Yes, just as you are responsible for obtaining your own coffee if that's what you want. I am sure you purchased it with your earnings from your own hard labor. If someone threatens my security I will take the necessary steps to protect myself.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
What so great about Progressivism
- Thread starter Mr.Fitnah
- Start date
Yes, just as you are responsible for obtaining your own coffee if that's what you want. I am sure you purchased it with your earnings from your own hard labor. If someone threatens my security I will take the necessary steps to protect myself.
Those you call “progressives” radicals or liberals who founded our country and set up its governing institutions could be called conservative “reactionaries”. They reached back 2,000 years to ancient Rome for a model for organization for our government’s constitution: Starting with a chief executive with term limits and disallowing terms in office beyond that.Since we are going down that road what is it all about?
What is Obamas new system
Now that we have fundamentally changed America?
Please try to remain on topic and civil.
Thanks
Change occurs over decades, not days...
We are now at the dead end Reaganomics led us down...
America was founded on a VERY progressive idea...especially in Thomas Jefferson's day.. a world of kings and the "right of kings"...
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...
The ONLY reason America has led the world in anything was because of progressive thinking...
<SNIP>
The ancestors of conservatives resisted "change" ...they supported King George...
A constitutional republican form of government is inherently conservative (the Romans – focused around “rule of law”
. A liberal form of government would’ve been a democracy (the Greeks - focused around heroic public figures).Some examples of our government’s being modeled after the Roman’s:
Rule of law, not of men:
Our new Government was to be by “rule of law”, precisely the phrase and system the Romans used in their republican form of government.
All offices had to stand for re-election in our new republic as in that of the Romans.
An amendable constitution
Electoral College:
Our constitutional system precisely follows the example of how the Romans voted for and elected to office their chief executive, with an “electoral college.” Ours is patterned after their vote for “Consul’ – (one of two equally powered chief executives serving concurrently), a tally of votes by “Tribes” with tribes (states) making the decision, not a popular vote.
Federal Republic:
“States” within our system are called “Federal” states, as the Romans called theirs Foederati, providing for preserving their own systems of government without interference (states rights).
Our chief executive was created to be responsible for foreign affairs, defense, an "adminstration" of the system of the whole rather than the subordinate parts.
Our Senate has the responsibility of advise and consent to the executive for appointments, exactly the function of the former Roman Senate.
Freedom of religion (and others), notwithstanding a period of persecution of Christians, was important to Romans as it was to our founding fathers.
So...... our founding fathers went beyond conservative, to reactionary, to restoring an earlier form of government that they idealized. Our new republic was more like that of ancient Rome’s than any other example of a self governing state, before or since. They weren’t liberals, they were consummately conservative. Had they been liberals they would’ve more followed the path the French were to subsequently take.
Last edited:
Fatality
SunCrackedSoul
- Jul 15, 2009
- 2,474
- 280
- 48
one way to smaller government, everyone stop working and go on the dole until the gov is sucked dry and there is nothing to replace the lazy greed with. tax the rich until there are no rich no more then we can all be poooor and sit around in the dirt and scratch our ass and bark at the moon in the non-workers paradise.
Bfgrn
Gold Member
- Apr 4, 2009
- 16,829
- 2,492
- 245
Why not end the corporate welfare ?
I agree...institute a TRUE free market...so does that means you understand and support cap & trade?
No cap and trade it destruction of production.
How about smaller government , and self reliance .
The byproducts of coal burning leads directly to the destruction of humans, fish and fowl...it deposits carcinogens into our water and our soil...WHO pays for THAT???
"We didn't inherit this land from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children."
Lakota Sioux Proverb
- Thread starter
- #25
DNC have been blocking Nuke plants for nearly my entire life all the while,
coal plants bleach out fumes
No Solar allowed
No Wind in my back yard.
CAp and trade will not allow any power to be developed .
Any belief other than that is a delusion.
Cap and trade is a get rich off stupid people plan.
coal plants bleach out fumes
No Solar allowed
No Wind in my back yard.
CAp and trade will not allow any power to be developed .
Any belief other than that is a delusion.
Cap and trade is a get rich off stupid people plan.
Bfgrn
Gold Member
- Apr 4, 2009
- 16,829
- 2,492
- 245
Those you call progressives radicals or liberals who founded our country and set up its governing institutions could be called conservative reactionaries. They reached back 2,000 years to ancient Rome for a model for organization for our governments constitution: Starting with a chief executive with term limits and disallowing terms in office beyond that.Since we are going down that road what is it all about?
What is Obamas new system
Now that we have fundamentally changed America?
Please try to remain on topic and civil.
Thanks
Change occurs over decades, not days...
We are now at the dead end Reaganomics led us down...
America was founded on a VERY progressive idea...especially in Thomas Jefferson's day.. a world of kings and the "right of kings"...
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...
The ONLY reason America has led the world in anything was because of progressive thinking...
<SNIP>
The ancestors of conservatives resisted "change" ...they supported King George...
A constitutional republican form of government is inherently conservative (the Romans focused around rule of law) . A liberal form of government wouldve been a democracy (the Greeks - focused around heroic public figures).
Some examples of our governments being modeled after the Romans:
Rule of law, not of men:
Our new Government was to be by rule of law, precisely the phrase and system the Romans used in their republican form of government.
All offices had to stand for re-election in our new republic as in that of the Romans.
An amendable constitution
Electoral College:
Our constitutional system precisely follows the example of how the Romans voted for and elected to office their chief executive, with an electoral college. Ours is patterned after their vote for Consul (one of two equally powered chief executives serving concurrently), a tally of votes by Tribes with tribes (states) making the decision, not a popular vote.
Federal Republic:
States within our system are called Federal states, as the Romans called theirs Foederati, providing for preserving their own systems of government without interference (states rights).
Our chief executive was created to be responsible for foreign affairs, defense, an "adminstration" of the system of the whole rather than the subordinate parts.
Our Senate has the responsibility of advise and consent to the executive for appointments, exactly the function of the former Roman Senate.
Freedom of religion (and others), notwithstanding a period of persecution of Christians, was important to Romans as it was to our founding fathers.
So...... our founding fathers went beyond conservative, to reactionary, to restoring an earlier form of government that they idealized. Our new republic was more like that of ancient Romes than any other example of a self governing state, before or since. They werent liberals, they were consummately conservative. Had they been liberals they wouldve more followed the path the French were to subsequently take.
Nice try...but WRONG...
Reactionary (also reactionist) refers to any political or social movement or ideology that seeks a return to a previous state (the status quo ante). The term originated in the French Revolution, to denote the counter-revolutionaries who wanted to restore the real or imagined conditions of the monarchical Ancien Régime. In the nineteenth century, the term reactionism denoted those who wished to preserve feudalism and aristocratic privilege against industrialism, republicanism, liberalism, and socialism. Today the term is largely used by those on the political left pejoratively to refer to ideas that they considered backwards, outdated and opposed to progress.
wiki
Wicked Jester
Libsmackin'chef
Secular Progressives believe that personal responsibility doesn't apply to them. It's all about being coddled from cradle to grave.
Quite sad really.
Quite sad really.
- Thread starter
- #28
Pointing at the formation of the US doesn't help .
The US is a special case, created with limited government .
The Progressive movement that threatens now is a movement to fix what apparently is wrong with the USA.
The US is a special case, created with limited government .
The Progressive movement that threatens now is a movement to fix what apparently is wrong with the USA.
Last edited:
Contumacious
Radical Freedom
What so great about Progressivism
1- Food Stamps
2- I can get my ho' knocked up at any time and uncle Sam pays
3- we get to invade any country any time - war profiteers love the revenue
I love the welfare/warfare state - don't you?
.
Those you call “progressives” radicals or liberals who founded our country and set up its governing institutions could be called conservative “reactionaries”. They reached back 2,000 years to ancient Rome for a model for organization for our government’s constitution: Starting with a chief executive with term limits and disallowing terms in office beyond that.Change occurs over decades, not days...
We are now at the dead end Reaganomics led us down...
America was founded on a VERY progressive idea...especially in Thomas Jefferson's day.. a world of kings and the "right of kings"...
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...
The ONLY reason America has led the world in anything was because of progressive thinking...
<SNIP>
The ancestors of conservatives resisted "change" ...they supported King George...
A constitutional republican form of government is inherently conservative (the Romans – focused around “rule of law”
Some examples of our government’s being modeled after the Roman’s:
Rule of law, not of men:
Our new Government was to be by “rule of law”, precisely the phrase and system the Romans used in their republican form of government.
All offices had to stand for re-election in our new republic as in that of the Romans.
An amendable constitution
Electoral College:
Our constitutional system precisely follows the example of how the Romans voted for and elected to office their chief executive, with an “electoral college.” Ours is patterned after their vote for “Consul’ – (one of two equally powered chief executives serving concurrently), a tally of votes by “Tribes” with tribes (states) making the decision, not a popular vote.
Federal Republic:
“States” within our system are called “Federal” states, as the Romans called theirs Foederati, providing for preserving their own systems of government without interference (states rights).
Our chief executive was created to be responsible for foreign affairs, defense, an "adminstration" of the system of the whole rather than the subordinate parts.
Our Senate has the responsibility of advise and consent to the executive for appointments, exactly the function of the former Roman Senate.
Freedom of religion (and others), notwithstanding a period of persecution of Christians, was important to Romans as it was to our founding fathers.
So...... our founding fathers went beyond conservative, to reactionary, to restoring an earlier form of government that they idealized. Our new republic was more like that of ancient Rome’s than any other example of a self governing state, before or since. They weren’t liberals, they were consummately conservative. Had they been liberals they would’ve more followed the path the French were to subsequently take.
Nice try...but WRONG...
Reactionary (also reactionist) refers to any political or social movement or ideology that seeks a return to a previous state (the status quo ante). The term originated in the French Revolution, to denote the counter-revolutionaries who wanted to restore the real or imagined conditions of the monarchical Ancien Régime. In the nineteenth century, the term reactionism denoted those who wished to preserve feudalism and aristocratic privilege against industrialism, republicanism, liberalism, and socialism. Today the term is largely used by those on the political left pejoratively to refer to ideas that they considered backwards, outdated and opposed to progress.
wiki
I used "reactionary", in advance as a response, to those who like to think of conservatism as a reactionary philosophy. They do that because they want to label Republican goals or issues as backwards; as if they desire to turn back the clock: For instance "constitutional originalism", etc. Of course the founders were not attempting to return to any "status quo ante"; instead they were establishing a conservative republic, and not a liberal democracy, IMO. My point was also that they were modeling their new republic after that of Rome, known by all as conservative, and that they were conservatives.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #31
Those you call progressives radicals or liberals who founded our country and set up its governing institutions could be called conservative reactionaries. They reached back 2,000 years to ancient Rome for a model for organization for our governments constitution: Starting with a chief executive with term limits and disallowing terms in office beyond that.
A constitutional republican form of government is inherently conservative (the Romans focused around rule of law) . A liberal form of government wouldve been a democracy (the Greeks - focused around heroic public figures).
Some examples of our governments being modeled after the Romans:
Rule of law, not of men:
Our new Government was to be by rule of law, precisely the phrase and system the Romans used in their republican form of government.
All offices had to stand for re-election in our new republic as in that of the Romans.
An amendable constitution
Electoral College:
Our constitutional system precisely follows the example of how the Romans voted for and elected to office their chief executive, with an electoral college. Ours is patterned after their vote for Consul (one of two equally powered chief executives serving concurrently), a tally of votes by Tribes with tribes (states) making the decision, not a popular vote.
Federal Republic:
States within our system are called Federal states, as the Romans called theirs Foederati, providing for preserving their own systems of government without interference (states rights).
Our chief executive was created to be responsible for foreign affairs, defense, an "adminstration" of the system of the whole rather than the subordinate parts.
Our Senate has the responsibility of advise and consent to the executive for appointments, exactly the function of the former Roman Senate.
Freedom of religion (and others), notwithstanding a period of persecution of Christians, was important to Romans as it was to our founding fathers.
So...... our founding fathers went beyond conservative, to reactionary, to restoring an earlier form of government that they idealized. Our new republic was more like that of ancient Romes than any other example of a self governing state, before or since. They werent liberals, they were consummately conservative. Had they been liberals they wouldve more followed the path the French were to subsequently take.
Nice try...but WRONG...
Reactionary (also reactionist) refers to any political or social movement or ideology that seeks a return to a previous state (the status quo ante). The term originated in the French Revolution, to denote the counter-revolutionaries who wanted to restore the real or imagined conditions of the monarchical Ancien Régime. In the nineteenth century, the term reactionism denoted those who wished to preserve feudalism and aristocratic privilege against industrialism, republicanism, liberalism, and socialism. Today the term is largely used by those on the political left pejoratively to refer to ideas that they considered backwards, outdated and opposed to progress.
wiki
I used "reactionary", in advance as a response, to those who like to think of conservatism as a reactionary philosophy. They do that because they want to label Republican goals or issues as backwards; as if they desire to turn back the clock: For instance "constitutional originalism", etc. Of course the founders were not attempting to return to any "status quo ante"; instead they were establishing a conservative republic, and not a liberal democracy, IMO. My point was also that they were modeling their new republic after that of Rome, known by all as conservative, and that they were conservatives.
Until they became liberals
I hesitate to disagree, but Rome never became, in the whole of its society liberal, though I recognize that liberality is often blamed for its decline. The “dole” (“bread and games” in Rome) was strictly for the citizens of the city, not for Roman citizens outside the city's walls. There simply was not enough work for all of the city’s population to make a living, partly because of the presence of so many slaves, so that to prevent social/civil unrest it was necessary to provide some “necessities.”I used "reactionary", in advance as a response, to those who like to think of conservatism as a reactionary philosophy. They do that because they want to label Republican goals or issues as backwards; as if they desire to turn back the clock: For instance "constitutional originalism", etc. Of course the founders were not attempting to return to any "status quo ante"; instead they were establishing a conservative republic, and not a liberal democracy, IMO. My point was also that they were modeling their new republic after that of Rome, known by all as conservative, and that they were conservatives.
Until they became liberals
Another reason there wasn’t enough work was because of government policies which enriched some of the aristocrats, mainly senators, who set up huge plantations in Italy with slave labor to supply the city’s food. These land hungry senators forced the peasants off their land. This in turn, caused more rural folk to move into the city so as to move beyond a bare subsistence.
But a large population in the capitol city was seen as a desirable situation from the standpoint of the political system, since Roman citizens could only cast their vote by physically appearing there at the voting place, the Field of Mars. Therefore it was important to keep the City’s citizenry satisfied and entertained. That could be seen as a “liberal” defect, but it was done more to preserve the status quo, which remained the same long after the last emperor was dethroned.
Unfortunately the Roman economy depended on the expansion of its empire for an inflow of gold, resources, material, products, and food supplies, namely wealth. Once the empire’s frontier borders became fixed, due to lack of its expansion, it became a problem to force the flow of sufficient necessities to the capital city, to provide for its population's wellbeing. The City of Rome continued to elect Consuls, and Magistrates to provide government functions and services, even after the last Emperor was removed in 476, even into the early 7th century; its government continued to perform and maintain its infrastructure.
Americas founding fathers were familiar with its history, institutions, and the course Rome’s history had ultimately taken. They were also familiar with those Roman ideals which had worked, and hoped to avoid its pitfalls.
Last edited:
Bfgrn
Gold Member
- Apr 4, 2009
- 16,829
- 2,492
- 245
Those you call progressives radicals or liberals who founded our country and set up its governing institutions could be called conservative reactionaries. They reached back 2,000 years to ancient Rome for a model for organization for our governments constitution: Starting with a chief executive with term limits and disallowing terms in office beyond that.
A constitutional republican form of government is inherently conservative (the Romans focused around rule of law) . A liberal form of government wouldve been a democracy (the Greeks - focused around heroic public figures).
Some examples of our governments being modeled after the Romans:
Rule of law, not of men:
Our new Government was to be by rule of law, precisely the phrase and system the Romans used in their republican form of government.
All offices had to stand for re-election in our new republic as in that of the Romans.
An amendable constitution
Electoral College:
Our constitutional system precisely follows the example of how the Romans voted for and elected to office their chief executive, with an electoral college. Ours is patterned after their vote for Consul (one of two equally powered chief executives serving concurrently), a tally of votes by Tribes with tribes (states) making the decision, not a popular vote.
Federal Republic:
States within our system are called Federal states, as the Romans called theirs Foederati, providing for preserving their own systems of government without interference (states rights).
Our chief executive was created to be responsible for foreign affairs, defense, an "adminstration" of the system of the whole rather than the subordinate parts.
Our Senate has the responsibility of advise and consent to the executive for appointments, exactly the function of the former Roman Senate.
Freedom of religion (and others), notwithstanding a period of persecution of Christians, was important to Romans as it was to our founding fathers.
So...... our founding fathers went beyond conservative, to reactionary, to restoring an earlier form of government that they idealized. Our new republic was more like that of ancient Romes than any other example of a self governing state, before or since. They werent liberals, they were consummately conservative. Had they been liberals they wouldve more followed the path the French were to subsequently take.
Nice try...but WRONG...
Reactionary (also reactionist) refers to any political or social movement or ideology that seeks a return to a previous state (the status quo ante). The term originated in the French Revolution, to denote the counter-revolutionaries who wanted to restore the real or imagined conditions of the monarchical Ancien Régime. In the nineteenth century, the term reactionism denoted those who wished to preserve feudalism and aristocratic privilege against industrialism, republicanism, liberalism, and socialism. Today the term is largely used by those on the political left pejoratively to refer to ideas that they considered backwards, outdated and opposed to progress.
wiki
I used "reactionary", in advance as a response, to those who like to think of conservatism as a reactionary philosophy. They do that because they want to label Republican goals or issues as backwards; as if they desire to turn back the clock: For instance "constitutional originalism", etc. Of course the founders were not attempting to return to any "status quo ante"; instead they were establishing a conservative republic, and not a liberal democracy, IMO. My point was also that they were modeling their new republic after that of Rome, known by all as conservative, and that they were conservatives.
The structure of our government has little to do with political ideology. Our founders opposed a direct democracy because it could allow a majority of voters at any time to trample rights and liberties in the "heat of a moment".
Thomas Jefferson was a man of the Enlightenment and heavily influenced by the writings of John Locke, Francis Bacon, and Isaac Newton. Jefferson's republican political principles were heavily influenced by the Country Party of 18th century British opposition writers. He was influenced by John Locke (particularly relating to the principle of inalienable rights).
The Age of Enlightenment, or simply The Enlightenment, is a term used to describe a time in Western philosophy and cultural life, centered upon the eighteenth century, in which reason was advocated as the primary source and legitimacy for authority.
Developing more or less simultaneously in Germany, France, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, and Portugal, the movement spread through much of Europe, including the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Russia and Scandinavia as well as the United States. It could be argued that the signatories of the American Declaration of Independence, the United States Bill of Rights, the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, and the Polish-Lithuanian Constitution of May 3, 1791, were motivated by "Enlightenment" principles.
wiki
Nice try...but WRONG...
Reactionary (also reactionist) refers to any political or social movement or ideology that seeks a return to a previous state (the status quo ante). The term originated in the French Revolution, to denote the counter-revolutionaries who wanted to restore the real or imagined conditions of the monarchical Ancien Régime. In the nineteenth century, the term reactionism denoted those who wished to preserve feudalism and aristocratic privilege against industrialism, republicanism, liberalism, and socialism. Today the term is largely used by those on the political left pejoratively to refer to ideas that they considered backwards, outdated and opposed to progress.
wiki
I used "reactionary", in advance as a response, to those who like to think of conservatism as a reactionary philosophy. They do that because they want to label Republican goals or issues as backwards; as if they desire to turn back the clock: For instance "constitutional originalism", etc. Of course the founders were not attempting to return to any "status quo ante"; instead they were establishing a conservative republic, and not a liberal democracy, IMO. My point was also that they were modeling their new republic after that of Rome, known by all as conservative, and that they were conservatives.
The structure of our government has little to do with political ideology. Our founders opposed a direct democracy because it could allow a majority of voters at any time to trample rights and liberties in the "heat of a moment".
Thomas Jefferson was a man of the Enlightenment and heavily influenced by the writings of John Locke, Francis Bacon, and Isaac Newton. Jefferson's republican political principles were heavily influenced by the Country Party of 18th century British opposition writers. He was influenced by John Locke (particularly relating to the principle of inalienable rights).
The Age of Enlightenment, or simply The Enlightenment, is a term used to describe a time in Western philosophy and cultural life, centered upon the eighteenth century, in which reason was advocated as the primary source and legitimacy for authority.
Developing more or less simultaneously in Germany, France, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, and Portugal, the movement spread through much of Europe, including the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Russia and Scandinavia as well as the United States. It could be argued that the signatories of the American Declaration of Independence, the United States Bill of Rights, the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, and the Polish-Lithuanian Constitution of May 3, 1791, were motivated by "Enlightenment" principles.
wiki
I didn't mention ideology; I did mention philosophy. I also mentioned history and a conservative versus liberal model. But to the point, I was suggesting our country's founders could be labeled conservative as they chose a conservative historical model to follow.
But thanks for the enlightenment on the Enlightenment. It has reason as it's base rather than emotion, perhaps, and is neither liberal nor conservative, but just another part of the foundation for the philosophies of our founders.
My own opinion is that we can see things more clearly when we look farther back in history. That's why I like to look at models rather than more recent historical figures. Even today there's not much interest in Rome as opposed to Athens, because Rome is seen as a conservative model, and academics prefer the liberal model of Greek Athens over Rome. No doubt people are sill arguing over whether Locke is a conservative or a liberal or a conservative liberal.
But what do I know; I'm but a country boy?
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Replies
- 17
- Views
- 193
- Replies
- 124
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 117
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 298
- Views
- 3K
- Replies
- 58
- Views
- 273
- Replies
- 67
- Views
- 311
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8018
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 467
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-