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.
Skyfloating
JuniorDisco
You guys were there waving your silly flag and crying about progressivism when women got the vote, when they stopped making black people use different bathrooms and you're still here now. Your absolutism is a sham.
Im one of the most liberal folks you can imagine with relaxed views on immigration, abortion, drugs, sex...a real "live and let live" kind of guy. And yet, just because I dare question the thoroughly orwellian implications of PC, you categorize me as a racist and chauvinist.
Your post is of great help to the many readers who happen upon this thread wondering about the foul tactics of the Dark-Red-PC-Brigade.edit on 2014 by Skyfloating because: (no reason given)
JuniorDisco
It wasn't me who employed the exact argument used to endorse the South African apartheid regime.
JuniorDisco
Except I didn't call you a racist or a chauvinist. So in fact you're slandering me.
You guys were there waving your silly flag and crying about progressivism when women got the vote, when they stopped making black people use different bathrooms and you're still here now.
OpenMindedRealist
Sometimes labels are even re-used but in reverse; in the 19th century, liberals stood for freedom of the individual and conservatives wanted to expand laws and power of government.
Look beyond the label. Look at the platform.
But how could this be? This was the Guardian, shrine of anti-racism, custodian of social conscience, embodiment of virtue. How then could they be guilty of racism – and moreover, dress it up as anti-racism? Of course, this is the core of what we now know today as ‘political correctness’ – where concepts are turned into their polar opposite in order to give miscreants a free pass if they belong to certain groups designated by the left as ‘victims’. They are thus deemed to be incapable of doing anything wrong, while groups designated as ‘oppressors’ can do no right. According to this double-think it was simply impossible for the Guardian folk to be guilty of racism, since they championed the victims of the Third World against their Western capitalist oppressors. But when those Third World unfortunates became the victims of the Third World tyrants ruling over them, the left remained silent – since to criticise any Third World person was said to be ‘racism’. This twisted thinking is what now passes for ‘progressive’ thinking in Britain and America. Thus the left actually abandons the oppressed of the world to their fate, all the time weeping crocodile tears for them – while sanctimoniously condemning ‘the right’ for its heartlessness! It is this hijacking of language and thought itself that has done so much to destroy any common understanding of the political ‘centre ground’, the lethal confusion that has so unfortunately polarised political debate into vacuous caricatures that have precious little to do with reality…
OpenMindedRealist
reply to post by JuniorDisco
Junior, you continue to miss the forest for the trees. Soviet propaganda was not about creating social movements, it was about co-opting existing social sentiments/trends, and setting them down a path that would undermine the US.
OpenMindedRealist
Melanie is a center-leftist
JuniorDisco
OpenMindedRealist
reply to post by JuniorDisco
Junior, you continue to miss the forest for the trees. Soviet propaganda was not about creating social movements, it was about co-opting existing social sentiments/trends, and setting them down a path that would undermine the US.
So when you said
"A convincing case can be made (for example, this thread) that American progressivism was born out of social movements which were seeded by Soviet propaganda"
you were just talking nonsense?
JuniorDisco
OpenMindedRealist
Melanie is a center-leftist
Sorry I have to go to the hospital. One of my ribs has cracked from all the laughing.
OpenMindedRealist
JuniorDisco
OpenMindedRealist
reply to post by JuniorDisco
Junior, you continue to miss the forest for the trees. Soviet propaganda was not about creating social movements, it was about co-opting existing social sentiments/trends, and setting them down a path that would undermine the US.
So when you said
"A convincing case can be made (for example, this thread) that American progressivism was born out of social movements which were seeded by Soviet propaganda"
you were just talking nonsense?
Go back and re-read those two posts of mine. I said two things: Soviet propaganda co-opted existing social trends, and that modern Progressivism is the result.
I know these are not simple concepts, but if you are going to continue replying in this thread, please make an effort to form a few connections on your own.
OpenMindedRealist
JuniorDisco
OpenMindedRealist
Melanie is a center-leftist
Sorry I have to go to the hospital. One of my ribs has cracked from all the laughing.
If you cared to read that article, you would see another quote from her book in which she describes what I call the 'spectrum drift' of political ideology over the years. What was considered far-left 50 years ago is now viewed as center-left, and what was thought of as center-right is now far-right. You've made it clear that you subscribe only to the modern spectrum.edit on 20-2-2014 by OpenMindedRealist because: (no reason given)
An article by Larry Elder in FrontPage Magazine referred to an incident on Bill Maher's Politically Incorrect where the term "white trash" was used in reference to guests on the Jerry Springer Show and asked 'Why Is It Okay to Say "White Trash?"'.[30] Commenting on this, and citing an instance of the term in a glossy magazine, blogger Ed Driscoll asked "Why Is "White Trash" An Acceptable Phrase In PC America?".[31]
In the Civitas think tank pamphlet, The Retreat of Reason: Political Correctness and the Corruption of Public Debate in Modern Britain (2006), the British politician Anthony Browne said that "the most overt racism, sexism and homophobia in Britain is now among the weakest groups, in ethnic minority communities, because their views are rarely challenged, as challenging them equates to oppressing them.[32][33] Inayat Bunglawala, media secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain, said that the opinions of Anthony Browne were misleading and ludicrous about the societal realities of the peoples who are contemporary Britain.[32]
reply to post by JuniorDisco
But if you think the entirety of liberalism is a colossal Soviet plot,
b]One might as well say that the whole of American conservatism is a racist plot funded by the Nazis.
Reductio ad Hitlerum, also argumentum ad Hitlerum (Latin for "reduction to" and "argument to" and dog Latin for "Hitler" respectively), is a term coined by conservative philosopher Leo Strauss in 1951.[1] According to Strauss, the Reductio ad Hitlerum is an informal fallacy that consists of trying to refute an opponent's view by comparing it to a view that would be held by Adolf Hitler or the Nazi Party.
where did I say that???
Now your screaming has reached a higher octave!
Reductio ad Hitlerum, also argumentum ad Hitlerum (Latin for "reduction to" and "argument to" and dog Latin for "Hitler" respectively), is a term coined by conservative philosopher Leo Strauss in 1951.[1] According to Strauss, the Reductio ad Hitlerum is an informal fallacy that consists of trying to refute an opponent's view by comparing it to a view that would be held by Adolf Hitler or the Nazi Party.