This is the end result of progressive ideology.

Discussion in 'General Global Topics' started by Mr.Nick, Aug 31, 2011.

  1. Mr.Nick
    Offline

    Mr.Nick VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2011
    Messages:
    9,604
    Thanks Received:
    682
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +682
    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lM3CiH1FE9E]China Culture Revolution - Public Execution & Impact - www.Youtube.com/TibetArchive - YouTube[/ame]
     
  2. theDoctorisIn
    Offline

    theDoctorisIn Senior Mod Staff Member Senior USMB Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    30,045
    Thanks Received:
    5,803
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    East, but still West
    Ratings:
    +11,991
    Actually, the Cultural Revolution was the end result of anti-intellectualism, a favorite tactic of the far right in this country.
     
  3. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    You define that as"progressive"?

    Really?

    Interesting theory.

    Totally nuts, of course, but interesting perversion of the meaning of the word.

    The Cultural revolution was a REACTIONARY response by the hard core communists against all movements to liberalize society

    Liberalize as in make society less communistic.

    But while you and I might disagree about the words used to describe the event, but we're on the same page about how BAD it was
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Bfgrn
    Offline

    Bfgrn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2009
    Messages:
    16,829
    Thanks Received:
    2,480
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,060
    Exactly editec!

    What Mao Zedong said about liberalism

    [​IMG]

    革命的集体组织中的自由主义是十分有害的。它是一种腐蚀剂,使团结涣散,关系松懈,工作消极,意见分歧。它使革命队伍失掉严密的组织和纪律,政策不能贯彻到底,党的组织和党所领导的群众发生隔离。这是一种严重的恶劣倾向。

    "Liberalism is extremely harmful in a revolutionary collective. It is a corrosive which eats away unity, undermines cohesion, causes apathy and creates dissension.

    It robs the revolutionary ranks of compact organization and strict discipline, prevents policies from being carried through and alienates the Party organizations from the masses which the Party leads. It is an extremely bad tendency."
    Combat Liberalism - Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung

    While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
    Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. theDoctorisIn
    Offline

    theDoctorisIn Senior Mod Staff Member Senior USMB Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    30,045
    Thanks Received:
    5,803
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    East, but still West
    Ratings:
    +11,991
    Mr. Nick, perhaps you should also take a look at the definition of the logical fallacy Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
     
  6. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    If progressive means turning away from the methods of the past, then CLEARLY China Cultural revolution was NOT progressivism.

    Reactionism is the oppposite of progressivism.

    Reactionaryists are those who SUPPORT the status quo.

    The STATUS QUO of China was hard core COMMUNISM.

    The GANG of FOUR were REACTIONARIES NOT PROGRESSIVES.

    The problem here is that we are using different definitions.

    I'm sort of stuck uing the definitions that are understood in the world of poltical science, while some of us are using the words as defined by TV commentators who clearly don't know what the fuck they're talking about.

    Right now, those in America who support the STATUS QUO (that is to say powerful government controlling many aspects of our society) are really REACTIONAIES, not PROGRESSIVES.

    Neither of those words stands for any specific political povs, they are terms used to describe political movments in relation to the STATUS QUO.


    BOTH political parties are sotto voce REACTIONARY PARTIES.
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2011
  7. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,233
    its this simplistic thinking that helps fuel the hate of thre right.

    Some one is feeding them lies and I really wish they would start questioning the people spoon feeding them lies instead of marching to the hate and fear tune their pied piper is playing.
     
  8. code1211
    Offline

    code1211 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    5,999
    Thanks Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +845


    Liberalism in the world of Mao meant something different than it does in our world.

    As an example, the Literal translation of the phrase "Join the Pepsi Generation" translated to Chinese as somthing like, "If You Drink Pepsi, You're Ancestors Will Rise From the Grave and Dance With You".

    Liberalism in the USA means that the power of authority should be concetrated at the center of political authority and as far from the average person as is possible.

    In that, Mao and the Big 0 are in perfect step.
     
  9. Bfgrn
    Offline

    Bfgrn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2009
    Messages:
    16,829
    Thanks Received:
    2,480
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,060
    Bullshit. Liberalism in America means more people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works.

    Communism is conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works. The conservatives in the US are in the same position as the communists in the 30s, and for the same reason: Their revolutions failed spectacularly but they refuse to admit what went wrong.
     
  10. peach174
    Offline

    peach174 Gold Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Messages:
    20,647
    Thanks Received:
    4,067
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    S.E. AZ
    Ratings:
    +7,473
    Liberalism is giving the minority rule over the majority.
    Liberalism has taken away the states rights and has given it over to the government. Unconstitutional.
    Liberalism has taken away the rights of the individual and has given it over to collectivism. Also Unconstitutional.
    Liberalism has turned the nation into a democracy instead of a republic. To those that argue that we are a democratic republic is how liberals have gotten a democracy, of which our founders never wanted. And you do not see the words Democratic Republic in our constitution. It says we have a guarantee to a Republic form of government.
    Liberalism has taken away the rights of the states and in doing so has taken away the power of the people.
    Liberals have turned the Constitution into power for the government, instead of government being restricted by the Constitution.

    Conservatives want to give the power back to the states and get back the constitution that restricts the government.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2011

Share This Page