1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Progressives: The Anti-Liberals

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by GenSeneca, Apr 20, 2009.

  1. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    Classical Liberalism emphasizes:
    • support for individual rights
    • support for equality of opportunity
    • support for freedom of thought
    • support for freedom of speech
    • support for limitations on the power of government
    • support for the rule of law
    • support for an individual's right to private property
    • support for a transparent system of government
    • support for open and fair elections
    • support for Free Markets and Capitalism
    • Belief that all citizens have equal rights by law

    Strangely enough, those are all things Conservatives and Libertarians also believe and strive for, yet the Progressives in both parties (known as Neocons or Moderate Republicans on the Right) would like to pretend that Liberals, Libertarians and Conservatives are ideologically in opposition to one another. The old divide and conquer tactic. If Liberals, Libertarians and Conservatives united around their common principles, they would constitute a super majority that would make the progressives in both parties totally irrelevent in matters of politics and policy.

    Progressives don't support any of the things listed for Liberalism... although they do pay lip service to many of them for the purpose of garnering support from those who do. I'm sure some of the proud Progressives here will beg to differ, so I welcome any challenger to prove me wrong through an intelligent debate... but I know that's not how they operate. Watch for drive-by postings in response, one liners filled with sarcasm, derision and assertions backed by nothing more than links to other assertions from those who agree with their position.

    Progressives are nothing more than an angry mob, functioning with a mobs mentality of might makes right and fueled by discontentment with never a moment of sober independent thought. Because they need their angry mobs to stay angry, lest they lose support, Progressive go out of their way to manufacture outrage and crisis whenever possible through exploitation of short attention spans and the ignorance of the mob they control.

    As we know, Liberals are tolerant and open minded individuals with a "to each his own" mentality but Progressives are the polar opposite. Progressives are narrow minded individuals who do not tolerate anything counter to progressive thought. If you don't agree with them, you are seen as an enemy that must be destroyed. Even dissension among their own ranks is strictly limited to complaints about whether the approved policy is too soft or too harsh while complaints that the approved policy is wrong is simply not tolerated.

    To destroy their enemies, Progressives start with attempts to discredit and destroy the character of those they disagree with, hence the reason they are so quick to level charges of racism, sexism, bigotry and homophobia.... anything to make their enemies sound like the intolerant ones. Progressives want to shut down all opposition and putting their opposition on the defensive by attacking their character has become a preferred tactic. That way progressives won't have to deal with the substance of the message they disagree with and others won't hear the message either but instead will be distracted into hearing only the defense of the messengers character.

    Progressives have no intelligent defense of their positions so if attacking the character of those who oppose them fails, they move onto emotional arguments, straw men, red herrings and other logical fallacies to keep from dealing with reality. They also don't hold their positions as a matter of deeply held personal opinion but rather their opinions are du jur and manufactured by the party intelligentsia.

    All of this will be proven accurate and on full display should one or more progressive take me up on the challenge and attempt to mount a defense of their Progressive philosophy as being something other than anti-liberal in practice and application.

    As a great man often says, "Don't doubt me... I know these people like every square inch of my glorious naked body."
     
  2. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Great cut-'n-paste.

    Whatta shame you forgot to add a link to this article/opinion.

    :rolleyes:

    (Here's my "original"-retort.)​
     
  3. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,924
    Likes Received:
    491
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Quiz question of the day: What do classic liberals, classic conservatives, whooping cranes, and ivory billed woodpeckers have in common?
     
  4. Little-Acorn

    Little-Acorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    A: Only classic conservatives still exist, unchanged from the form they've held for the last century or so. The others haven't been seen in generations.

    Conservatives (no relation to the misnamed "neocons", which are liberals who have joined the Republican party) want the Fed govt to be limited in its powers, along the lines stated (not "interpreted") in the Constitution, and for states and lower govts to have the remaining powers if they choose. They believe society prospers best, and is safest, when government confines itself to functions that private individuals and groups CANNOT do.

    Some of the Federal no-nos are running retirement insurance programs, running health insurance programs, running schools, controlling how much water flows in your toilet, deciding who should get housing loans and who shouldn't, baling out failing companies, regulating corporation other than for contract enforcement and fraud, etc.

    Some things the Fed should do, include national defense, foreign relations, mediating interstate disputes, coining money, and some others. They currently have no authority to regulate environmental issues, though I personally believe the Const should be modified to provide them a limited authority - far more restricted than the authority they have currently usurped.

    Conservatives supported these things a hundred years ago, and support them now. Conservatives have not changed in that time, though their numbers have shrunk in relationship to the others. I haven't seen a classical liberal in quite a while. The other two are extinct.

    How'd I do on the quiz?
     
  5. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You consider these clowns Liberals, huh?

    :rolleyes:

    Do you have...like....fairly-significant neck-problems...you know...from all the spinning you do????

    :confused:
     
  6. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,924
    Likes Received:
    491
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Very well. There have been some unconfirmed sightings of classical liberals and ivory billed woodpeckers, but both are believed to be extinct.

    Some of them may have changed hats and become libertarians though (the liberals, not the woodpeckers).

    Classical conservatives may be rarer than you think.
     
  7. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ....Or, DEAD!!

     
  8. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,924
    Likes Received:
    491
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Religion really has little to do with classic conservatism.
     
  9. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    DUH!!!!!!!!!!!

    That was Goldwater's POINT!!!!!

    Ya' wanna State The Obvious on any other issues?

    :rolleyes:
     
  10. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    ROTFLMAO, I did forget to add accusations of plagiarism to the list of how Progressives attack those with whom they disagree.

    Nevertheless, what Shaman has done here is use an ad hominem attack, an attack on my character, rather than take up my sincere challenge. Shaman does not want to deal with the substance of my incredibly brilliant and original post (thats would be the message), so he's attempting to put me on defense and make the "discussion" about my integrity, (he's attacking the messenger).

    Furthermore, he has offered a link that's supposed to be a response to my observations but the article bears no relation to what I've said. Instead, the author of that article has set up straw men arguments and red herrings then knocked them down... which, as I've already pointed out, is a preferred tactic of the Progressives.

    So unlike the stereotypes that his Progressive author so easily set up and knocked down, Shamans response has shown my observations on Progressives and their response to opposition to be 100% accurate.
     
  11. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    Progressives parade around as though they are classical liberals, going so far as to use the definition for liberals against the definition for conservative to claim they are the tolerant, open minded ones and conservatives are the bigots. If Progressives didn't claim to be something they were not, which they do for obvious reasons, then I wouldn't bother trying to dispell the myth that the two are interchangable or even identicle in ideology and practice.

    Are you a Liberal?


    Are you a Conservative?


    I've discussed this propaganda tactic before but I don't think it was here at the HOP. At any rate, I won't bore anyone with a lesson on propaganda but will simply point out that on the dictionary used for the word Liberal, says "American Heritage" while the conservative definition is inside a dictionary that just says "American".

    Aside from that red flag for truth seekers, if you actually use the American Heritage dictionary and compare the definitions of the two words, you will find some of the highlighted words were cherry picked out of context or fabricated for the purpose of propaganda.
     
  12. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Aw, jeez.......... :rolleyes:

    Here....try this:

    WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!
     
  13. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,924
    Likes Received:
    491
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Based on your post #7, it appeared that the obvious... excuse me, I mean Obvious had escaped you.
     
  14. The Scotsman

    The Scotsman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,681
    Likes Received:
    327
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    South of the Haggis Munching Line
  15. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    Thank you again for being the intellectual leader of the Progressives here on the forum. ;)

    Have you a defense of Progressive ideology as being something other than anti-liberal?
     
Loading...

Share This Page