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

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

No evidence is not evidence.

True. It's a good thing I did not make an absurd claim without any verifiable proof.

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

That statement was not one of observation. It was a definitive statement.

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

If you wish to say such things, it would be best if one were able to prove what you claim. Otherwise we are left to assume you are talking out of your ass and saying it out of desire, not for the sake of logical conversation.

originally posted by: BatheInTheFountain
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

Funny. I feel the same way about the extreme Right Wing. They are at odds with the constitution and are a threat to our national interests.

I would invite ANY "Progressive" or "Liberal" to speak to anyone around 35-40 from Eastern Europe or the former Soviet Union to get an idea of where "Progressivism" leads.

I have had a good amount of friends from those regions. Tell them the 'virtues' of it. In fact, go to Europe now in most nations under attack from the very "Progressive" ideologies running them to the ground culturally and economically right as WE SPEAK.

See how well that goes.

P.S. Marxism, Maoism, Stalinism, Trotskyism, Castroism, Potism, is still them same FAILED State ideas and were considered "REVOLUTIONARY PROGRESSIVISM" of their time...

Where are they now????? Talk to some people who lived through it's FULL completion. See what they tell you. Tout it. Promote it. You might just get punched in the face. People died. A LOT.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: BatheInTheFountain
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

Funny. I feel the same way about the extreme Right Wing. They are at odds with the constitution and are a threat to our national interests.

Give an example.

From what I see extreme "Right Wingers" is vague. If you are speaking of the RELIGIOUS ideologues, you may have a point.

Otherwise what?

ETA: And make a point without emotion, hand waving, or personal opinion. I challenge you to do so.

a reply to: introvert

I can say anything I want. You can believe it or not.

I'm sorry but, most self-proclaimed Marxists I have spoken to have not read Das Capital. Should I go get these Marxists for you? In what sort of conversation am I not allowed to make that claim? What nonsense fantasy makes you think I am saying it out of desire?

You're an authoritarian, not a scientist. Your requests are absurd, not logical, nor within the realms of reasonable conversation.

Funny. I feel the same way about the extreme Right Wing. They are at odds with the constitution and are a threat to our national interests.

View the fruits of your ugly hypocrisy.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I can say anything I want. You can believe it or not.

Agreed.

I'm sorry but, most self-proclaimed Marxists I have spoken to have not read Das Capital.

Ok, it's still a logical fallacy to provide that as some sort of proof for such a definitive statement.

Your requests are absurd, not logical, nor within the realms of reasonable conversation.

It's absurd and illogical to be able to prove the claims you make? If you believe that, we have different definitions of logical.

View the fruits of your ugly hypocrisy.

So you have nothing. Got it.

Part of the issue is how we on the right view improving society v. how you on the left seem to view it. There are lots of other differences, but this is one of them.

On the right, we view societal improvement mostly as an issue of the individual. It goes person by person and needs character/moral development and education which is best accomplished by parents, schools and religious upbringing. Societal improvement is thus gradual and done one by one.

On the left, its a matter of society's moral failings - racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. And you try to accomplish instant change through political action. Instead of focusing on character education in school, the focus shifts to social issues, and societal importance on religion and personal morality and parents falls away in favor of social issues and activism. This is why when you hear the term activist, you almost always think "leftist."

Ironically, a lot of the moral failings of America (like rape culture) could be fixed if we concentrated on character development and self-control like we used to. And the more a culture slips away from having good person moral character and self-control, the more it needs to be governed by big government, which, of course, the politicians love and encourage as it enhances their power and the need for them to take more power.

a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

How about the Right Wing trying to keep certain groups of people from having Equal Application of the Law? Gay rights? That was not just a religious resistance, that was political.

How about abortion rights in which the Supreme Court ruled that a woman has the constitutional right to her own body? That was beyond religion. That was political.

They may talk about being champions of the Constitution, but it's just talk.

Example of "Progressivism" in current action:

1) A small minority of our nation, Trans-gendered, fight for a "Right" to occupy bathrooms and showers of people of the OPPOSITE gender (meaning biologically).

The RIGHTS of the host (women) are glanced over and ignored, for the "RIGHTS" of a few. Until it reaches upper courts.

This "RIGHT" (privilege or WANT) gets granted by "Progressive" leaders and the entire emotional case is made that if you oppose it, your are 'bigoted'....regardless of precedent or logic.

Until one day, you have a LAW, at local levels, which states YOUR RIGHTS...are not to be heard, and a small minority, which fought for that "RIGHT" on mostly political and sub-cultural IDENTITY grounds......WINS...and thus a new "LAW" is born.


That is just one small example of "Progressive" ideology, which is "None for thee....but for ME"

a reply to: breakingbs

You said basically that conservatives are not interested in improving things. This can only be interpreted as ignorance or an insult.

I'm sorry - ??? Can you show me the text that indicates this to you? I like to be careful about my wording.
I realize I have admitted calling myself a "progressive" - but I have also said I consider myself a "patriot."

The whole thread is about change..... is that change "improving" or "not improving" the way things are?

a reply to: introvert

Ok, it's still a logical fallacy to provide that as some sort of proof for such a definitive statement.

I wasn't making an argument, a claim, nor an assertion.

It's absurd and illogical to be able to prove the claims you make? If you believe that, we have different definitions of logical.

I wasn't making an argument, a claim, nor an assertion.

The only evidence I have is my experiences, and that's all I was sharing.

Funny. I feel the same way about the extreme Right Wing. They are at odds with the constitution and are a threat to our national interests.

Got it. As per your principles of conversation, provide your evidence so we can see the legitimacy of your claim.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

How about the Right Wing trying to keep certain groups of people from having Equal Application of the Law? Gay rights? That was not just a religious resistance, that was political.

How about abortion rights in which the Supreme Court ruled that a woman has the constitutional right to her own body? That was beyond religion. That was political.

They may talk about being champions of the Constitution, but it's just talk.

If you actually READ my previous points, I argued that those TWO policies specifically are the only ones I can tell that are LOGICAL and sensible from the "LEFT" of this world/nation.

And the ones I happen to support. But those are very Libertarian stances (arguably).

All else in the Liberal realm is FAILURE....IMO

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: breakingbs

You said basically that conservatives are not interested in improving things. This can only be interpreted as ignorance or an insult.

I'm sorry - ??? Can you show me the text that indicates this to you? I like to be careful about my wording.
I realize I have admitted calling myself a "progressive" - but I have also said I consider myself a "patriot."

The whole thread is about change..... is that change "improving" or "not improving" the way things are?

"Progressives" cannot be "Patriots"

The two ideologies are CONTRARY to each other. I've told you

a reply to: ketsuko

Ironically, a lot of the moral failings of America (like rape culture) could be fixed if we concentrated on character development and self-control like we used to. And the more a culture slips away from having good person moral character and self-control, the more it needs to be governed by big government, which, of course, the politicians love and encourage as it enhances their power and the need for them to take more power.

This is an important issue. Without the moral foundation of trustworthiness, respect, self-control etc., the economy will be abused—this according to Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Of course people can help others in their free time. I don't need a government agency to help me teach my nephew how to do something. But it's also common sense to me to have our government agencies and institutions work to help the public as much as possible. Otherwise, what's the point in a government in the first place? They already spend our tax dollars and will continue to rack up public debt either way, as both Republicans and Democrats have shown. So at least they can reallocate those funds to help the Americans who actually need the help, as opposed to allocating it to the MIC and Wall St.

Hi. My heart is up in my throat right now, after reading this.

Thank you for being here.

Progressivism not only TOLERATES the lowest common denominator in the world... but REWARDS it.

Low wages, low education, cultural upheaval, welfare thinking, special interests, violence, borderless nations, world bodies, lack of sovereignty,etc.

The 'Right" also panders to their "low Info" base too...evidenced by the very slick and cunning Trump mantras...which are based on TRUTH, but packaged in a very detailed EMOTION, like the Grubers of the Obama Admin.

Trump is slick. He's BRILLIANT.....if you actually break down his platform philosophically.

BOTH can be troublesome. But "Porgressivism" is more invasive and behind the scenes as a general accepted rule. It's under your nose without being seen, but pervasive.

I don't see "Right Wing" ideologies as COVERT, in fact they're very OVERT in nature. You can see RiGHT WING Authoritarianism coming.

"Progressivism" sneaks up behind you and slits your throat while telling you it cares for you.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

You got it! You give me hope. Thank You for that.

Collective action on the left was deemed an anathema, while collective action on the right was promoted.

While you don't eat fish, you care about someone else eating the fish. You probably don't even care if that person eating the mercury is a stranger. Others might not even give a thought that it is their own future grandchild that might ingest mercury... or whatever else pollution is out there.

And if one doesn't care who else has to eat the poison, then one is blind to the poison. And if one is blind to the poison, one will be blind to whomever put it there.

A nation forced apart, made to feel as a nation of "rugged individuals" rather than working together, makes for a nation weak against forces that will tear it apart. Forces that ultimately poison everyone, rugged individual or not.

Keep your wise and judicial outlook. The struggle never ends. Peace....and patriotism.

a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

"Progressives" cannot be "Patriots"

The two ideologies are CONTRARY to each other. I've told you

You've "told me"? LOL

I'm telling you I don't think so.
Progressives can certainly be Patriots.



Don't make me wanna change my tone.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

"Progressives" cannot be "Patriots"

The two ideologies are CONTRARY to each other. I've told you

You've "told me"? LOL

I'm telling you I don't think so.
Progressives can certainly be Patriots.



Don't make me wanna change my tone.

The two are at odds. Philosophically...as of 2016...contemporary (see; Neo Marxism) "Progressive" ideology CANNOT support Patriotism.

If this were a thread about extreme RIGHT WING ideology, I could spend an hour how THAT ideology is itself approaching the line of bounds also....but you asked a specific question.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

"Progressives" cannot be "Patriots"

The two ideologies are CONTRARY to each other. I've told you

You've "told me"? LOL

I'm telling you I don't think so.
Progressives can certainly be Patriots.



Don't make me wanna change my tone.

Also, I am speaking about "Progressivism" as defined by current understanding. You may have a different idea of what that entails.

My 'opinion' is from evidenced current and past activity and belief.

One can say 'Liberalism" but I refuse to really give you guys that honor since the NEO-LEFT are not the true Liberals, Libertarians are....period.

Your "side" is a completely different animal. Like comparing Salafist Sunni Muslims to traditional Levant Moderate, even dare I say, "Peaceful" Muslims (on paper)

Your "side" are political Jihadists of the 21st Century. "Progressive" is a pejorative IMO.