It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So... I'm a progressive... You can regress all you like.

page: 8
39
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: newWorldSamurai

Yes, you get it worldwide progression...

I've drifted from my own thread because it went from a rant about world issues to the political mudpit focused on the constitutional & anti-constitutional left and right of the U.S...


I'll just read along and see if it returns to its intended destination.


Which was what? All those things are part of the history of those words you wrote. Would you rather talk about what the media says those words are?




posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:35 PM
link   
a reply to: tadaman

Honestly...

With a couple of weeks until a new prime minister is elected...

It's still difficult to know that.



The puppet shows of our respective countries are so different I don't know where to begin explaining.


They all seem authoritarian in some (or a lot of) circumstances...

On the other hand they all have pretty agreeable stances.




I was gonna vote Labour (socialist left equivalent to your democrats) to oust the Conservatives (dystopian right equivalent to your republicans) and to hinder UKIP (borderline extreme far right potentially, equivalent to your Tea Party so the UKIP leader says)...


But I may go liberal democrats (hmmm equivalent to nobody in the States really besides maybe the Democrats slightly, but less socialist) as their leader seems to be the most involved with discussing things in the run up campaign and has also apologised for his parties previous failures, as opposed to the others who use a giant sweep and a massive carpet to hide their s#.




It's a cesspool basically.
edit on 13-4-2015 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:36 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

The problem is that socialism and communism are BAD WORDS and BAD WAYS. The thing is that what has been purported as being such.... aren't. Real socialism, communism, anarchy even, are systems that are socially aware and responsible. The terms(labels) have been bastardized into the USSR. China, Venezuela, etc. We're good at labelling but not so good at getting it right.

If you look around you can see "socialism" everywhere in society.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:36 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Sigh. You originally responded to my question of what is wrong with socialism. You jumped on Marx like a razorback on an unattended 80's infant. I responded with what I meant by that term. You, however, are hung up on Marx like my niece on One Direction. I already admitted that Karly's version is wrong. So, kindly stop equating with what i meant by that question with your attempt to hijack a definition. I posted a link to the definition - twice.

What Fr. Lenin and and the Bolshy Boys ( great band name, that) wanted wasn't socialism. Heck, it wasn't even Marxism, no matter how the gussied it up. They wanted what Wall Street is doing their damnedest to get.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: newWorldSamurai

Yes, you get it worldwide progression...

I've drifted from my own thread because it went from a rant about world issues to the political mudpit focused on the constitutional & anti-constitutional left and right of the U.S...


I'll just read along and see if it returns to its intended destination.


Which was what? All those things are part of the history of those words you wrote. Would you rather talk about what the media says those words are?


Which was to progress rather than regress.

Quite simple if you actually read the OP.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Charlie...

I have always known you were a progressive, I could tell by your defense of things I cannot understand, your viewpoints that, to me, seem completely the opposite of my thinking, and of course your views on palestine and the situation with Israel.
But I would be lying, If I ever said that our discussions never gave me pause, never made me think, and never made me uncomfortable enough to examine my ideals.

I have not changed my mind on many of my ideals, however, because of you, I have learned to change my thought process.

Because of you, I have learned that even though I do not agree 99 percent of the time with progressives, that doesnt mean that on occasion, we cannot agree....which we have on a few things...

Above all i respect you, for sticking to your principles , and always being respectful towards me, as I hope you feel I have been towards you, though we have had heated exchanged...

Charlie, youre a progressive,I am a conservative, and I do not agree with you most of the time, your a Muslim, and I am a Christian, but youre my brother, and I love and respect you, and more importantly I know you love and respect me back.

Cheers to real diversity, and heres to hoping that the rest of the world can come together on the terms that we have.....

Much love and respect,

MBTM



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: crazyewok

Thats true. Modern republicans would be shunned by their counterparts of former days. Ron Paul was the closest we ever got to a real republican...and he was "unelectable".

I have a real question I am slightly embarrassed to ask.

What are the political trends as far as left VS right and libertarian VS authoritarian of the UK and what major parties fall in line with them?

I have NEVER properly informed myself on your political system. I am a little ashamed since most in the Uk are better informed about our political system in the US than some of our own people. LOL

I would like to hear it from one of you and since I trust what you have to say, I would love if you could break it down for me. Anyone who knows really.




Well our two main parties are pretty central.

Conservatives(AKA torys) are slightly to the right, Labour is slightly to the left.


Then we have 3 smaller parties.
UKIP who are very "right" wing but seem to be authoratarian but as they are new its hard to totaly get a feeling of who they are yet as some are pretty libertarian others are bordeline facists but they are united in there hate for the EU.
Green who are very very left verging on communisum.
Libral democrats who apart from there odd EU support are a sort of libertarian "lite" they recognise the value in public services but want leaner more cost effective public services and lower taxes.
Scotish national party who are a bit furtner left of center to labour and are pro EU but anti UK


At the moment we have a Conservative/lib dem goverment.


edit on 13-4-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:40 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: crazyewok

Thank you. Thats a start. I really am feeling lazy about this....but I want to learn, so ugh. I guess let me start to look those up. LOL

Thanks though. Very helpful
edit on 4 13 2015 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Cuervo

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Cuervo

You want to add an ammendment that will provide for more freedoms and individual liberties then bring it on!

You want to add an ammendment that will restrict, inhibit, deny freedoms and individual liberties, then you're a progressive.


So... is legalizing gay marriage, which provides more freedom and individual liberty, not "progressive"? What about legalizing various substances, which provides more freedom and individual liberty? Is that something outside the realm of "progressive" now?


What in the f### makes you think I'm against any of what you listed?



Is there a word you have for "progressive" that doesn't do all the bad stuff you don't like?


I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

I think that since YOU think I'm anti progressive, that means I'm anti gay marriage, anti-legalisation etc.

Bullsh##

I'm against big government dictating to us what we;
eat
buy
smoke
wear
say
live
write
watch

I'm against government dictating that I have to buy health insurance.
I'm against government dictating what kinds of guns, what kind of ammo I have to buy.
I'm against government interfering with the internet.
I'm against government justifying more taxes when then can't even control their own spending.
I'm against government pushing division, racially and socially.
I'm sick and tired of government thinking they know how to raise my children better than I do.

I'm sick of PEOPLE obeying the dictates of government and parroting the same vomit about how they think they know better.


Holy crap, Beezzer, I didn't say you were against anything at all. If I thought you were, I wouldn't have asked you the questions I did. I asked you because I honestly wanted to know what you think. Because it was an honest question.

By "stuff you don't like", I meant the things you listed earlier, like altering the constitution. Why do you think you are considered a poster child for "reasonable conservative"? We all know you aren't some bigot right-winger and I totally wasn't implying it. Maybe you misread what I wrote or perhaps I wasn't specific enough so I'll begin again:

I was only asking what you would call a person who is socially liberal and progressive but stands for things that take away limitations to freedoms. The two examples I gave were marriage equality and legalizing substances. I was asking for a new term from you because I consider you to almost be in that category along with me and a bunch of mixed left/right wingers out there. It was seriously an honest question because I wanted your honest opinion.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Great, Islam needs to be reformed.

You have your work cut out for you.

Good luck.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: luthier

Sigh. You originally responded to my question of what is wrong with socialism. You jumped on Marx like a razorback on an unattended 80's infant. I responded with what I meant by that term. You, however, are hung up on Marx like my niece on One Direction. I already admitted that Karly's version is wrong. So, kindly stop equating with what i meant by that question with your attempt to hijack a definition. I posted a link to the definition - twice.

What Fr. Lenin and and the Bolshy Boys ( great band name, that) wanted wasn't socialism. Heck, it wasn't even Marxism, no matter how the gussied it up. They wanted what Wall Street is doing their damnedest to get.


I don't get the reference I guess since I read history from books not tv examples as well as have conversations about the principles of words.

So you say who cares what they mean look at the definition I gave you. I say who cares. What are the intents.

Socialism is what Hitler tried no?
Socialism allows the government to do what people should do locally which is take care of each other.
Marxism says we will do it without government naturally when people are to greedy socialism says let some "elected" officials tell you what is best for you.
Of course there are socialist aspects to every society. Its just when they are federally allocated the problems for abuse occur.
It has great intentions until the inevitable pyscho takes over.

Progressives were wealthy to do people who wanted causes and did what they would think was good to help immigrants be better Americans, have poor not be so filthy and having babies etc. Now it is a loose term foe liberal like people.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Great, Islam needs to be reformed.

You have your work cut out for you.

Good luck.


again like ive said , we dont agree on much Charlie and I, however he is of the school of thought for reformation....

IF anyone can do it, its people like him who can do so.......

Im still of the mind that religion can be the answer....simple reason?

IF we , the religions of the world can make peace with each other, then what stops us as a race from reaching goals we never even dreamed of as a race......

If religions across the world could stop fighting, imagine what we could do to effect change with the other bickering and wars across the world....



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Wish I could give you a hug and shake your hand after that buddy...


Feeling is mutual!
In every sense!



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: crazyewok

Thank you. Thats a start. I really am feeling lazy about this....but I want to learn, so ugh. I guess let me start to look those up. LOL

Thanks though. Very helpful

No worries.
For reference famous PM's you might have heard of:

Tony Blair=labour
Margret Thatcher=conservatives
Harold wilson=labour
Winston churchhill= conservative.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Great, Islam needs to be reformed.

You have your work cut out for you.

Good luck.


Education on what Islam is needs reform yes.


I wouldn't change a word of the Quran...

But I'd teach it fully to the illiterate majority that use it as a tool to murder innocent people.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Cuervo

Apologies then. I thought you were implying something. I must have read it wrong.

A progressive argues for gun control.
A progressive argues for limitations of freedoms of expression.
I don't think a progressive cares one way or the other on gay marriage, unless they can use it to inhibit religious expression.

We're playing fast and loose with definitions here, though.

I've been branded a "conservative" but I'm probably more liberal than many here.

I just get fired up when I see an attempt to infringe on individual rights.

Whether that be;
religious
sexual orientation
what you smoke or drink
what you say
what you write
what you endorse


I was only asking what you would call a person who is socially liberal and progressive but stands for things that take away limitations to freedoms.


If you stand for taking away any limitations to freedom, I'd call you a patriot and brother.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Wondered how long it would take for Hitler (tm) to get brought in. That was fascism, not actual socialism, and it was a d*** sight closer to what Stalin brought in than actual, you know, SOCIALISM.

Words have meaning. This sounds like such a simple concept yet so many seem to ignore it. You can't walk in and say "this is what this word means now, screw the dictionary". Not only is that bad form, but that way lies bad science debates. No. If word has meaning, that is the intent. If I say "frog", I mean and intend "small green amphibian", not "Frenchman", or "cat" or "Conservative". So when a word is defined - twice- that is the intent and the meaning. Arguing further about that is like making cats laugh.

You make interesting claims. "Progressives were wealthy to do people who wanted causes and did what they would think was good to help immigrants be better Americans, have poor not be so filthy and having babies etc. Now it is a loose term foe liberal like people." Going to assume proof, or are you just tossing words together, maybe going with an ad hominem attack on liberals/prgressives?

As for your "inevitable psycho" comment, I could point to Wall Street, Bush, Cheney, the Walton family or Indiana for the flip to that.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 06:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Ironhawke

National socialism is national socialism.

Fascism is syndicalism which is socialism.

You have the capability to rectify the myriad misunderstandings that you have elucidated here.

As you correctly point out, words do have meaning.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 06:13 PM
link   
I believe in minding your own damned business.

You don't know what is best for me and my family and I will jealously guard my right to make those decisions.

Progressives are not progressive. Don't confuse the meaning of the word with the Eugenicists that created the Progressive Movement.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Charlie, Ill take what I can get brother, im just glad you were able to see that post buried in the thread, Look I think we all need to do the same thing in this country, and indeed the world, as you and I have done......

im actually trying to find an audio version of the quran to listen to in my past time off apple iphone do you know of any apps?

I need to hear more of it honestly to be able to comment at any length on it....

That doesnt mean i dont disagree with a lot of the actions (as most do as well as Charlie i know) however I would like to learn more...

Thats one thing I regret I didnt have time to do while i was "boots on the ground" in the big sand box was be able to sit more and listen to the teachings of Islam by true believers in Pakistan.....most of the tribal community there have a lot more practical approach to Islam, which is interesting considering their fairly primative life style....point blank, they hate the extremist....those small tribes are the ones to learn from...

what I would give for 4 months with one of those guys every day in a school about the faith.....yeah im a bit of a philanthropist




top topics



 
39
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join