One step closer to understanding the disease called Progressivism.

[PredFan]

The United States became the greatest country in the world, because it progressed versus going backwards.

 

[kiwiman127]

The United States became the greatest country in the world, because it progressed versus going backwards.

Went over your head, didn't it?

 

[peach174]

The United States became the greatest country in the world, because it progressed versus going backwards.

But thanks to the progressives in both parties we are regressing not progressing.
We have so many laws and regulations that they are staring to contradict each other.
It's gotten so bad that no matter what you do now you are breaking some law or regulation, that is not freedom.

 

[PredFan]

The United States became the greatest country in the world, because it progressed versus going backwards.

Went over your head, didn't it?

No, it's just stupid.

 

[Pogo]

And there we go!

And used wrongly too.

The most effective way to defeat a Prog is to keep them on task. Don't allow them to smoke screen or deflect. If you dismiss their attempts at dragging the argument off point, they cannot win.

No they can't win if required to argue the concept instead of focusing on their opponent in the debate, but that has been almost impossible to achieve on a message board. On my "A New and Improved Constitution" thread, it has remained mostly cordial, but despite my best efforts to keep the discussion on point, the progressives simply can't help themselves. They simply HAVE to point to 'eeeeeeevul' Republicans or Tea Party extremism or greedy, hateful conservatism as the reason that everything is screwed up and if everybody just embraced progressivism, the world would be a much better place. They simply are unable to argue any concept offered at face value but will almost 100% consistently drag the ad hominem element into it.

Why? Because I believe they most often operate on pure emotionalism, judgmentalism, and delusions of righteousness and are incapable of arguing a rationale for a policy or point of view apart from that ad hominem mindset.

How does calling out a strawman become "ad hominem"?
Who said anything about "eeeeeeevul" or "Republicans"? Besides the OP who won't explain his terms?

How is it OK to post a thread referring to "the disease called progressivism", which is "called" but never "defined" ---- yet it somehow becomes "ad hominem" to refer to a strawman, which IS defined?

Hm?

Progressivism defined
The Progressives were reformers in the late 19th and early 20th century who believed that in order to address modern problems, America needed to abandon the old ideas of the Founding in favor of a new expansive conception of the role of government. Progressives paved the way for modern liberalism and politics, and their core ideas are still the mainstay of today’s liberalism.

Hence my reference to Nosebook being around a hundred years ago. Funny that the OP couldn't define his own term. Wonder if he agrees with it. Guess we'll never know.

Thanks Peach -- is there a link to whose definition this is, or is it yours?

The only possible reason you would want that information is so that you can attack.

Attack WHAT, Peach?? OP refuses to say what he's talking about. If there's nothing there, what's to "attack"?

You want my reason? Here it is: I object to intellectual sloth. You don't get to speak in riddles and vague insinuations, dance around ever having to define your terms, and then claim you think you made some kind of point. THAT is what my reason is.

HERE is exactly what I'm talking about:

I doesn't need definition numbskull. Maybe to YOU it does but you are a progressive and no one gives a shit about your opinions here.

According to Foxfyre's guideline above, PF has just identified himself as a "progressive" by virtue of ad hominem.

But that still doesn't tell us what it means. He's also declared me "a progressive" while in the same post making abundantly clear he doesn't intend to define what the hell that means.

And that is absolute rhetorical bullshit.

 

[rdean]

I discovered this important fact about those people who are in the throes of Progressivism when I was arguing a few minutes ago on FaceBook.

A certain scientist who happens to be an outspoken atheist, had said something about Christmas that irritated Christians.

I realized that progressives compensate for thier lack of knowledge, critical thinking skills, and common sense by idol worshipping people with degrees. Apparently they feel that by liking, sharing, and quoting the opinions and beliefs of people with a college education makes them appear smart.

Interesting. Perhaps by understanding the people suffering from progressivism, we get closer to a cure.

Conservatives want nothing to change. It's insane to try to keep change from happening. Change is a part of this world and change is the only thing that doesn't change.

 

[Pogo]

For the purpose of this discussion, I believe the author of the OP and others who have been participating in that discussion will agree that Progressives--and I don't CARE whether the word is capitalized or not--are defined as those who describe themselves as such. I think it is probably safe to say that those who have been arguing ad hominem and are doing their dangdest to change the subject or divert from the thesis of the OP and who are refusing to discuss it probably all fall within that definition.

Here's why the upper or lower case P matters....

"Progressives" (proper noun) refers to the proponents of a political trend of approximately a hundred years ago, as articulated by Peach in post 25. That's a different thing from "progressive" (small p), which is an adjective, meaning "of, relating to, or characterized by progress" -- a state of improvement or gradual growth.

Now these people no one can identify call themselves... what? "Progressives"? or "progressive" (people)?



I would have thought, Foxy, that one discerning enough to habitually make the distinction between Democratic/democratic and Libertarian/libertarian would have grasped this concept right away. That's why I brought it up.


Far as any rational point making is concerned, until what it's talking about is defined this thread has yet to move past post one, because it has yet to articulate its opening thought.

 

[PredFan]

I discovered this important fact about those people who are in the throes of Progressivism when I was arguing a few minutes ago on FaceBook.

A certain scientist who happens to be an outspoken atheist, had said something about Christmas that irritated Christians.

I realized that progressives compensate for thier lack of knowledge, critical thinking skills, and common sense by idol worshipping people with degrees. Apparently they feel that by liking, sharing, and quoting the opinions and beliefs of people with a college education makes them appear smart.

Interesting. Perhaps by understanding the people suffering from progressivism, we get closer to a cure.

Conservatives want nothing to change. It's insane to try to keep change from happening. Change is a part of this world and change is the only thing that doesn't change.

Totally wrong. Thanks for coming here are supplying another fine example of progressive stupidity. Got any more?

 

[peach174]

I discovered this important fact about those people who are in the throes of Progressivism when I was arguing a few minutes ago on FaceBook.

A certain scientist who happens to be an outspoken atheist, had said something about Christmas that irritated Christians.

I realized that progressives compensate for thier lack of knowledge, critical thinking skills, and common sense by idol worshipping people with degrees. Apparently they feel that by liking, sharing, and quoting the opinions and beliefs of people with a college education makes them appear smart.

Interesting. Perhaps by understanding the people suffering from progressivism, we get closer to a cure.

Conservatives want nothing to change. It's insane to try to keep change from happening. Change is a part of this world and change is the only thing that doesn't change.

Sure they do.
Conservatives want this country to prosper by continuing to have advances in everything from technology to good education.
Liberals want nothing to change. They refuse to accept the fact the government is too big and needs to be scaled down so that we can pay off our debt, not just bring down the deficit.
Just because Conservatives want to keep our freedom and wants congress to obey our Constitution, does not mean they don't want change, which is called progress.

 

[peach174]

For the purpose of this discussion, I believe the author of the OP and others who have been participating in that discussion will agree that Progressives--and I don't CARE whether the word is capitalized or not--are defined as those who describe themselves as such. I think it is probably safe to say that those who have been arguing ad hominem and are doing their dangdest to change the subject or divert from the thesis of the OP and who are refusing to discuss it probably all fall within that definition.

Here's why the upper or lower case P matters....

"Progressives" (proper noun) refers to the proponents of a political trend of approximately a hundred years ago, as articulated by Peach in post 25. That's a different thing from "progressive" (small p), which is an adjective, meaning "of, relating to, or characterized by progress" -- a state of improvement or gradual growth.

Now these people no one can identify call themselves... what? "Progressives"? or "progressive" (people)?



I would have thought, Foxy, that one discerning enough to habitually make the distinction between Democratic/democratic and Libertarian/libertarian would have grasped this concept right away. That's why I brought it up.


Far as any rational point making is concerned, until what it's talking about is defined this thread has yet to move past post one, because it has yet to articulate its opening thought.

You are right about the proper spelling of Progressives but that is what the Liberals are starting to call themselves again. Even they don't know the real difference of the original Progressives verses the Liberals of today.
Progressives from 100 years ago still had traditional morals. The Liberals of today do not, they believe in self expression, especially sexual liberation and they are obsessed with equality done by government.

We are not in a classroom Pogo, we are on a political message board and when they use the word Progressives or progressives they are talking about the ideology of the Democrats.
I understand where you are coming from, to make that distinction in order to make it absolutely clear though.
Most Americans want this country to have progress but we can't do that until we start to pay down out Debt, not just our Deficit.
Todays Democrats no longer has representation for Moderates or Conservatives.
Conservative Dem's know that all to well because they fought them for over 20 years to get more Conservative Democrat representation. They gave up and left the party.

 

[Foxfyre]

For the purpose of this discussion, I believe the author of the OP and others who have been participating in that discussion will agree that Progressives--and I don't CARE whether the word is capitalized or not--are defined as those who describe themselves as such. I think it is probably safe to say that those who have been arguing ad hominem and are doing their dangdest to change the subject or divert from the thesis of the OP and who are refusing to discuss it probably all fall within that definition.

Here's why the upper or lower case P matters....

"Progressives" (proper noun) refers to the proponents of a political trend of approximately a hundred years ago, as articulated by Peach in post 25. That's a different thing from "progressive" (small p), which is an adjective, meaning "of, relating to, or characterized by progress" -- a state of improvement or gradual growth.

Now these people no one can identify call themselves... what? "Progressives"? or "progressive" (people)?



I would have thought, Foxy, that one discerning enough to habitually make the distinction between Democratic/democratic and Libertarian/libertarian would have grasped this concept right away. That's why I brought it up.


Far as any rational point making is concerned, until what it's talking about is defined this thread has yet to move past post one, because it has yet to articulate its opening thought.

You are right about the proper spelling of Progressives but that is what the Liberals are starting to call themselves again. Even they don't know the real difference of the original Progressives verses the Liberals of today.
Progressives from 100 years ago still had traditional morals. The Liberals of today do not, they believe in self expression, especially sexual liberation and they are obsessed with equality done by government.

We are not in a classroom Pogo, we are on a political message board and when they use the word Progressives or progressives they are talking about the ideology of the Democrats.
I understand where you are coming from, to make that distinction in order to make it absolutely clear though.
Most Americans want this country to have progress but we can't do that until we start to pay down out Debt, not just our Deficit.
Todays Democrats no longer has representation for Moderates or Conservatives.
Conservative Dem's know that all to well because they fought them for over 20 years to get more Conservative Democrat representation. They gave up and left the party.

Yep. I simply won't get into a battle of semantics or definitions or what capitalization does or does not mean. Those who want to nitpick and split hairs and make THAT the important thing should start threads and hash that out as a separate topic. But it is a favorite ploy of some progressive types to use that to deflect from the topic or concept being discussed. Which of course has already been discussed in this thread.

I differentiate between libertarianism (little "L") and Libertarianism (capital "L") because these are two very different animals in modern day America. One represents the values of liberty or classical liberalism as promoted and understood by the Founders and others with whom they shared a particular point of view. The other represents a political party with an agenda that I cannot fully embrace.

Progressives (capital "P") and progressivm with or without capitalizations are understood as one and the same in modern day vernacular. There is no Progressive party.

When I debate on these issues of policy and ideology and, in this case, why and how 'progressives' and 'progressivism' are doing more harm than good, I am using the term with or without captalization based on how the term is defined, understood, and used in modern day vernacular in America, I make no distinction between Progressives or progressivism. If I capitalize Progressive I am identifying a particular group of Americans who embrace progressivism sometimes also referred to as leftists or liberals or statists or political class as those terms are understood and used in modern day America. Those who don't like the terms I use to express my point of view certainly don't have to use them, but I will use them because they ARE the modern day vernacular.

 

[Pogo]

I discovered this important fact about those people who are in the throes of Progressivism when I was arguing a few minutes ago on FaceBook.

A certain scientist who happens to be an outspoken atheist, had said something about Christmas that irritated Christians.

I realized that progressives compensate for thier lack of knowledge, critical thinking skills, and common sense by idol worshipping people with degrees. Apparently they feel that by liking, sharing, and quoting the opinions and beliefs of people with
a college education makes them appear smart.

Interesting. Perhaps by understanding the people suffering from progressivism, we get closer to a cure.

Conservatives want nothing to change. It's insane to try to keep change from happening. Change is a part of this world and change is the only thing that doesn't change.

Totally wrong. Thanks for coming here are supplying another fine example of progressive stupidity. Got any more?

Once again.... QED. ^^

 

[Pogo]

I discovered this important fact about those people who are in the throes of Progressivism when I was arguing a few minutes ago on FaceBook.

A certain scientist who happens to be an outspoken atheist, had said something about Christmas that irritated Christians.

I realized that progressives compensate for thier lack of knowledge, critical thinking skills, and common sense by idol worshipping people with degrees. Apparently they feel that by liking, sharing, and quoting the opinions and beliefs of people with a college education makes them appear smart.

Interesting. Perhaps by understanding the people suffering from progressivism, we get closer to a cure.

Conservatives want nothing to change. It's insane to try to keep change from happening. Change is a part of this world and change is the only thing that doesn't change.

Sure they do.
Conservatives want this country to prosper by continuing to have advances in everything from technology to good education.
Liberals want nothing to change. They refuse to accept the fact the government is too big and needs to be scaled down so that we can pay off our debt, not just bring down the deficit.
Just because Conservatives want to keep our freedom and wants congress to obey our Constitution, does not mean they don't want change, which is called progress.

Indeed. And the adjective that describes the state of "progress" is.... progressive.

So we are still left in the definitional Void.

 

[Pogo]

For the purpose of this discussion, I believe the author of the OP and others who have been participating in that discussion will agree that Progressives--and I don't CARE whether the word is capitalized or not--are defined as those who describe themselves as such. I think it is probably safe to say that those who have been arguing ad hominem and are doing their dangdest to change the subject or divert from the thesis of the OP and who are refusing to discuss it probably all fall within that definition.

Here's why the upper or lower case P matters....

"Progressives" (proper noun) refers to the proponents of a political trend of approximately a hundred years ago, as articulated by Peach in post 25. That's a different thing from "progressive" (small p), which is an adjective, meaning "of, relating to, or characterized by progress" -- a state of improvement or gradual growth.

Now these people no one can identify call themselves... what? "Progressives"? or "progressive" (people)?



I would have thought, Foxy, that one discerning enough to habitually make the distinction between Democratic/democratic and Libertarian/libertarian would have grasped this concept right away. That's why I brought it up.


Far as any rational point making is concerned, until what it's talking about is defined this thread has yet to move past post one, because it has yet to articulate its opening thought.

You are right about the proper spelling of Progressives but that is what the Liberals are starting to call themselves again. Even they don't know the real difference of the original Progressives verses the Liberals of today.
Progressives from 100 years ago still had traditional morals. The Liberals of today do not, they believe in self expression, especially sexual liberation and they are obsessed with equality done by government.

We are not in a classroom Pogo, we are on a political message board and when they use the word Progressives or progressives they are talking about the ideology of the Democrats.
I understand where you are coming from, to make that distinction in order to make it absolutely clear though.
Most Americans want this country to have progress but we can't do that until we start to pay down out Debt, not just our Deficit.
Todays Democrats no longer has representation for Moderates or Conservatives.
Conservative Dem's know that all to well because they fought them for over 20 years to get more Conservative Democrat representation. They gave up and left the party.

So does all this mean the word "Progressive" means "Democrat"? If so, why not just say "Democrat"? After all "Progressive" has already been used a century ago and at the time applied to both Democrats and Republicans. Kinda confusing using a term to mean opposite and conflicting things, doncha think?

I still don't know who calls him/herself "progressive" (or as a noun requiring an article, "a Progressive") but this is the reason I bring it up: I suspect where one does, they're using the adjective, to articulate a contrast from regressive, implying nothing more than "your way takes us backward, I wanna go forward". Not invoking some kind of imaginary Movement of some sort.

I submit, again, that the reason the OP cannot define his term is that he doesn't know what it means. It becomes nothing more than rhetorical poo, like "communist", "fascist" or "retard". Facile ad homs available for flinging without the responsibility of definition. And that's not discourse.

I submit that "progressive" (the adjective) is naught but a synonym for "forward-thinking". The only "Progressives" (the noun) that weren't with us a century ago are these folks:

 

[Pogo]

For the purpose of this discussion, I believe the author of the OP and others who have been participating in that discussion will agree that Progressives--and I don't CARE whether the word is capitalized or not--are defined as those who describe themselves as such. I think it is probably safe to say that those who have been arguing ad hominem and are doing their dangdest to change the subject or divert from the thesis of the OP and who are refusing to discuss it probably all fall within that definition.

Here's why the upper or lower case P matters....

"Progressives" (proper noun) refers to the proponents of a political trend of approximately a hundred years ago, as articulated by Peach in post 25. That's a different thing from "progressive" (small p), which is an adjective, meaning "of, relating to, or characterized by progress" -- a state of improvement or gradual growth.

Now these people no one can identify call themselves... what? "Progressives"? or "progressive" (people)?



I would have thought, Foxy, that one discerning enough to habitually make the distinction between Democratic/democratic and Libertarian/libertarian would have grasped this concept right away. That's why I brought it up.


Far as any rational point making is concerned, until what it's talking about is defined this thread has yet to move past post one, because it has yet to articulate its opening thought.

You are right about the proper spelling of Progressives but that is what the Liberals are starting to call themselves again. Even they don't know the real difference of the original Progressives verses the Liberals of today.
Progressives from 100 years ago still had traditional morals. The Liberals of today do not, they believe in self expression, especially sexual liberation and they are obsessed with equality done by government.

We are not in a classroom Pogo, we are on a political message board and when they use the word Progressives or progressives they are talking about the ideology of the Democrats.
I understand where you are coming from, to make that distinction in order to make it absolutely clear though.
Most Americans want this country to have progress but we can't do that until we start to pay down out Debt, not just our Deficit.
Todays Democrats no longer has representation for Moderates or Conservatives.
Conservative Dem's know that all to well because they fought them for over 20 years to get more Conservative Democrat representation. They gave up and left the party.

Yep. I simply won't get into a battle of semantics or definitions or what capitalization does or does not mean. Those who want to nitpick and split hairs and make THAT the important thing should start threads and hash that out as a separate topic. But it is a favorite ploy of some progressive types to use that to deflect from the topic or concept being discussed. Which of course has already been discussed in this thread.

There is no topic established where terms have not been defined. Nothing has been discussed here.

Which reminds me I'm still on the crusade to stamp out Greeblings and Meezledorfs. Are you with us or against us?
See how that works?

I differentiate between libertarianism (little "L") and Libertarianism (capital "L") because these are two very different animals in modern day America. One represents the values of liberty or classical liberalism as promoted and understood by the Founders and others with whom they shared a particular point of view. The other represents a political party with an agenda that I cannot fully embrace.

Progressives (capital "P") and progressivm with or without capitalizations are understood as one and the same in modern day vernacular. There is no Progressive party.

Indeed there isn't, nor is there such a movement just because you (or Glenn Beck) makes one up. If it exists, it can be defined. If not, not. This one doesn't seem definable. Peach above says it means "Democrats" but from what you have here it means the historical sense. Those don't agree with each other. So we still have nothing.

When I debate on these issues of policy and ideology and, in this case, why and how 'progressives' and 'progressivism' are doing more harm than good, I am using the term with or without captalization based on how the term is defined, understood, and used in modern day vernacular in America, I make no distinction between Progressives or progressivism. If I capitalize Progressive I am identifying a particular group of Americans who embrace progressivism sometimes also referred to as leftists or liberals or statists or political class as those terms are understood and used in modern day America. Those who don't like the terms I use to express my point of view certainly don't have to use them, but I will use them because they ARE the modern day vernacular.

-- that has apparently no definition, and therefore does not exist.

 

[Foxfyre]

For the purpose of this discussion, I believe the author of the OP and others who have been participating in that discussion will agree that Progressives--and I don't CARE whether the word is capitalized or not--are defined as those who describe themselves as such. I think it is probably safe to say that those who have been arguing ad hominem and are doing their dangdest to change the subject or divert from the thesis of the OP and who are refusing to discuss it probably all fall within that definition.

Here's why the upper or lower case P matters....

"Progressives" (proper noun) refers to the proponents of a political trend of approximately a hundred years ago, as articulated by Peach in post 25. That's a different thing from "progressive" (small p), which is an adjective, meaning "of, relating to, or characterized by progress" -- a state of improvement or gradual growth.

Now these people no one can identify call themselves... what? "Progressives"? or "progressive" (people)?



I would have thought, Foxy, that one discerning enough to habitually make the distinction between Democratic/democratic and Libertarian/libertarian would have grasped this concept right away. That's why I brought it up.


Far as any rational point making is concerned, until what it's talking about is defined this thread has yet to move past post one, because it has yet to articulate its opening thought.

You are right about the proper spelling of Progressives but that is what the Liberals are starting to call themselves again. Even they don't know the real difference of the original Progressives verses the Liberals of today.
Progressives from 100 years ago still had traditional morals. The Liberals of today do not, they believe in self expression, especially sexual liberation and they are obsessed with equality done by government.

We are not in a classroom Pogo, we are on a political message board and when they use the word Progressives or progressives they are talking about the ideology of the Democrats.
I understand where you are coming from, to make that distinction in order to make it absolutely clear though.
Most Americans want this country to have progress but we can't do that until we start to pay down out Debt, not just our Deficit.
Todays Democrats no longer has representation for Moderates or Conservatives.
Conservative Dem's know that all to well because they fought them for over 20 years to get more Conservative Democrat representation. They gave up and left the party.

Yep. I simply won't get into a battle of semantics or definitions or what capitalization does or does not mean. Those who want to nitpick and split hairs and make THAT the important thing should start threads and hash that out as a separate topic. But it is a favorite ploy of some progressive types to use that to deflect from the topic or concept being discussed. Which of course has already been discussed in this thread.

There is no topic established where terms have not been defined. Nothing has been discussed here.

Which reminds me I'm still on the crusade to stamp out Greeblings and Meezledorfs. Are you with us or against us?
See how that works?

I differentiate between libertarianism (little "L") and Libertarianism (capital "L") because these are two very different animals in modern day America. One represents the values of liberty or classical liberalism as promoted and understood by the Founders and others with whom they shared a particular point of view. The other represents a political party with an agenda that I cannot fully embrace.

Progressives (capital "P") and progressivm with or without capitalizations are understood as one and the same in modern day vernacular. There is no Progressive party.

Indeed there isn't, nor is there such a movement just because you (or Glenn Beck) makes one up. If it exists, it can be defined. If not, not. This one doesn't seem definable. Peach above says it means "Democrats" but from what you have here it means the historical sense. Those don't agree with each other. So we still have nothing.

When I debate on these issues of policy and ideology and, in this case, why and how 'progressives' and 'progressivism' are doing more harm than good, I am using the term with or without captalization based on how the term is defined, understood, and used in modern day vernacular in America, I make no distinction between Progressives or progressivism. If I capitalize Progressive I am identifying a particular group of Americans who embrace progressivism sometimes also referred to as leftists or liberals or statists or political class as those terms are understood and used in modern day America. Those who don't like the terms I use to express my point of view certainly don't have to use them, but I will use them because they ARE the modern day vernacular.

-- that has apparently no definition, and therefore does not exist.

You will understand if I take the position that just because you don't understand a term and therefore say it does not exist, despite how many definitions have been furnished to you over the months, and because you refuse to look it up yourself, I am under no obligation to accept that your opinion about it has any validity whatsoever?

 

[Foxfyre]

For the purpose of this discussion, I believe the author of the OP and others who have been participating in that discussion will agree that Progressives--and I don't CARE whether the word is capitalized or not--are defined as those who describe themselves as such. I think it is probably safe to say that those who have been arguing ad hominem and are doing their dangdest to change the subject or divert from the thesis of the OP and who are refusing to discuss it probably all fall within that definition.

Here's why the upper or lower case P matters....

"Progressives" (proper noun) refers to the proponents of a political trend of approximately a hundred years ago, as articulated by Peach in post 25. That's a different thing from "progressive" (small p), which is an adjective, meaning "of, relating to, or characterized by progress" -- a state of improvement or gradual growth.

Now these people no one can identify call themselves... what? "Progressives"? or "progressive" (people)?



I would have thought, Foxy, that one discerning enough to habitually make the distinction between Democratic/democratic and Libertarian/libertarian would have grasped this concept right away. That's why I brought it up.


Far as any rational point making is concerned, until what it's talking about is defined this thread has yet to move past post one, because it has yet to articulate its opening thought.

You are right about the proper spelling of Progressives but that is what the Liberals are starting to call themselves again. Even they don't know the real difference of the original Progressives verses the Liberals of today.
Progressives from 100 years ago still had traditional morals. The Liberals of today do not, they believe in self expression, especially sexual liberation and they are obsessed with equality done by government.

We are not in a classroom Pogo, we are on a political message board and when they use the word Progressives or progressives they are talking about the ideology of the Democrats.
I understand where you are coming from, to make that distinction in order to make it absolutely clear though.
Most Americans want this country to have progress but we can't do that until we start to pay down out Debt, not just our Deficit.
Todays Democrats no longer has representation for Moderates or Conservatives.
Conservative Dem's know that all to well because they fought them for over 20 years to get more Conservative Democrat representation. They gave up and left the party.

So does all this mean the word "Progressive" means "Democrat"? If so, why not just say "Democrat"? After all "Progressive" has already been used a century ago and at the time applied to both Democrats and Republicans. Kinda confusing using a term to mean opposite and conflicting things, doncha think?

I still don't know who calls him/herself "progressive" (or as a noun requiring an article, "a Progressive") but this is the reason I bring it up: I suspect where one does, they're using the adjective, to articulate a contrast from regressive, implying nothing more than "your way takes us backward, I wanna go forward". Not invoking some kind of imaginary Movement of some sort.

I submit, again, that the reason the OP cannot define his term is that he doesn't know what it means. It becomes nothing more than rhetorical poo, like "communist", "fascist" or "retard". Facile ad homs available for flinging without the responsibility of definition. And that's not discourse.

I submit that "progressive" (the adjective) is naught but a synonym for "forward-thinking". The only "Progressives" (the noun) that weren't with us a century ago are these folks:

Sorry, but I just can't be as anal as you seem to be re capitalization. I accept that such seems to make you happy and keeps you busy however.

And no, Progressive or progressive does not mean Democrat or democrat. In modern American vernacular as it is understood by those who have educated themselves on the subject, it is synonymous with leftist, statist, liberal, political class. Many if not most Democrats are progressive however.

 

[Pogo]

For the purpose of this discussion, I believe the author of the OP and others who have been participating in that discussion will agree that Progressives--and I don't CARE whether the word is capitalized or not--are defined as those who describe themselves as such. I think it is probably safe to say that those who have been arguing ad hominem and are doing their dangdest to change the subject or divert from the thesis of the OP and who are refusing to discuss it probably all fall within that definition.

Here's why the upper or lower case P matters....

"Progressives" (proper noun) refers to the proponents of a political trend of approximately a hundred years ago, as articulated by Peach in post 25. That's a different thing from "progressive" (small p), which is an adjective, meaning "of, relating to, or characterized by progress" -- a state of improvement or gradual growth.

Now these people no one can identify call themselves... what? "Progressives"? or "progressive" (people)?



I would have thought, Foxy, that one discerning enough to habitually make the distinction between Democratic/democratic and Libertarian/libertarian would have grasped this concept right away. That's why I brought it up.


Far as any rational point making is concerned, until what it's talking about is defined this thread has yet to move past post one, because it has yet to articulate its opening thought.

You are right about the proper spelling of Progressives but that is what the Liberals are starting to call themselves again. Even they don't know the real difference of the original Progressives verses the Liberals of today.
Progressives from 100 years ago still had traditional morals. The Liberals of today do not, they believe in self expression, especially sexual liberation and they are obsessed with equality done by government.

We are not in a classroom Pogo, we are on a political message board and when they use the word Progressives or progressives they are talking about the ideology of the Democrats.
I understand where you are coming from, to make that distinction in order to make it absolutely clear though.
Most Americans want this country to have progress but we can't do that until we start to pay down out Debt, not just our Deficit.
Todays Democrats no longer has representation for Moderates or Conservatives.
Conservative Dem's know that all to well because they fought them for over 20 years to get more Conservative Democrat representation. They gave up and left the party.

Yep. I simply won't get into a battle of semantics or definitions or what capitalization does or does not mean. Those who want to nitpick and split hairs and make THAT the important thing should start threads and hash that out as a separate topic. But it is a favorite ploy of some progressive types to use that to deflect from the topic or concept being discussed. Which of course has already been discussed in this thread.

There is no topic established where terms have not been defined. Nothing has been discussed here.

Which reminds me I'm still on the crusade to stamp out Greeblings and Meezledorfs. Are you with us or against us?
See how that works?

I differentiate between libertarianism (little "L") and Libertarianism (capital "L") because these are two very different animals in modern day America. One represents the values of liberty or classical liberalism as promoted and understood by the Founders and others with whom they shared a particular point of view. The other represents a political party with an agenda that I cannot fully embrace.

Progressives (capital "P") and progressivm with or without capitalizations are understood as one and the same in modern day vernacular. There is no Progressive party.

Indeed there isn't, nor is there such a movement just because you (or Glenn Beck) makes one up. If it exists, it can be defined. If not, not. This one doesn't seem definable. Peach above says it means "Democrats" but from what you have here it means the historical sense. Those don't agree with each other. So we still have nothing.

When I debate on these issues of policy and ideology and, in this case, why and how 'progressives' and 'progressivism' are doing more harm than good, I am using the term with or without captalization based on how the term is defined, understood, and used in modern day vernacular in America, I make no distinction between Progressives or progressivism. If I capitalize Progressive I am identifying a particular group of Americans who embrace progressivism sometimes also referred to as leftists or liberals or statists or political class as those terms are understood and used in modern day America. Those who don't like the terms I use to express my point of view certainly don't have to use them, but I will use them because they ARE the modern day vernacular.

-- that has apparently no definition, and therefore does not exist.

You will understand if I take the position that just because you don't understand a term and therefore say it does not exist, despite how many definitions have been furnished to you over the months, and because you refuse to look it up yourself, I am under no obligation to accept that your opinion about it has any validity whatsoever?

Whether I understand it is irrelevant. Whether those who actually use the term --- which isn't me -- can understand it, is crucial. Because if you don't -- you can't.

 

[Pogo]

For the purpose of this discussion, I believe the author of the OP and others who have been participating in that discussion will agree that Progressives--and I don't CARE whether the word is capitalized or not--are defined as those who describe themselves as such. I think it is probably safe to say that those who have been arguing ad hominem and are doing their dangdest to change the subject or divert from the thesis of the OP and who are refusing to discuss it probably all fall within that definition.

Here's why the upper or lower case P matters....

"Progressives" (proper noun) refers to the proponents of a political trend of approximately a hundred years ago, as articulated by Peach in post 25. That's a different thing from "progressive" (small p), which is an adjective, meaning "of, relating to, or characterized by progress" -- a state of improvement or gradual growth.

Now these people no one can identify call themselves... what? "Progressives"? or "progressive" (people)?



I would have thought, Foxy, that one discerning enough to habitually make the distinction between Democratic/democratic and Libertarian/libertarian would have grasped this concept right away. That's why I brought it up.


Far as any rational point making is concerned, until what it's talking about is defined this thread has yet to move past post one, because it has yet to articulate its opening thought.

You are right about the proper spelling of Progressives but that is what the Liberals are starting to call themselves again. Even they don't know the real difference of the original Progressives verses the Liberals of today.
Progressives from 100 years ago still had traditional morals. The Liberals of today do not, they believe in self expression, especially sexual liberation and they are obsessed with equality done by government.

We are not in a classroom Pogo, we are on a political message board and when they use the word Progressives or progressives they are talking about the ideology of the Democrats.
I understand where you are coming from, to make that distinction in order to make it absolutely clear though.
Most Americans want this country to have progress but we can't do that until we start to pay down out Debt, not just our Deficit.
Todays Democrats no longer has representation for Moderates or Conservatives.
Conservative Dem's know that all to well because they fought them for over 20 years to get more Conservative Democrat representation. They gave up and left the party.

So does all this mean the word "Progressive" means "Democrat"? If so, why not just say "Democrat"? After all "Progressive" has already been used a century ago and at the time applied to both Democrats and Republicans. Kinda confusing using a term to mean opposite and conflicting things, doncha think?

I still don't know who calls him/herself "progressive" (or as a noun requiring an article, "a Progressive") but this is the reason I bring it up: I suspect where one does, they're using the adjective, to articulate a contrast from regressive, implying nothing more than "your way takes us backward, I wanna go forward". Not invoking some kind of imaginary Movement of some sort.

I submit, again, that the reason the OP cannot define his term is that he doesn't know what it means. It becomes nothing more than rhetorical poo, like "communist", "fascist" or "retard". Facile ad homs available for flinging without the responsibility of definition. And that's not discourse.

I submit that "progressive" (the adjective) is naught but a synonym for "forward-thinking". The only "Progressives" (the noun) that weren't with us a century ago are these folks:

Sorry, but I just can't be as anal as you seem to be re capitalization. I accept that such seems to make you happy and keeps you busy however.

And no, Progressive or progressive does not mean Democrat or democrat. In modern American vernacular as it is understood by those who have educated themselves on the subject, it is synonymous with leftist, statist, liberal, political class. Many if not most Democrats are progressive however.

Once again weasel words. Your synonyms aren't even synonymous with each other.

Just a simple definition, that's all we need. Something that can identify person A is a "Progressive", person B is not. Something with a little more substance than "most Democrats are progressive but I can't say what that means' .

 

[Foxfyre]

Here's why the upper or lower case P matters....

"Progressives" (proper noun) refers to the proponents of a political trend of approximately a hundred years ago, as articulated by Peach in post 25. That's a different thing from "progressive" (small p), which is an adjective, meaning "of, relating to, or characterized by progress" -- a state of improvement or gradual growth.

Now these people no one can identify call themselves... what? "Progressives"? or "progressive" (people)?



I would have thought, Foxy, that one discerning enough to habitually make the distinction between Democratic/democratic and Libertarian/libertarian would have grasped this concept right away. That's why I brought it up.


Far as any rational point making is concerned, until what it's talking about is defined this thread has yet to move past post one, because it has yet to articulate its opening thought.

You are right about the proper spelling of Progressives but that is what the Liberals are starting to call themselves again. Even they don't know the real difference of the original Progressives verses the Liberals of today.
Progressives from 100 years ago still had traditional morals. The Liberals of today do not, they believe in self expression, especially sexual liberation and they are obsessed with equality done by government.

We are not in a classroom Pogo, we are on a political message board and when they use the word Progressives or progressives they are talking about the ideology of the Democrats.
I understand where you are coming from, to make that distinction in order to make it absolutely clear though.
Most Americans want this country to have progress but we can't do that until we start to pay down out Debt, not just our Deficit.
Todays Democrats no longer has representation for Moderates or Conservatives.
Conservative Dem's know that all to well because they fought them for over 20 years to get more Conservative Democrat representation. They gave up and left the party.

Yep. I simply won't get into a battle of semantics or definitions or what capitalization does or does not mean. Those who want to nitpick and split hairs and make THAT the important thing should start threads and hash that out as a separate topic. But it is a favorite ploy of some progressive types to use that to deflect from the topic or concept being discussed. Which of course has already been discussed in this thread.

There is no topic established where terms have not been defined. Nothing has been discussed here.

Which reminds me I'm still on the crusade to stamp out Greeblings and Meezledorfs. Are you with us or against us?
See how that works?

I differentiate between libertarianism (little "L") and Libertarianism (capital "L") because these are two very different animals in modern day America. One represents the values of liberty or classical liberalism as promoted and understood by the Founders and others with whom they shared a particular point of view. The other represents a political party with an agenda that I cannot fully embrace.

Progressives (capital "P") and progressivm with or without capitalizations are understood as one and the same in modern day vernacular. There is no Progressive party.

Indeed there isn't, nor is there such a movement just because you (or Glenn Beck) makes one up. If it exists, it can be defined. If not, not. This one doesn't seem definable. Peach above says it means "Democrats" but from what you have here it means the historical sense. Those don't agree with each other. So we still have nothing.

When I debate on these issues of policy and ideology and, in this case, why and how 'progressives' and 'progressivism' are doing more harm than good, I am using the term with or without captalization based on how the term is defined, understood, and used in modern day vernacular in America, I make no distinction between Progressives or progressivism. If I capitalize Progressive I am identifying a particular group of Americans who embrace progressivism sometimes also referred to as leftists or liberals or statists or political class as those terms are understood and used in modern day America. Those who don't like the terms I use to express my point of view certainly don't have to use them, but I will use them because they ARE the modern day vernacular.

-- that has apparently no definition, and therefore does not exist.

You will understand if I take the position that just because you don't understand a term and therefore say it does not exist, despite how many definitions have been furnished to you over the months, and because you refuse to look it up yourself, I am under no obligation to accept that your opinion about it has any validity whatsoever?

Whether I understand it is irrelevant. Whether those who actually use the term --- which isn't me -- can understand it, is crucial. Because if you don't -- you can't.

I understand it quite well. You apparently can't, but don't feel badly. Most of those in the progressive camp can't. Numerous definitions have now been provided you and a least a dozen links to scholarly discussions on the subject. Not all on this thread of course, but over the course of the past months as these discussions come up.

I simply have no power to help you understand because you refuse to even consider, much less discuss those definitions or discussions. The closest you have come is with severely abridged dictionary defintiions whiile refusing to comment on encyclopedia defintiions or scholarly definitions that expand on those and put them into historical context.

Such willful ignorance--referring back to the OP--is simply too large an obstacle to overcome in order to have a reasoned discussion on something.

One does wonder, however, how one can be so sure that the terms themselves are being misused and at the same time insist they have not been defined and therefore nobody knows what they are talking about.