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.

 

Conservatives and Liberals... And Progressivism

page: 1
21
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+1 more 
posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:14 PM
link   
When we Americans attempt to define ourselves on ATS, we should be aware of the definitions of the terms, at least.

Definition of Liberalism, Free Dictionary:

A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority.

Definition of Conservatism; Free dictionary:

1. The inclination, especially in politics, to maintain the existing or traditional order. 2. A political philosophy or attitude that emphasizes respect for traditional institutions and opposes the attempt to achieve social change though legislation or publicly funded programs. 3. Caution or moderation, as in behavior or outlook.

Now both ideals, by definition, are not bad things at all! One side having a belief in the natural goodness of humans, the other side wanting to maintain a traditional order, a cautionary ideology.

These ideologies should be able to co-exist with a little compromise.

However. These are NOT the things that exist anymore in the Democratic and Republican parties in our leadership. Now they pay lip service to the ideals to get elected, but their real motives are far from either definition.

Now.. what about Progressivism?

Definition, Free Dictionary. Also called progressionism, progressism. the principles and practices of those advocating progress, change, or reform, especially in political matters.

That doesn't really sound too bad either, does it?


Progressivism started taking hold in the late 1800's in America. Many of the core principles of the Progressive Movement focused on the need for efficiency in all areas of society. Purification to eliminate waste and corruption was a powerful element, as well as the Progressives' support of worker compensation, improved child labor laws, minimum wage legislation, a support for a maximum hours that workers could work for, graduated income tax and allowed women the right to vote.


Something we can all get behind! However, the MEANS to their goals didn't work quite so well with the whole "America" experiment.

According to historian William Leuchtenburg:


The Progressives believed in the Hamiltonian concept of positive government, of a national government directing the destinies of the nation at home and abroad. They had little but contempt for the strict construction of the Constitution by conservative judges, who would restrict the power of the national government to act against social evils and to extend the blessings of democracy to less favored lands. The real enemy was particularism, state rights, limited government.


The way Progressives change things is through government. By government. BIG government. Their ideal is a vast over-reaching bureaucracy of benign technocrats that will care for you cradle to grave. Sound familiar?

Which is why they settled into the Democratic party first, running any real liberals out by the 70's. They started with the Republican party as well in the 30's, pretty much taking it over by the 80's (with the exception of a Democrat turned Republican called Reagan.)

So now they run everything. Now, there has been a little pushback the last 9 years or so with the Republican party actually getting a few conservatives back and hopefully the trend will continue. I hope someday the Democrats will get their own push going as well.

So when we squabble on ATS about what we are, there is an easy way to define yourself.

If you think the Federal government needs to solve your problems, you are not a liberal or conservative. You are a progressive. Period.

If you think the Federal government needs to have more programs for the young, the poor, the illegals, the whatever... you are a Progressive.

If you think that if just ONE more law passes that further erodes the Bill of Rights will help? You guessed it... you are a Progressive.

So if you are arguing that Obama good, Bush bad, Clinton good? They are all Progressives. Try to point out a particular sleezeball on one side of the isle so your side can look better? Surprise... they are mostly Progressives anyways... there are no real "sides" anymore, Haven't been for a few generations.

The real enemy isn't conservatives or liberals.. we need both to have a balanced society.

The enemy is tyranny. And THAT, my friend, is the end result of Progressivism. Always.

Hope I helped someone with their confusion on political parties vs Americans.





posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari


I am for freedom, independence and a firm follower of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.


Can't put it much plainer than that.



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:23 PM
link   
The definition of liberalism couldn’t be further from liberals today



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:31 PM
link   
I think a majority of ppl , regardless of how they are labeled, are centrists.

They may have leanings both ways on different issues. I, for example, am for small, unobtrusive, financially responsible government. A clearly Republican stance. I don't want religion in schools. A fairly liberal stance. I want a strong military, without nation building. Don't know where that puts me. I don't want a permanent welfare class, but believe in helping poor ppl to a better life. I want control of our borders.

To me these all seem like common sense, but there are those that would disagree with every one of those views.



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: avgguy
The definition of liberalism couldn’t be further from liberals today


Agreed, and that's quite sad, really. It's like the Progressive party started out with the people that had more empathy and used them first to start the movement.

I'd like the old ones back please.



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:35 PM
link   
We have met the enemy and he is us.



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mach2
I think a majority of ppl , regardless of how they are labeled, are centrists.

They may have leanings both ways on different issues. I, for example, am for small, unobtrusive, financially responsible government. A clearly Republican stance. I don't want religion in schools. A fairly liberal stance. I want a strong military, without nation building. Don't know where that puts me. I don't want a permanent welfare class, but believe in helping poor ppl to a better life. I want control of our borders.

To me these all seem like common sense, but there are those that would disagree with every one of those views.


I'm all for all of that.

However, tell me the last time a Republican-led government shrunk the Federal government.

It was Calvin Coolidge in 1923.

For the record, he came into office and HALVED the size of the Federal government in a week.

Imagine that happening today?



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: watchitburn
We have met the enemy and he is us.


It's technically our education...

Although you reminded me of the V speech....




posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:40 PM
link   
I think mis-guided Liberals (aka Marxists) hi-jacked Liberalism.

Combine that with Fabian Socialists and you get toxic waste.

The dumpsite is the American Democrat Parti.

😎



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
I think mis-guided Liberals (aka Marxists) hi-jacked Liberalism.

Combine that with Fabian Socialists and you get toxic waste.

The dumpsite is the American Democrat Parti.

😎


Progressivism and Marxism are two paths to the same place.

So yes, I agree.




posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

You have a point. I guess, in reality, the mainstream Republican politician is not very conservative these days.



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari


the principles and practices of those advocating progress, change, or reform, especially in political matters.


The problem with this ethos in todays society, is that advocating for change/progress/reform is always one sided with the theme that "its going to happen - you can have your say, but its irrelevant if you disagree with our **vision, because it's going to happen regardless"

**All illegal immigrants should be afforded the rights and protections of US citizens, regardless of how they treat US citizens or view the Constitution as the highest authority in the land.
**All guns should be banned
**All Christians need to apologise for 10 generations for causing everything.
**Pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon' is allowed because free speech - condemning it is intolerable and bigoted.
**All policies should be designed to favour minorities because the majority have had it too good for too long.
**White people are racist, all others can attack whites and not be racist.
**There are now 62 genders - you're a bigot if you disagree or require proof.

So, until intelligent folks, who respect others' view points are elected into positions of power, the US will continue to have Pelosi, Trump, Mad Max, Schumer, Ryan, Sessions and all the other folks that the US currently DESERVES.

The End.



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Lumenari


I am for freedom, independence and a firm follower of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.


Can't put it much plainer than that.


Which used to be the stance of both major parties.

Now it isn't.

Let's hope that more and more people realize this and get back to where our major political battles in Congress was where to spend what was left.. not how to spend what we don't have.



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: Lumenari


the principles and practices of those advocating progress, change, or reform, especially in political matters.


The problem with this ethos in todays society, is that advocating for change/progress/reform is always one sided with the theme that "its going to happen - you can have your say, but its irrelevant if you disagree with our **vision, because it's going to happen regardless"

**All illegal immigrants should be afforded the rights and protections of US citizens, regardless of how they treat US citizens or view the Constitution as the highest authority in the land.
**All guns should be banned
**All Christians need to apologise for 10 generations for causing everything.
**Pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon' is allowed because free speech - condemning it is intolerable and bigoted.
**All policies should be designed to favour minorities because the majority have had it too good for too long.
**White people are racist, all others can attack whites and not be racist.
**There are now 62 genders - you're a bigot if you disagree or require proof.

So, until intelligent folks, who respect others' view points are elected into positions of power, the US will continue to have Pelosi, Trump, Mad Max, Schumer, Ryan, Sessions and all the other folks that the US currently DESERVES.

The End.


I agree entirely, but keep in mind, the rhetoric is on purpose. To keep us divided.

We need to start, as Americans, pushing back on the entire ideology of Progressivism.

Because it isn't Progress for the average citizen at ALL>



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Lumenari


I am for freedom, independence and a firm follower of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.


Can't put it much plainer than that.


Which used to be the stance of both major parties.

Now it isn't.

Let's hope that more and more people realize this and get back to where our major political battles in Congress was where to spend what was left.. not how to spend what we don't have.


Hell, it isn't the stance of either "party" any more.



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 07:13 PM
link   
The first clue you are on to something here:

"Conservative" and "Liberal" used to refer to fiscal values. Today they refer to social values, with the fiscal values being nearly identical between the 2.

And a government that spends big IS big, no matter how you slice it.



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

The stance of both parties is to stack the poop of every American citizen on top of one another. Our country is a friggin joke to the entire world. IDC about either party anymore. They all suck to the point none of my vacuum work anymore. LOL and that right there is my childish response to this thread. Have fun people any enjoy your Sunday!



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 07:19 PM
link   
The problem with politics is that its starting to turn into a sport for the populace. Left or right up or down, which ever side you may fall on, the opposite side MUST be your opponent, right? I only see right from wrong, not right from left...

-StS



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 07:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

Categorizing people and putting them in a box is the most tyrannical form of government and the most anti freedom form of government I can imagine. I do believe Hitler and IBM categorized people?


Eff all that muh feelz snip! We have a Constitution and regardless of your tribal alliance due to being brain washed by the MSM and politicians who lie like a snake? Those of us who still admire and respect our founders, and love our country? Let the Marxists bring it on. A war they won't win!



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 07:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
The first clue you are on to something here:

"Conservative" and "Liberal" used to refer to fiscal values. Today they refer to social values, with the fiscal values being nearly identical between the 2.

And a government that spends big IS big, no matter how you slice it.


Exactly.. thank you for pointing that out.




new topics




 
21
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join