Can't a "Progressive" also be a "Patriot"?

a reply to: amazing

Yes...Progressives are Patriots as are Conservatives.

The problem is that the labels we use, politically, don't mean what they used to or what we think they do and they are a means to control us.

I'm more liberal than Conservative, but I'm more pro gun than most conservatives I know. Wow! How is that possible? According to popular belief and our modern labels it is impossible for me to be pro gun and pro LGBT rights. Because our labels just don't mean anything.

The Ideals of feminism and progressiveness and liberalism and conservatism and libertarian ism and patriotism are all great ideals...as is socialism, but we've been programmed to believe what the media tell us.

We're all programmed here on ATS to fall right in with those labels and programmed to hate anyone that disagrees with us.

That might be the problem. It isn't the duty of the media to philosophically justify certain political positions for people. I would argue that if you cannot philosophically justify any political position, you have no right to hold it. Anything else is group think. Most marxists have never read anything of Marx's work.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Most marxists have never read anything of Marx's work.

Interesting comment. Can you share the information you used to make such a statement?

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: breakingbs

But I refuse to really believe you're that ignorant.

Ignorant about what?

I lean progressive, yes. I also have no issue with the 1st and 2nd amendments. I am a secular person (as opposed to religious).

What is it I am ignorant about?
(Been reading your posts - gotta say, you don't seem to make very much sense to me.)

Okay, not sure how else to articulate I understand politics for what they are, and if there's no way to do just that, than maybe you buy into your own hype. Or we're at an impasse. To me it makes me sick having to describe the obvious. You said basically that conservatives are not interested in improving things. This can only be interpreted as ignorance or an insult. If its the latter, id disagree, but at least think you had a clue. The former (or maybe just jerking me around because you want me to explain in writing) is something I dont want to f with. Im trying my !@#/ to give you the benefit of the doubt.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Most marxists have never read anything of Marx's work.

Is it appropriate for me to say most Christians have never read the Bible?

a reply to: desert

I agree completely. I think the word should be reclaimed, just like many other words that have been demonized over time.

"Environmentalist" is another word that should be reclaimed and/or rebranded. How is it a bad thing for people to want our country to have clean air and water? Or to want our public lands to remain clean with plentiful wildlife? The problem comes with both overly zealous "environmentalists" who use the term to attack nearly everything and with their equally zealous opponents who demonize anyone who cares about anything related to Nature.

I'm a vegetarian so it won't affect my eating habits in the least if there's mercury in our fish supply or if the deer in an area are being poisoned by toxic runoff. But I care enough about other people that I don't want them to have to eat tainted foods. How on Earth has that become a "negative" trait now?

a reply to: introvert

Interesting comment. Can you share the information you used to make such a statement?

Das Capital is an enormous work, and exceedingly boring. In my own experience, I've met very few self-proclaimed Marxists who have spent the time to read it, preferring some interpretation or another instead.

a reply to: olaru12

Is it appropriate for me to say most Christians have never read the Bible?

Probably.

While you all are at each others throats, America is circling the drain. How many lists are we at the bottom of now? How many families are on welfare? How many kids go hungry or drop out of school? How many foreclosures or loan defaults? How many people in prison?

Liberal/Progressive/Democrat, Republican/Conservative - does it even really matter? TRUE "patriots" call bull# on all of it. True patriots work around the system. We don't argue endlessly while clinging desperately to dogma and labels defined by the beast itself. We slay the beast, not feed it.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Id actually agree with you here and think most of the reaction comes from all this annoying packaging of the concept that only "certain types" sit together and eat arugula, etc. I buy kale all the time and dont get its association with overboard obnoxious health nuts and hipsters

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert

Interesting comment. Can you share the information you used to make such a statement?

Das Capital is an enormous work, and exceedingly boring. In my own experience, I've met very few self-proclaimed Marxists who have spent the time to read it, preferring some interpretation or another instead.

So because you've met very few Marxists that have read it, that equates to "most" of them? Anecdotal evidence is not evidence.

By the way, Marx wrote several hundred pieces on many different aspects. Das Kapital is not the only book on Marxist ideologies.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

"Progressives" (AKA Neo-Leftists) circa 2016...CANNOT be considered Patriots merely based on platform and policy alone.

The Progressive agenda is antithetic to National pride, protection, and specifically BORDERS, and Rule of Law with respect to borders.

Progressive philosophy (Theology) is in direct conflict with any NATIONAL interest. It touts Multi-Culturalism at the expense of any Native people (Americans) (Globalism) and teaches that we are all under the same tent, because we share the same planet.

Progressives think that the U.N., a world body, is Superior to our own National interests and should have control over our domestic laws. See gun clauses, weapons clauses, climtate clauses, commerce deals, trade deals, environmental controls.

Progressives care more about total strangers, that they have never met, who have ZERO care about the U.S. as a nation, before their own countrymen (in general philosophy). They would give away the farm if it meant they were considered hip, chic, cool, trendy....and most importantly "Not Racist"

Progressivism is REGRESSIVE in National interest....yet PROGRESSIVE for outside entities and foreigners.

Progressivism is a bad political philosophy for a single sovereign nation.

If you care about YOUR country....chuck Progressive IDEOLOGY out the door. It's bad news.

originally posted by: breakingbs
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Id actually agree with you here and think most of the reaction comes from all this annoying packaging of the concept that only "certain types" sit together and eat arugula, etc. I buy kale all the time and dont get its association with overboard obnoxious health nuts and hipsters

Ironically, I hate kale lol. But I know what you mean. (Also ironically, most of my survivalist friends & contacts love kale, too. So I don't get its association with the stereotypical "hipsters" either. Maybe it's just a marketing thing?)

EDIT: Ok, "hate" is a strong word. I used to eat kale raw in salads to replace "normal" lettuces and yeah... Probably should've focused on the other uses for kale.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

who is "she"??

My country

:-)

a reply to: introvert

So because you've met very few Marxists that have read it, that equates to "most" of them? Anecdotal evidence is not evidence.

Can you provide evidence of the opposite?

Additionally, "Progressivism" is Neo-Marxism wrapped in a shiny bow for the 21st Century. The same beliefs are there, coming back around, as if Marx's ghost is forever haunting the Liberal enclaves of Europe and trying to spread through those under 30 years old in the U.S.

FORTUNATELY, many polls and studies are showing that many of the younger generation are actually WAKING UP to the truth about LEFT ideology by looking at their slightly older sibling demographic of "Generation X", many who became parents, and their children, the now young 20 somethings...have seen the light.

At it's CORE, "Progressivism" is a religion. Not based on facts or logic, but emotion, appeal to emotion, spin, guilt, hand waving, and lack of true cohesive direction.

Other than Gay Rights, and possibly the Right to choice to terminate a pregnancy...Progressive ideology is Karl Marx's dead failed ghost trying to resurrect a social and economic philosophy that has a trail of TENS OF MILLIONS of dead bodies behind it.

For all intents and purposes, when I examine the "Progressive" platform, it's general policies and mantras, it appears more like a RELIGION than a political value. A "Secular Religion".....(Oxymoron)...but that's the only way I can describe it.

"Progressives" are BELIEVERS.....like Fundamentalist Christians, or SUNNI Salafists, or Scientologists.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert

So because you've met very few Marxists that have read it, that equates to "most" of them? Anecdotal evidence is not evidence.

Can you provide evidence of the opposite?

No. I have not been able to find a poll that asks how many Marxists have read his material. It's a silly question. You made a specific claim and therefore the onus is on you to provide evidence of it being true. Anecdotal evidence is fallacious.

Otherwise, we can dismiss your comment as being absurd.

a reply to: introvert

No. I have not been able to find a poll that asks how many Marxists have read his material. It's a silly question. You made a specific claim and therefore the onus is on you to provide evidence of it being true. Anecdotal evidence is fallacious.

Otherwise, we can dismiss your comment as being absurd.

No evidence is not evidence.

I was just making an observation. I'm sorry it didn't meet your standards of acceptable speech.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert

So because you've met very few Marxists that have read it, that equates to "most" of them? Anecdotal evidence is not evidence.

Can you provide evidence of the opposite?

There's a site called RevLeft that you could look into (Revolutionary Left). They've got actual Marxists there & they'll debate you to your heart's content about the differences in Marxism, Leninism, Stalinism, and Maoism (you should probably check the existing threads first since I don't know how active they still are). I'm not much of a fan of communism so I steer clear of that site. But you asked for evidence so there you go.

In short, to summarize my answer, after ranting on your thread OP...

NO...you as a "Progressive" cannot or will not, under any stretch or evidence of the known data, be considered a "PATRIOT".

Your Philosophy is a religion at complete ODDS with our Constitution and National Interests.

Sorry

a reply to: enlightenedservant

There's a site called RevLeft that you could look into (Revolutionary Left). They've got actual Marxists there & they'll debate you to your heart's content about the differences in Marxism, Leninism, Stalinism, and Maoism (you should probably check the existing threads first since I don't know how active they still are). I'm not much of a fan of communism so I steer clear of that site. But you asked for evidence so there you go.

I was making a joke, but thanks.