your statement is simply not true, in my experience. Most anarchists that I have known are generally collectivists and do not want to see society collapse; but, rather evolve to a point where one can live unfettered by external coercion. Most, if not all of them, were also pacifists. YMMV.
You are free to believe what you want; but, your statement is simply not true, in my experience. Most anarchists that I have known are generally collectivists and do not want to see society collapse; but, rather evolve to a point where one can live unfettered by external coercion. Most, if not all of them, were also pacifists. YMMV.
vet_curm: They perform the mental gymnastics of reclassifying that as "charity", you know.
If anyone is guilty of reclassifying terms it is the progressives. And "charity" is one of their biggest lies.
To a progressive lib, "charity" is taking from the haves and giving to the have-not. When in reality, charity is giving of your own free will to help those in need. Welfare et al, is NOT charity.
If anyone is guilty of reclassifying terms it is the progressives. And "charity" is one of their biggest lies.
To a progressive lib, "charity" is taking from the haves and giving to the have-not. When in reality, charity is giving of your own free will to help those in need. Welfare et al, is NOT charity.
so vote republican: If you asked Barack Obama and a Libertarian whether is was okay to drop bombs on children from unmanned drones, which would say no?
Both.
Who targets children? Also drones do not drop bombs, they launch missiles from 50,000 feet.
Both.
Who targets children? Also drones do not drop bombs, they launch missiles from 50,000 feet.
gradivus: very little income inequality.
Libs, aka progressive left wing totalitarian dooshes, love "income equality". It is a goal of shared misery where they take from those who have, usually a small minority and give to those who are deemed worthy (plus a bit for the ruling class), who are often a large majority who they court for votes.
When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you will always have the support of Paul. How anyone is OK with an ideology of theft and control like this is sad. That so many are into it is scary.
Libs, aka progressive left wing totalitarian dooshes, love "income equality". It is a goal of shared misery where they take from those who have, usually a small minority and give to those who are deemed worthy (plus a bit for the ruling class), who are often a large majority who they court for votes.
When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you will always have the support of Paul. How anyone is OK with an ideology of theft and control like this is sad. That so many are into it is scary.
I miss flash. He was funnier. :-(
Wait, Flash left? When did that happen?
rocket lawn chair: Worse, after being programmed that one must "progress" all the time no matter what, common sense gets tossed out along with tradition simply because they're not new.
There's everything right with making progress, but progressivism can be quite regressive at times.
But everything's fine. Americans will vote for change HARDER in 2012. That's the ticket.
Correct. To a progressive, there is only one direction for progress. Left.
There can be many directions one can go to improve society, but not to a progressive. There is only one way. Which is why they are closed minded.
There's everything right with making progress, but progressivism can be quite regressive at times.
But everything's fine. Americans will vote for change HARDER in 2012. That's the ticket.
Correct. To a progressive, there is only one direction for progress. Left.
There can be many directions one can go to improve society, but not to a progressive. There is only one way. Which is why they are closed minded.
someone who may or may not be just sayin
2012-01-02 12:38:45.0
login to vote
score 0
phil_herup: Who targets children?
Libertarian Group Condemns Sarah Palin for Not Killing Disabled Baby in Abortion
Libertarian Group Condemns Sarah Palin for Not Killing Disabled Baby in Abortion
It's probably an unconscious reaction to the suffix pro at the beginning of the word
someone who may or may not be just sayin: Libertarian Group Condemns Sarah Palin for Not Killing Disabled Baby in Abortion
Can we call you "someone who may or may not be making false equivalences"?
Whar tha fuck did you dig that up? Do you visit that group a lot?
Can we call you "someone who may or may not be making false equivalences"?
Whar tha fuck did you dig that up? Do you visit that group a lot?
someone who may or may not be worried about your moral choices
2012-01-02 12:44:33.0
login to vote
score 1
gradivus: Helping others is a form of socialism by definition, thank you for proving my point.
Lulz. Speaking of "uninformed", you're a fucking retard.
Lulz. Speaking of "uninformed", you're a fucking retard.
As Phail likes to try to redefine the term 'progressive' to something that bears no relationship to the actual meaning of the word, I'm going to post the actual meaning of the word. Then all can see for themselves just how desperate he is in his quest to demonize those who would dare take a few cents off his dollar for the unspeakably evil purpose of ensuring that starving American children can eat, or that the sick are tended to instead of being carted out of the hospital and dropped in a ditch because their insurance ran out.
Progressivism is an umbrella term for a political ideology advocating or favoring social, political, and economic reform or changes through the state. Progressivism is often viewed by its advocates to be in opposition to conservative or reactionary ideologies.
The Progressive Movement began in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in cities with settlement workers and reformers who were interested in helping those facing harsh conditions at home and at work. The reformers spoke out about the need for laws regulating tenement housing and child labor. They also called for better working conditions for women.
The term progressivism emerged in reference to a more general response to the vast changes brought by industrialization: an alternative to the traditional conservative response to social and economic issues and, despite being associated with left-wing politics, to the various more radical streams of communism or anarchism.
Political parties, such as the Progressive Party, organized at the start of the 20th century, and progressivism was embraced in the administrations of American Presidents Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Lyndon Baines Johnson.[1] Moreover, in the United States and Canada, the term "progressive" has occasionally been used by groups not particularly left-wing. The Progressive Democrats in the Republic of Ireland took the name "progressivism" despite being considered centre-right or classical liberal. The European Progressive Democrats was a mainly heterogeneous political group in the European Union. For most of the period from 1942–2003, the largest conservative party in Canada was the Progressive Conservative Party.
Wikipedia
In historiography, the Idea of Progress is the theory that advances in technology, science, and social organization inevitably produce an improvement in the human condition. That is, people can become happier in terms of quality of life (social progress) through economic development (modernization), and the application of science and technology (scientific progress). The assumption is that the process will happen once people apply their reason and skills, for it is not divinely foreordained. The role of the expert is to identify hindrances that slow or neutralize progress.
Historian J. B. Bury wrote in 1920:[1]
“ "To the minds of most people the desirable outcome of human development would be a condition of society in which all the inhabitants of the planet would enjoy a perfectly happy existence....It cannot be proved that the unknown destination towards which man is advancing is desirable. The movement may be Progress, or it may be in an undesirable direction and therefore not Progress..... The Progress of humanity belongs to the same order of ideas as Providence or personal immortality. It is true or it is false, and like them it cannot be proved either true or false. Belief in it is an act of faith. ”
Sociologist Robert Nisbet finds that "No single idea has been more important than...the Idea of Progress in Western civilization for three thousand years.",[2] and defines five "crucial premises" of Idea of Progress:
value of the past
nobility of Western civilization
worth of economic/technological growth
faith in reason and scientific/scholarly knowledge obtained through reason
intrinsic importance and worth of life on earth.
The Idea of Progress emerged primarily in the Enlightenment in the 18th century. Significant movements in this period were Diderot's Encyclopedia, which carried on the campaign against authority and superstition, and the French Revolution.
Some scholars consider the idea of progress that was affirmed with the Enlightenment, as a secularization of ideas from early Christianity, and a rework of ideas from ancient Greece.[3][4][5] The theory of evolution in the nineteenth century made progress a necessary law of nature and gave the doctrine its first conscious scientific form. The idea was challenged by the 20th century realization that destruction, as in the two world wars, could grow out of technical progress.
Wikipedia
Progressivism is an umbrella term for a political ideology advocating or favoring social, political, and economic reform or changes through the state. Progressivism is often viewed by its advocates to be in opposition to conservative or reactionary ideologies.
The Progressive Movement began in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in cities with settlement workers and reformers who were interested in helping those facing harsh conditions at home and at work. The reformers spoke out about the need for laws regulating tenement housing and child labor. They also called for better working conditions for women.
The term progressivism emerged in reference to a more general response to the vast changes brought by industrialization: an alternative to the traditional conservative response to social and economic issues and, despite being associated with left-wing politics, to the various more radical streams of communism or anarchism.
Political parties, such as the Progressive Party, organized at the start of the 20th century, and progressivism was embraced in the administrations of American Presidents Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Lyndon Baines Johnson.[1] Moreover, in the United States and Canada, the term "progressive" has occasionally been used by groups not particularly left-wing. The Progressive Democrats in the Republic of Ireland took the name "progressivism" despite being considered centre-right or classical liberal. The European Progressive Democrats was a mainly heterogeneous political group in the European Union. For most of the period from 1942–2003, the largest conservative party in Canada was the Progressive Conservative Party.
Wikipedia
In historiography, the Idea of Progress is the theory that advances in technology, science, and social organization inevitably produce an improvement in the human condition. That is, people can become happier in terms of quality of life (social progress) through economic development (modernization), and the application of science and technology (scientific progress). The assumption is that the process will happen once people apply their reason and skills, for it is not divinely foreordained. The role of the expert is to identify hindrances that slow or neutralize progress.
Historian J. B. Bury wrote in 1920:[1]
“ "To the minds of most people the desirable outcome of human development would be a condition of society in which all the inhabitants of the planet would enjoy a perfectly happy existence....It cannot be proved that the unknown destination towards which man is advancing is desirable. The movement may be Progress, or it may be in an undesirable direction and therefore not Progress..... The Progress of humanity belongs to the same order of ideas as Providence or personal immortality. It is true or it is false, and like them it cannot be proved either true or false. Belief in it is an act of faith. ”
Sociologist Robert Nisbet finds that "No single idea has been more important than...the Idea of Progress in Western civilization for three thousand years.",[2] and defines five "crucial premises" of Idea of Progress:
value of the past
nobility of Western civilization
worth of economic/technological growth
faith in reason and scientific/scholarly knowledge obtained through reason
intrinsic importance and worth of life on earth.
The Idea of Progress emerged primarily in the Enlightenment in the 18th century. Significant movements in this period were Diderot's Encyclopedia, which carried on the campaign against authority and superstition, and the French Revolution.
Some scholars consider the idea of progress that was affirmed with the Enlightenment, as a secularization of ideas from early Christianity, and a rework of ideas from ancient Greece.[3][4][5] The theory of evolution in the nineteenth century made progress a necessary law of nature and gave the doctrine its first conscious scientific form. The idea was challenged by the 20th century realization that destruction, as in the two world wars, could grow out of technical progress.
Wikipedia
gradivus: Hello?
Having some socialist elements does not make a nation "socialist". Similarly, libertarians don't really want to do away with all government institutions.
Socialists::Marxists
Libertarians::Anarchists
Having some socialist elements does not make a nation "socialist". Similarly, libertarians don't really want to do away with all government institutions.
Socialists::Marxists
Libertarians::Anarchists
so vote republican: Having some socialist elements does not make a nation "socialist". Similarly, libertarians don't really want to do away with all government institutions.
Socialists::Marxists
Libertarians::Anarchists
Didnt you post a link to a list of countries that were socialist in name only?
I just want to compare what I consider socialist countries to what other would compare as both socialist and libertarian.
Socialists::Marxists
Libertarians::Anarchists
Didnt you post a link to a list of countries that were socialist in name only?
I just want to compare what I consider socialist countries to what other would compare as both socialist and libertarian.
gradivus: Didnt you post a link to a list of countries that were socialist in name only?
I just want to compare what I consider socialist countries to what other would compare as both socialist and libertarian.
Since there's no hard and fast definition of "socialist", what you consider "socialist" is worthless. I already explained that the countries you referenced were quite libertarian.
I just want to compare what I consider socialist countries to what other would compare as both socialist and libertarian.
Since there's no hard and fast definition of "socialist", what you consider "socialist" is worthless. I already explained that the countries you referenced were quite libertarian.
so vote republican: Since there's no hard and fast definition of "socialist", what you consider "socialist" is worthless. I already explained that the countries you referenced were quite libertarian.
Socially liberal, yes, but they have a huge central government making sure all the citizens have what they need through wealth redistribution.
So you would consider places like Scandinavia, the Netherlands, Sweden, libertarian?
Socially liberal, yes, but they have a huge central government making sure all the citizens have what they need through wealth redistribution.
So you would consider places like Scandinavia, the Netherlands, Sweden, libertarian?
gradivus: Socially liberal, yes, but they have a huge central government making sure all the citizens have what they need through wealth redistribution.
So you would consider places like Scandinavia, the Netherlands, Sweden, libertarian?
I would consider them mixed economies, because that's what they are.
So you would consider places like Scandinavia, the Netherlands, Sweden, libertarian?
I would consider them mixed economies, because that's what they are.
so vote republican: I would consider them mixed economies, because that's what they are.
I would consider them the most socialist places, because thats what they are. Until we have a Star Trek style utopia this is the metric I am using.
I still want to see Brazils idea of a libertarian ideal and what countries are currently closest to that.
I would consider them the most socialist places, because thats what they are. Until we have a Star Trek style utopia this is the metric I am using.
I still want to see Brazils idea of a libertarian ideal and what countries are currently closest to that.
gradivus: I would consider them the most socialist places, because thats what they are. Until we have a Star Trek style utopia this is the metric I am using.
I still want to see Brazils idea of a libertarian ideal and what countries are currently closest to that.
I would consider them the most libertarian places, because that's what they are.
I still want to see Brazils idea of a libertarian ideal and what countries are currently closest to that.
I would consider them the most libertarian places, because that's what they are.
so vote republican: I would consider them the most libertarian places, because that's what they are.
How do you figure? They have the most welfare safety nets, universal healthcare, highly regulated industry and commerce. Just because they are lax about people smoking weed and boobs on tv commercials doesnt make them the most libertarian. By that metric Jamaica is pretty damn libertarian.
How do you figure? They have the most welfare safety nets, universal healthcare, highly regulated industry and commerce. Just because they are lax about people smoking weed and boobs on tv commercials doesnt make them the most libertarian. By that metric Jamaica is pretty damn libertarian.
so vote republican: I would consider them the most libertarian places, because that's what they are.
Seriously, you consider the countries with some of the highest government enforced wealth redistribution libertarian?
Seriously, you consider the countries with some of the highest government enforced wealth redistribution libertarian?
gradivus: Seriously, you consider the countries with some of the highest government enforced wealth redistribution libertarian?
The problem is your definition of libertarian is limited to financial issues.
The problem is your definition of libertarian is limited to financial issues.
so vote republican: The problem is your definition of libertarian is limited to financial issues.
No, its not. I would just rank them as socialist and socially liberal. Like I said, just because the government isnt repressive doesnt automatically make it libertarian. They are far more socialist than anything.
No, its not. I would just rank them as socialist and socially liberal. Like I said, just because the government isnt repressive doesnt automatically make it libertarian. They are far more socialist than anything.
gradivus: No, its not. I would just rank them as socialist and socially liberal. Like I said, just because the government isnt repressive doesnt automatically make it libertarian. They are far more socialist than anything.
You making things up doesn't count as facts, FYI.
You making things up doesn't count as facts, FYI.
so vote republican: You making things up doesn't count as facts, FYI.
What am I making up again? You are saying you consider the countries with the highest government wealth redistribution as libertarian. How is that even remotely libertarian? Its the antithesis of libertarianism.
What am I making up again? You are saying you consider the countries with the highest government wealth redistribution as libertarian. How is that even remotely libertarian? Its the antithesis of libertarianism.
phil_herup: If anyone is guilty of reclassifying terms it is the progressives. And "charity" is one of their biggest lies.
To a progressive lib, "charity" is taking from the haves and giving to the have-not. When in reality, charity is giving of your own free will to help those in need. Welfare et al, is NOT charity.
A bullshitter is someone who doesn't care whether what he is saying is true or a lie; he only wants to influence others and veracity doesn't really matter.
You're a bullshitter, plain and simple.
(much like Eric Cantor's campaign manager, who insisted yesterday during Cantor's interview on 60 Minutes that Reagan raising taxes "wasn't true" - just your garden variety run-of-the-mill right-wing bullshitter)
To a progressive lib, "charity" is taking from the haves and giving to the have-not. When in reality, charity is giving of your own free will to help those in need. Welfare et al, is NOT charity.
A bullshitter is someone who doesn't care whether what he is saying is true or a lie; he only wants to influence others and veracity doesn't really matter.
You're a bullshitter, plain and simple.
(much like Eric Cantor's campaign manager, who insisted yesterday during Cantor's interview on 60 Minutes that Reagan raising taxes "wasn't true" - just your garden variety run-of-the-mill right-wing bullshitter)
Comments 1 through 100 of 243 shown.
Page
1
2
If you logged in, you could post here.