Conservatives and Liberals... And Progressivism

originally posted by: SurveyTheSurveyors
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

I agree entirely. It is now bread and circuses for the masses. Keep them fighting each other while the higher ups keep gaining power.

We as a people should be able to see this, fight this, educate others on it.

Which is why when I self-identify as a fiscal conservative I HATE being boxed into "oh, you're a Republican".

What about the socially liberal part of me? LOL

The Republican party isn't conservative anymore... hasn't been for years.

I'd like the party to get back to that.

a reply to: Lumenari

Unfortunately Conservative and Liberal.
These are just ideas that humans have.
They do not represent what humans are.

No mater what we call ourselves we can never truly be any one idea.
We are just to complected as a species.

a reply to: Lumenari


I wish we could. Unfortunately I don't see it ever happening. The pure mind, loving soul, and the selfless heart has all been corrupted to the point of no return. There's too many issues people have at hand to take a side on, whether it be religion, sexuality, racism, politics, guns... The list goes on and on, and that's not a good thing.


I pray for all my enemies, allies, friends, and family. Who am I praying to? Sometimes unsure, but positive thoughts are what we need more than ever... you don't have to be religious to manifest positivity

-StS

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Lumenari

Unfortunately Conservative and Liberal.
These are just ideas that humans have.
They do not represent what humans are.

No mater what we call ourselves we can never truly be any one idea.
We are just to complected as a species.

You can have bits of both ideologies... I certainly do. One does not need to be one-dimensional.

Ideas are all that we are, at the end of the day. They are what make us an individual, define who were are, define how we act and react towards others in society.

Otherwise we are just meat sacks.

originally posted by: SurveyTheSurveyors
a reply to: Lumenari


I wish we could. Unfortunately I don't see it ever happening. The pure mind, loving soul, and the selfless heart has all been corrupted to the point of no return. There's too many issues people have at hand to take a side on, whether it be religion, sexuality, racism, politics, guns... The list goes on and on, and that's not a good thing.


I pray for all my enemies, allies, friends, and family. Who am I praying to? Sometimes unsure, but positive thoughts are what we need more than ever... you don't have to be religious to manifest positivity

-StS

Then you are right where they want you to be.

Have hope. We as a country are not done just yet.

originally posted by: Lumenari

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?

Here's something else to imagine:

Prior to the Great Depression and the bloated bureaucracy created by the Great Society, the Federal government was smaller than the average State government.

Even the Progressives of the early 1900's didn't accomplish federal overreach that we have today.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

Here's something else to imagine:

Prior to the Great Depression and the bloated bureaucracy created by the Great Society, the Federal government was smaller than the average State government.

Even the Progressives of the early 1900's didn't accomplish federal overreach that we have today.

I so agree! Their growth has been exponential, helped of course by money men behind the scenes and a complicit media.

-- David Rockefeller, Speaking at the June, 1991 Bilderberger meeting in Baden, Germany (a meeting also attended by then-Governor Bill Clinton and by Dan Quayle--

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time
Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended
our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost
forty years."

"It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world
if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years.
But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a
world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite
and world bankers is surely preferable to the national
auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

by: David Rockefeller (1915- ) Internationalist billionaire, CFR kingpin, founder of the Trilateralist Commission, World Order Godfather
Date: June 1991 Baden, Germany
Source: Bilderberger Meeting, Baden, Germany

Progressives have a plan... they have been working on it in the US for over a century now.

My little hope is that the internet and a rise of public awareness will rise up and bite them in the ass.

a reply to: Lumenari

Yea, I have to take issue with those dictionary definitions. Nearly every post so far has given a truer definition of at least some aspects of the question.

These terms really mean whatever the people describing themselves as such say they mean. The meaning of conservative has changed quite a bit over the last 20 years. Sometimes what was liberal yesterday is conservative today and vice versa. Progressive seems to denote progress toward Marxism.

Our current system of government doesn't seem to address the powers and forces that currently drive our government policy. Corruption has caused all sides to betray their stated principles. Even if it is possible to have a president that can't be bought off, it makes little difference if everyone else in the government is. When all sides must constantly raise funds all the time, they all start to look the same to me.

originally posted by: toms54
a reply to: Lumenari

Yea, I have to take issue with those dictionary definitions. Nearly every post so far has given a truer definition of at least some aspects of the question.

These terms really mean whatever the people describing themselves as such say they mean. The meaning of conservative has changed quite a bit over the last 20 years. Sometimes what was liberal yesterday is conservative today and vice versa. Progressive seems to denote progress toward Marxism.

Our current system of government doesn't seem to address the powers and forces that currently drive our government policy. Corruption has caused all sides to betray their stated principles. Even if it is possible to have a president that can't be bought off, it makes little difference if everyone else in the government is. When all sides must constantly raise funds all the time, they all start to look the same to me.

I used dictionary definitions because that's what actual liberalism and conservatism means. That the current words and actions of people who say they are liberal and conservative don't match the definitions is what the OP was about.

People are wearing the shirt with the name on it and they have no idea what they are proclaiming they are. I thought I would try to clear that up.

What I was also trying to point out is that political leaders now look all look the same to you because they ARE the same. Just because they are wearing the shirt with the name on it doesn't mean that's what they are.

I watched a discussion here somewhere the other day about Paul Ryan.. someone was pointing out that he is the definition of conservative.

No he isn't. He just talks like one. Look at his actions, what he votes for, what he does. Bigger government, more laws to solve a problem.

Progressive.

a reply to: Lumenari
Progressivism is communism...They just stuck a nicer name on it...Repackaged it...

I feel like that between 1962 and 1975 both the demacrats and republicans seem to change sides. And both sides were destroyed by by the progressives in the 80's.

originally posted by: Iscool
a reply to: Lumenari
Progressivism is communism...They just stuck a nicer name on it...Repackaged it...

Communism, socialism, marxism, trotskyism, leninism, stalinism, maoism, progressivism... all eggs from the same nest.

They are all slightly different social and economic mechanisms to achieve the same goal.

They all go back to Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

So you are entirely correct.

originally posted by: Nickn3
I feel like that between 1962 and 1975 both the demacrats and republicans seem to change sides. And both sides were destroyed by by the progressives in the 80's.

You are right. The Neo-conservatives that originated in the Democratic party were forced out by the Progressives in the 60's and went to the Republican party. Their power peaked in 1990-2000 and then were pushed into oblivion by more Progressives coming into the Republican party.

The current sea change in the Republican party was started as the Tea Party in 2007. Actual conservatives starting to take back some ground, as it were. As for whether they shall continue to grow as political sentiment on the right grows increasingly conservative one can only hope.

I would love to see the same movement on the Democratic side.

a reply to: Lumenari

I agree with most of what you said and think there is an INCREDIBLE need to actually have people understand the definitions of the words they use..

Most conservatives think liberal/left means “wants to take all the guns, abolish money, make everyone gay, exc, exc, exc.. “

When almost no one thinks that way at all....

The right has created a fictional universe where there are all these vast illuminati conspiracies that make zero sense..


People pull off vast and expensive conspiracies for profit.. not for fun... the conservative conspiracy theories don’t even have a profit based motivation..

For example:

Disarming the American people wouldn’t be profitable.. it would cost trillions.


Faking climate change would cost billions.. and a carbon tax wouldn’t even cover the cost of maintaining the conspiracy.. let alone make a net profit.


So who is paying the media, unions , schoolteachers, college professors, celebrities , universities, exc to all be in a vast conspiracy to make republicans look bad???



There is no profit in ANY of that.. all those things would cost money.. not make it..




The problem with the left is they will use lazy messaging and eat their own at the drop of a hat..

The left will admit and recognize there is a problem, but often take no action..

Take BLM for example..

Police shootings are not a black only issue.. they are an issue that effects us all.. so the left selling it like it is a black only issue for the easy publicity is swiftly used against them..

Sweetheart, you DO realize that you are a progressive, don't you?

If you don't mind, take your crap back to your own thread. I started this one to counter yours.

I'm not the one bashing one side. I'm saying there is a reason both sides currently suck.



Edited to add... you put a smile on my face. I'm going to go cook a steak.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Lol.. only if the definition of freedom and independence means “my tax dollars are not used for ANYTHING I am not presently using..”


I think the fact they can throw you in a concrete box for DECADES. Just because you were getting high seems like a FAR more accurate example of a slight on our freedoms..


You know, a slight that actually Robs you of your freedom..

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Nickn3
I feel like that between 1962 and 1975 both the demacrats and republicans seem to change sides. And both sides were destroyed by by the progressives in the 80's.

You are right. The Neo-conservatives that originated in the Democratic party were forced out by the Progressives in the 60's and went to the Republican party. Their power peaked in 1990-2000 and then were pushed into oblivion by more Progressives coming into the Republican party.

The current sea change in the Republican party was started as the Tea Party in 2007. Actual conservatives starting to take back some ground, as it were. As for whether they shall continue to grow as political sentiment on the right grows increasingly conservative one can only hope.

I would love to see the same movement on the Democratic side.

I agree, my grandfather was a hardcore democrat that raised his family during the depression and ww2. He would be ashamed of what his party's become.

a reply to: Nickn3

My grandparents were the same. They were Depression kids and voted hardcore Democrat until Obama. To them, their party changed so much they had no idea what it even was anymore.

They stopped voting because they didn't want to vote Republican, but couldn't vote Democrat.

It's a shame.

a reply to: Lumenari

I don't usually get involved in Political Matters but it does disturb me when the terminology gets screwed like what we've seen lately. I guess that makes me a Conservative Progressive Liberal because I believe in Traditions being upheld, in this case with the official definitions being followed, in that I would like to see Progress made beyond all this bickering, and that it is the Duty of the individual to uphold themselves to a high standard of Conduct, imposed on by Self as opposed to being Mandated.

But just keep slingin' the insults wildly because it's an all out poo-flinging madhouse in here.