Why the left hates Trump so intensely

[usmbguest5318]

Blog: Why the left hates Trump so intensely

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.

next time you take the effort to type something, try an actual response, you low post count hack-poseur.

I did type a response. It just wasn't one for which you were prepared or that you wanted.

You replied, you didn't respond.

Noob.

I may be new here, but you are the one who doesn't know what you are talking about, and had you before posting it confirmed that your supposition about the distinction between a reply and a response, you would not have posted it. Alas, that's not what you did and now you shall look like the fool you are.

• What is the difference between reply and respond? | the-difference-between.com
  
• Difference between "response" and "reply"
  
• Reply (see synonym guide too)
• Response/respond (verb)

Every reply is a response, but not every response is a reply. And that, rock-boy, is why you are wrong;.

Trust me when I tell you that I am not the person with whom you want to try playing pedantically snide word games. I'm quite careful to be cognizant of the denotation and connotation of the words I choose to express myself in public. That's not to say I never make mistakes, but rather that this time I have not.

Good. Now that you feel validated, please crawl back under your rock.

So much text, so little content. Not a single thing about the article I posted, or my views on said article.

Only trolls and morons who want to appear smarter than they are go into such snide detail as you.

Enjoy your (probably brief) stay here.

I don't see you still trying to defend that stupid remark you made either, now do I? You're back to your empty aspersions. You go with that....

 

[candycorn]

Blog: Why the left hates Trump so intensely

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

[Blue Team Progressivism is a church, offering you moral superiority and a path to spiritual enlightenment. As a church it's got a lot going for it. It runs religious programming on television, all day every day. Every modern primetime program is like a left-wing Andy Griffith show, reinforcing lessons of inclusion, tolerance, feminism, and anti-racism./QUOTE]

I think that nailed it. It's like the liberal playbook is their bible and it's not open to interpretation and there is no room for personal opinions. Accept it or you instantly become the enemy or sinner.

The left always cheers when Republicans disagree with each other since that is not allowed in the liberal religion. Blind faith is all that they will accept. They think there is something wrong with people who don't follow the leaders without question.

Unfortunately for libs, they don't understand human nature. They never seem to expect the reactions from people when they try to force their will on us. Like how people leave states when liberals raise taxes or how we don't believe what MSNBC tells us about Hillary's integrity. They just don't get it. Because they have convinced themselves that they are so righteous, they never even consider the fact that they are to blame for failures. To them, Trump's win must mean that people were fooled or brainwashed. Truth is that lying and indoctrinating people is the left's thing. That shit doesn't fly with free thinkers.

I haven't yet quite come to terms with this over-the-top hysteria. I can see why the traditional partisans would be upset, they were absolutely sure that we were on a inexorable march towards a Euro-social democracy (so was I, by the way), and this has just stunned them. That would explain their intensity.

The part that I don't yet understand is the way it has ignited such hatred throughout the entire Left side of our culture. There is simply nothing in our history, as far as I know, that compares with this.

One clue may be in the increase in sheer hatred towards "the rubes", those who don't live in the bluest states. You can see it all over this board, it's a little disturbing.
.

If you just treat their views as a religion, then you can understand why they are so shrill, and the progs on this post discuss anything but the issue at hand.

I agree. But how do you interpret the behaviors of the non-elites? Restaurants putting up signs saying they won't serve Trump supporters, families and relationships literally breaking up?

This has now - my nightmare scenario - seeped into our everyday culture. That's a significant new level.
.

You mean like this one?

AZ Gun Store Owner Bans Obama Supporters

Gun Store: Obama Voters Not Welcome


Yeah, ONLY the left acts irrationally when they lose an election; obviously.

Here is the story of a guy who refused to hire anyone for 5+ years!!!!
Company Policy: We are not hiring until Obama is gone'

As for not serving people…please refresh our memories about who refused to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples?

 

[martybegan]

Blog: Why the left hates Trump so intensely

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.

next time you take the effort to type something, try an actual response, you low post count hack-poseur.

I did type a response. It just wasn't one for which you were prepared or that you wanted.

You replied, you didn't respond.

Noob.

I may be new here, but you are the one who doesn't know what you are talking about, and had you before posting it confirmed that your supposition about the distinction between a reply and a response, you would not have posted it. Alas, that's not what you did and now you shall look like the fool you are.

• What is the difference between reply and respond? | the-difference-between.com
  
• Difference between "response" and "reply"
  
• Reply (see synonym guide too)
• Response/respond (verb)

Every reply is a response, but not every response is a reply. And that, rock-boy, is why you are wrong;.

Trust me when I tell you that I am not the person with whom you want to try playing pedantically snide word games. I'm quite careful to be cognizant of the denotation and connotation of the words I choose to express myself in public. That's not to say I never make mistakes, but rather that this time I have not.

Good. Now that you feel validated, please crawl back under your rock.

So much text, so little content. Not a single thing about the article I posted, or my views on said article.

Only trolls and morons who want to appear smarter than they are go into such snide detail as you.

Enjoy your (probably brief) stay here.

I don't see you still trying to defend that stupid remark you made either, now do I? You're back to your empty aspersions. You go with that....

I stand by my statement that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a Religion. In fact I am debating it with someone now, unlike my posts with you, which are nothing more than your pathetic attempt to avoid the conversation at hand.

 

[usmbguest5318]

You replied, you didn't respond.

Noob.

You replied, you didn't respond.

reply -
verb
1 Say something in response to something someone has said
reply - definition of reply in English | Oxford Dictionaries

Is English your second language, Marty? How could the other poster reply without responding, fool? You're wrong given your declaration and the definition, shit for brains, and that's a FACT, so have another shit sundae...bon appetite ass wipe!

Marty has to be told what to think or have his “thoughts” confirmed by someone as equally narrow minded.

This coming from one of the biggest bleating sheep of the left on this board is comical.

You quoted the blog then tried lamely to criticize others of getting their thoughts fed to them. Just reciting facts; name calling is your game

I tried to start a discussion on a discussion board. People of your ilk don't feel like actually discussing. Yet there is a perfectly adult conversation also going on, that if you don't feel like participating in, kindly sod off.

Your idea of catalyzing a discussion is to post a link to a blog, say nothing of substance that builds upon what we'll find at the link, and just think we'll say stuff that you can then either agree with and make yourself feel good or castigate folks with whom you disagree, which also makes you feel good, but do it in a setting where you know there will be people running to your defense, which you need a lot of as you're a world class schlub. No. That's not starting a discussion; it's a pathetic attempt at ego boosting.

 

[Mac1958]

Blog: Why the left hates Trump so intensely

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

I think that nailed it. It's like the liberal playbook is their bible and it's not open to interpretation and there is no room for personal opinions. Accept it or you instantly become the enemy or sinner.

The left always cheers when Republicans disagree with each other since that is not allowed in the liberal religion. Blind faith is all that they will accept. They think there is something wrong with people who don't follow the leaders without question.

Unfortunately for libs, they don't understand human nature. They never seem to expect the reactions from people when they try to force their will on us. Like how people leave states when liberals raise taxes or how we don't believe what MSNBC tells us about Hillary's integrity. They just don't get it. Because they have convinced themselves that they are so righteous, they never even consider the fact that they are to blame for failures. To them, Trump's win must mean that people were fooled or brainwashed. Truth is that lying and indoctrinating people is the left's thing. That shit doesn't fly with free thinkers.

I haven't yet quite come to terms with this over-the-top hysteria. I can see why the traditional partisans would be upset, they were absolutely sure that we were on a inexorable march towards a Euro-social democracy (so was I, by the way), and this has just stunned them. That would explain their intensity.

The part that I don't yet understand is the way it has ignited such hatred throughout the entire Left side of our culture. There is simply nothing in our history, as far as I know, that compares with this.

One clue may be in the increase in sheer hatred towards "the rubes", those who don't live in the bluest states. You can see it all over this board, it's a little disturbing.
.

If you just treat their views as a religion, then you can understand why they are so shrill, and the progs on this post discuss anything but the issue at hand.

I agree. But how do you interpret the behaviors of the non-elites? Restaurants putting up signs saying they won't serve Trump supporters, families and relationships literally breaking up?

This has now - my nightmare scenario - seeped into our everyday culture. That's a significant new level.
.

You mean like this one?

AZ Gun Store Owner Bans Obama Supporters

Gun Store: Obama Voters Not Welcome


Yeah, ONLY the left acts irrationally when they lose an election; obviously.

Here is the story of a guy who refused to hire anyone for 5+ years!!!!
Company Policy: We are not hiring until Obama is gone'

As for not serving people…please refresh our memories about who refused to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples?

Unfortunately, you would be one of the few people on the Left here I'd ask about this.

Instead I get a straw man, "Yeah, ONLY the left acts irrationally when they lose an election; obviously".

I didn't say that. My question is about a fairly specific group of people, and their specific behaviors. That's it.

This is why I can only wonder out loud, it's why I don't ask people directly, as curious as I may be about it.
.

 

[Care4all]

Blog: Why the left hates Trump so intensely

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

[Blue Team Progressivism is a church, offering you moral superiority and a path to spiritual enlightenment. As a church it's got a lot going for it. It runs religious programming on television, all day every day. Every modern primetime program is like a left-wing Andy Griffith show, reinforcing lessons of inclusion, tolerance, feminism, and anti-racism./QUOTE]

[
The Blue Church controls the HR department, so even if you don't go to church, you have to act like a loyal churchgoer in every way that matters while you're on the clock. And off the clock, on any kind of public social media platform.

Jon Stewart and John Oliver are basically TV preachers. Watching them gives the same sense of quiet superiority your grandma gets from watching The 700 Club. The messages are constantly reinforced, providing that lovely dopamine hit, like an angel's voice whispering, "You're right, you're better, you're winning."
/QUOTE]

For the first time in decades, voters explicitly rejected the Blue Church, defying hours of daily cultural programming, years of indoctrination from the schools, and dozens of explicit warnings from HR.

We've been trained since childhood to obey the pretty people on TV, but for the first time in decades, that didn't work.

Donald Trump won because flyover America wants their culture back, and Blue Team has not been rejected like that before.

reinforcing lessons of inclusion, tolerance, feminism, and anti-racism


So fly over country wanted bigotry and racism, anti feminism, anti inclusion, and anti tolerance back?

They don't want the feminism being spouted now, that deals more with women trying to find some advantage over men, rather than being equal to men

They don't want the anti-bigotry that states that if you oppose progressive policies like affirmative action, immigration amnesty, and open borders, you are a bigot.

They don't want the anti-racism that states basically the issues I listed above.

How tolerant is the left these days over the lifestyle of most of middle america? Why are words like rubes, and deplorables seeming A-OK in the leftist lexicon?

I think it was more about MONEY...what they believe has affected their own pockets, and they just wanted to see jobs return...they seem to believe if affirmative action was not there... they, as in white America, would have more jobs, if immigrants were not here, they'd have more jobs and money, and those few against feminism thoughts of... if women were not in the workforce, 'they' would have more jobs and money....

that kind of thing....all related to their own prosperity....isn't the saying, ''people vote with their pocketbook''?

 

[Flash]

The Left hates Trump because the greedy little bastards are afraid that their welfare check may be cut a little bit.

They don't understand economics and think Trump the Capitalist will be bad for America. Of course these are the same dumbasses that thought Obama the Socialist was going to be good for America so they are not exactly the best and the brightest.

It is good to see the assholes so butt hurt over Trump winning. It is good the Moon Bats lost. Crooked Hillary would have been a disaster for this country on the heels of the Obama disaster.

 

[owebo]

Blog: Why the left hates Trump so intensely

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

[Blue Team Progressivism is a church, offering you moral superiority and a path to spiritual enlightenment. As a church it's got a lot going for it. It runs religious programming on television, all day every day. Every modern primetime program is like a left-wing Andy Griffith show, reinforcing lessons of inclusion, tolerance, feminism, and anti-racism./QUOTE]

[
The Blue Church controls the HR department, so even if you don't go to church, you have to act like a loyal churchgoer in every way that matters while you're on the clock. And off the clock, on any kind of public social media platform.

Jon Stewart and John Oliver are basically TV preachers. Watching them gives the same sense of quiet superiority your grandma gets from watching The 700 Club. The messages are constantly reinforced, providing that lovely dopamine hit, like an angel's voice whispering, "You're right, you're better, you're winning."
/QUOTE]

reinforcing lessons of inclusion, tolerance, feminism, and anti-racism


So fly over country wanted bigotry and racism, anti feminism, anti inclusion, and anti tolerance back?

They don't want the feminism being spouted now, that deals more with women trying to find some advantage over men, rather than being equal to men

They don't want the anti-bigotry that states that if you oppose progressive policies like affirmative action, immigration amnesty, and open borders, you are a bigot.

They don't want the anti-racism that states basically the issues I listed above.

How tolerant is the left these days over the lifestyle of most of middle america? Why are words like rubes, and deplorables seeming A-OK in the leftist lexicon?

I think it was more about MONEY...what they believe has affected their own pockets, and they just wanted to see jobs return...they seem to believe if affirmative action was not there... they, as in white America, would have more jobs, if immigrants were not here, they'd have more jobs and money, and those few against feminism thoughts of... if women were not in the workforce, 'they' would have more jobs and money....

that kind of thing....all related to their own prosperity....isn't the saying, ''people vote with their pocketbook''?

I voted for America, she need our help fending off you fascist democrats....

 

[Claudette]

If he's successful with his plans for America they will hate him even more.

Hope they are ready to spew all that hate. LOL

 

[martybegan]

reply -
verb
1 Say something in response to something someone has said
reply - definition of reply in English | Oxford Dictionaries

Is English your second language, Marty? How could the other poster reply without responding, fool? You're wrong given your declaration and the definition, shit for brains, and that's a FACT, so have another shit sundae...bon appetite ass wipe!

Marty has to be told what to think or have his “thoughts” confirmed by someone as equally narrow minded.

This coming from one of the biggest bleating sheep of the left on this board is comical.

You quoted the blog then tried lamely to criticize others of getting their thoughts fed to them. Just reciting facts; name calling is your game

I tried to start a discussion on a discussion board. People of your ilk don't feel like actually discussing. Yet there is a perfectly adult conversation also going on, that if you don't feel like participating in, kindly sod off.

Your idea of catalyzing a discussion is to post a link to a blog, say nothing of substance that builds upon what we'll find at the link, and just think we'll say stuff that you can then either agree with and make yourself feel good or castigate folks with whom you disagree, which also makes you feel good, but do it in a setting where you know there will be people running to your defense, which you need a lot of as you're a world class schlub. No. That's not starting a discussion; it's a pathetic attempt at ego boosting.

Why don't you look at the discussion between me and Mac on this, which was started by my post and link.

You on the other hand are adding nothing to the conversation except arguing ABOUT the conversation.

 

[martybegan]

Blog: Why the left hates Trump so intensely

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

[Blue Team Progressivism is a church, offering you moral superiority and a path to spiritual enlightenment. As a church it's got a lot going for it. It runs religious programming on television, all day every day. Every modern primetime program is like a left-wing Andy Griffith show, reinforcing lessons of inclusion, tolerance, feminism, and anti-racism./QUOTE]

[
The Blue Church controls the HR department, so even if you don't go to church, you have to act like a loyal churchgoer in every way that matters while you're on the clock. And off the clock, on any kind of public social media platform.

Jon Stewart and John Oliver are basically TV preachers. Watching them gives the same sense of quiet superiority your grandma gets from watching The 700 Club. The messages are constantly reinforced, providing that lovely dopamine hit, like an angel's voice whispering, "You're right, you're better, you're winning."
/QUOTE]

reinforcing lessons of inclusion, tolerance, feminism, and anti-racism


So fly over country wanted bigotry and racism, anti feminism, anti inclusion, and anti tolerance back?

They don't want the feminism being spouted now, that deals more with women trying to find some advantage over men, rather than being equal to men

They don't want the anti-bigotry that states that if you oppose progressive policies like affirmative action, immigration amnesty, and open borders, you are a bigot.

They don't want the anti-racism that states basically the issues I listed above.

How tolerant is the left these days over the lifestyle of most of middle america? Why are words like rubes, and deplorables seeming A-OK in the leftist lexicon?

I think it was more about MONEY...what they believe has affected their own pockets, and they just wanted to see jobs return...they seem to believe if affirmative action was not there... they, as in white America, would have more jobs, if immigrants were not here, they'd have more jobs and money, and those few against feminism thoughts of... if women were not in the workforce, 'they' would have more jobs and money....

that kind of thing....all related to their own prosperity....isn't the saying, ''people vote with their pocketbook''?

Some of it may be economics, but some of it also can be attributed to people don't like being called evil, and those terms bigot, racist, misogynist, homophobic, are just fill in words for calling someone evil. That, and the level of "evil" has been devolved down to disagreement on politics, and this disagreement has been lowered to the level where the left basically just says "shut up" when someone has an opinion that doesn't fit within progressive orthodoxy.

 

[usmbguest5318]

next time you take the effort to type something, try an actual response, you low post count hack-poseur.

I did type a response. It just wasn't one for which you were prepared or that you wanted.

You replied, you didn't respond.

Noob.

I may be new here, but you are the one who doesn't know what you are talking about, and had you before posting it confirmed that your supposition about the distinction between a reply and a response, you would not have posted it. Alas, that's not what you did and now you shall look like the fool you are.

• What is the difference between reply and respond? | the-difference-between.com
  
• Difference between "response" and "reply"
  
• Reply (see synonym guide too)
• Response/respond (verb)

Every reply is a response, but not every response is a reply. And that, rock-boy, is why you are wrong;.

Trust me when I tell you that I am not the person with whom you want to try playing pedantically snide word games. I'm quite careful to be cognizant of the denotation and connotation of the words I choose to express myself in public. That's not to say I never make mistakes, but rather that this time I have not.

Good. Now that you feel validated, please crawl back under your rock.

So much text, so little content. Not a single thing about the article I posted, or my views on said article.

Only trolls and morons who want to appear smarter than they are go into such snide detail as you.

Enjoy your (probably brief) stay here.

I don't see you still trying to defend that stupid remark you made either, now do I? You're back to your empty aspersions. You go with that....

I stand by my statement that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a Religion. In fact I am debating it with someone now, unlike my posts with you, which are nothing more than your pathetic attempt to avoid the conversation at hand.

Eight Elements of a Religion

1. BELIEF SYSTEM or WORLDVIEW:
   Many beliefs that fit together in a system to make sense of the universe and our place in it.
2. COMMUNITY:
   The belief system is shared, and its ideals are practiced by a group.
3. CENTRAL STORIES/MYTHS:
   Stories that help explain the beliefs of a group; these are told over and over again and sometimes performed by members of the group. They may or may not be factual.
4. RITUALS:
   Beliefs are explained, taught, and made real through ceremonies.
5. ETHICS:
   Rules about how to behave; these rules are often thought to have come from a deity or supernatural place, but they might also be seen as guidelines created by the group over time.
6. CHARACTERISTIC EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCES:
   Most religions share emotions such as awe, mystery, guilt, joy, devotion, conversion, inner peace, etc.
7. MATERIAL EXPRESSION:
   Religions use things to perform rituals or to express or represent beliefs, such as: statues, paintings, music, flowers, incense, clothes, architecture, and specific sacred locations.
8. SACREDNESS:
   Religions see some things as sacred and some not sacred (or profane). Some objects, actions, people and places may share in the sacredness or express it.

Share with us how you see all eight of those key traits of a religion found in progressivism. At least using the above outline you have a framework that you can use to drive the discussion. Go for it. Have fun.
_____________

Just so you understand where I'm coming from....You say you want to initiate a discussion about the nature and extent in which modern progressivism is as much a religion as, say, Christianity, Roman Catholicism, or Hinduism. The topic is reasonably interesting in the abstract, but frankly I'd never given it any consideration. I would be happy to engage on that line of discussion, but seeing as I've not thought about it in the context you have in mind -- and you can't know when you are creating the thread that anyone else has either -- you need to guide the direction and context in which you want people to think about the topic and discuss it. It's your burden to put the framework out so others can consider it.

What did your OP do? It tossed someone else's ideas at us (the blog) and your only personal contribution to the topic it amounted to, "See, see. I told you so. I've been saying this all along and here a blogger agrees with me." (BTW, I googled "Blue Team Progressivism" to see what it is. I quickly found nothing about it and the quote you posted was "out of the blue;" thus it wasn't apparent just what to make of it. I don't even know if the quoted words are yours as your name isn't at the top of the quote.)

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

That's not much of a positive and thoughtful conversation starter. That's little other than pride braggadociously expressed. Why is that so?

• You didn't offer any of your own nuanced spin on the blog post.
• You didn't expound on the ideas in the blog post.
• You didn't put any of your own ideas on the table in advance of asking us to do the same.

It's fine that you use the blog post as a high level rubric for the discussion, but without your putting your own "something" out there with it -- something beside a blanket "he says the same thing I do" affirmation -- it's not you that we'd be discussing, it's the blogger's ideas, and he's not here to defend or explain them. And all you said, was basically, "me too and I told you so." What else is that but you expressing a feeling of validation? Nothing. That all that is.

Think of it as though you found a recipe (the blog post) for apple pie. You read it and it's close to what you want to bake, but you put your own take on it and add apple brandy to the recipe and then ice the pie crust with hard sauce. Now it's not someone else's pie/recipe, it's your pie/recipe and the people to whom you serve it will have a reason to talk about it with you.

 

[martybegan]

next time you take the effort to type something, try an actual response, you low post count hack-poseur.

I did type a response. It just wasn't one for which you were prepared or that you wanted.

You replied, you didn't respond.

Noob.

I may be new here, but you are the one who doesn't know what you are talking about, and had you before posting it confirmed that your supposition about the distinction between a reply and a response, you would not have posted it. Alas, that's not what you did and now you shall look like the fool you are.

• What is the difference between reply and respond? | the-difference-between.com
  
• Difference between "response" and "reply"
  
• Reply (see synonym guide too)
• Response/respond (verb)

Every reply is a response, but not every response is a reply. And that, rock-boy, is why you are wrong;.

Trust me when I tell you that I am not the person with whom you want to try playing pedantically snide word games. I'm quite careful to be cognizant of the denotation and connotation of the words I choose to express myself in public. That's not to say I never make mistakes, but rather that this time I have not.

Good. Now that you feel validated, please crawl back under your rock.

So much text, so little content. Not a single thing about the article I posted, or my views on said article.

Only trolls and morons who want to appear smarter than they are go into such snide detail as you.

Enjoy your (probably brief) stay here.

I don't see you still trying to defend that stupid remark you made either, now do I? You're back to your empty aspersions. You go with that....

I stand by my statement that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a Religion. In fact I am debating it with someone now, unlike my posts with you, which are nothing more than your pathetic attempt to avoid the conversation at hand.

Eight Elements of a Religion

1. BELIEF SYSTEM or WORLDVIEW:
   Many beliefs that fit together in a system to make sense of the universe and our place in it.
2. COMMUNITY:
   The belief system is shared, and its ideals are practiced by a group.
3. CENTRAL STORIES/MYTHS:
   Stories that help explain the beliefs of a group; these are told over and over again and sometimes performed by members of the group. They may or may not be factual.
4. RITUALS:
   Beliefs are explained, taught, and made real through ceremonies.
5. ETHICS:
   Rules about how to behave; these rules are often thought to have come from a deity or supernatural place, but they might also be seen as guidelines created by the group over time.
6. CHARACTERISTIC EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCES:
   Most religions share emotions such as awe, mystery, guilt, joy, devotion, conversion, inner peace, etc.
7. MATERIAL EXPRESSION:
   Religions use things to perform rituals or to express or represent beliefs, such as: statues, paintings, music, flowers, incense, clothes, architecture, and specific sacred locations.
8. SACREDNESS:
   Religions see some things as sacred and some not sacred (or profane). Some objects, actions, people and places may share in the sacredness or express it.

Share with us how you see all eight of those key traits of a religion found in progressivism. At least using the above outline you have a framework that you can use to drive the discussion. Go for it. Have fun.
_____________

Just so you understand where I'm coming from....You say you want to initiate a discussion about the nature and extent in which modern progressivism is as much a religion as, say, Christianity, Roman Catholicism, or Hinduism. The topic is reasonably interesting in the abstract, but frankly I'd never given it any consideration. I would be happy to engage on that line of discussion, but seeing as I've not thought about it in the context you have in mind -- and you can't know when you are creating the thread that anyone else has either -- you need to guide the direction and context in which you want people to think about the topic and discuss it. It's your burden to put the framework out so others can consider it.

What did your OP do? It tossed someone else's ideas at us (the blog) and your only personal contribution to the topic it amounted to, "See, see. I told you so. I've been saying this all along and here a blogger agrees with me." (BTW, I googled "Blue Team Progressivism" to see what it is. I quickly found nothing about it and the quote you posted was "out of the blue;" thus it wasn't apparent just what to make of it. I don't even know if the quoted words are yours as your name isn't at the top of the quote.)

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

That's not much of a positive and thoughtful conversation starter. That's little other than pride braggadociously expressed. Why is that so?

• You didn't offer any of your own nuanced spin on the blog post.
• You didn't expound on the ideas in the blog post.
• You didn't put any of your own ideas on the table in advance of asking us to do the same.

It's fine that you use the blog post as a high level rubric for the discussion, but without your putting your own "something" out there with it -- something beside a blanket "he says the same thing I do" affirmation -- it's not you that we'd be discussing, it's the blogger's ideas, and he's not here to defend or explain them. And all you said, was basically, "me too and I told you so." What else is that but you expressing a feeling of validation? Nothing. That all that is.

Think of it as though you found a recipe (the blog post) for apple pie. You read it and it's close to what you want to bake, but you put your own take on it and add apple brandy to the recipe and then ice the pie crust with hard sauce. Now it's not someone else's pie/recipe, it's your pie/recipe and the people to whom you serve it will have a reason to talk about it with you.

I prefer to start a discussion with minimal input, and let the ideas hash themselves out through discussion. If you don't like that, feel free to infest other threads.

And to me progressivism has many of the traits you list above, What really is the clincher is how they deal with "heretics" or those with beliefs outside their own system.

 

[Care4all]

Blog: Why the left hates Trump so intensely

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

[Blue Team Progressivism is a church, offering you moral superiority and a path to spiritual enlightenment. As a church it's got a lot going for it. It runs religious programming on television, all day every day. Every modern primetime program is like a left-wing Andy Griffith show, reinforcing lessons of inclusion, tolerance, feminism, and anti-racism./QUOTE]

reinforcing lessons of inclusion, tolerance, feminism, and anti-racism


So fly over country wanted bigotry and racism, anti feminism, anti inclusion, and anti tolerance back?

They don't want the feminism being spouted now, that deals more with women trying to find some advantage over men, rather than being equal to men

They don't want the anti-bigotry that states that if you oppose progressive policies like affirmative action, immigration amnesty, and open borders, you are a bigot.

They don't want the anti-racism that states basically the issues I listed above.

How tolerant is the left these days over the lifestyle of most of middle america? Why are words like rubes, and deplorables seeming A-OK in the leftist lexicon?

I think it was more about MONEY...what they believe has affected their own pockets, and they just wanted to see jobs return...they seem to believe if affirmative action was not there... they, as in white America, would have more jobs, if immigrants were not here, they'd have more jobs and money, and those few against feminism thoughts of... if women were not in the workforce, 'they' would have more jobs and money....

that kind of thing....all related to their own prosperity....isn't the saying, ''people vote with their pocketbook''?

Some of it may be economics, but some of it also can be attributed to people don't like being called evil, and those terms bigot, racist, misogynist, homophobic, are just fill in words for calling someone evil. That, and the level of "evil" has been devolved down to disagreement on politics, and this disagreement has been lowered to the level where the left basically just says "shut up" when someone has an opinion that doesn't fit within progressive orthodoxy.

That's funny....!

I don't and never have, seen any of you on the right, 'shut up', you are more vocal than Liberals, on near everything, for at least 3 decades from my eye view.

 

[candycorn]

Mind if I quote you?

I haven’t yet quite come to terms with this over-the-top hysteria.

Well, you had 4 years in 2 cases. Conservatives stating they will not hire anyone because we have Obama in office; gun store owners refusing to serve people who voted for Obama.

And you had 2 years since the court ruled on SSM to “come to terms” with why conservative clerks wouldn’t issue marriage certificates.

How much more time do you need?

I can see why the traditional partisans would be upset, they were absolutely sure that we were on a inexorable march towards a Euro-social democracy (so was I, by the way), and this has just stunned them. That would explain their intensity.

The part that I don't yet understand is the way it has ignited such hatred throughout the entire Left side of our culture. There is simply nothing in our history, as far as I know, that compares with this.

Oh… you don’t?

Perhaps you missed this:

2008–13 United States ammunition shortage - Wikipedia (the page has 500 edits plus…it wasn’t started last week so yes, it was “a thing”). You don’t think that was “over the top” hysteria?

But that was just an example of hysteria that lasted 5 years that you claim to be completely unaware of….

Lets go back to 2009 when Obama hadn’t done much of anything to piss anyone off yet: You may recall that the President of the US wanted to broadcast a message to some school kids. Pretty innocuous, right? Wrong:

Many conservatives enraged over Obama school speech - CNN.com

One “level headed” conservative said: “"Thinking about my kids in school having to listen to that just really upsets me," suburban Colorado mother Shanneen Barron told CNN Denver affiliate KMGH. "I'm an American. They are Americans, and I don't feel that's OK. I feel very scared to be in this country with our leadership right now.”

School Districts in Six States to Refrain from Showing Presidential Address Next Week

Proves it was widespread.

I guess you missed the Town Halls in 2009—right after Obama took office in January 8 months earlier. Politico described the supposedly “non hysterical” protestors as this:

Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress.

Guess you missed that one too.

Hysterical behavior is the staple of both sides when they lose the election; somehow you only cite it when the left is guilty of it and plead ignorance to all of the other examples.

One clue may be in the increase in sheer hatred towards "the rubes", those who don't live in the bluest states. You can see it all over this board, it's a little disturbing.
.

I guess you missed Ms. Streep’s comments and how much love they generated by the right wing when she said that MMA wasn’t an “art”. But the again, the right wing posters here (you mentioned the board) have always loved Hollywood; right? <sarcasm>

Whatever…everyone feels they are under attack 100% of the time on the board.

But FWIW…

I’ve yet to see any “sheer hatred” of the “rubes” as you put it that has been beyond the usual comments that supposedly educated people make about the supposedly uneducated… on this board at least. I see much more venom in the other direction as a matter of fact. What I think you’re seeing is that people who love the nation (and many Republicans too) know that Mr. Trump is, at best, several fathoms in over his head with no inkling of how to begin to tackle the problems of the nation; all the while professing unique expertise in solving those specific problems. And when you air those concerns…naturally…the people who installed this douchebag are (or at least feel) they are being targeted for being dumb enough to think he knew more than the generals about ISIS, that he had a plan to replace Obamacare, that he actually did care about veterans, and that he will bring jobs back when simple mathematics makes it nearly impossible.

 

[candycorn]

I did type a response. It just wasn't one for which you were prepared or that you wanted.

You replied, you didn't respond.

Noob.

I may be new here, but you are the one who doesn't know what you are talking about, and had you before posting it confirmed that your supposition about the distinction between a reply and a response, you would not have posted it. Alas, that's not what you did and now you shall look like the fool you are.

• What is the difference between reply and respond? | the-difference-between.com
  
• Difference between "response" and "reply"
  
• Reply (see synonym guide too)
• Response/respond (verb)

Every reply is a response, but not every response is a reply. And that, rock-boy, is why you are wrong;.

Trust me when I tell you that I am not the person with whom you want to try playing pedantically snide word games. I'm quite careful to be cognizant of the denotation and connotation of the words I choose to express myself in public. That's not to say I never make mistakes, but rather that this time I have not.

Good. Now that you feel validated, please crawl back under your rock.

So much text, so little content. Not a single thing about the article I posted, or my views on said article.

Only trolls and morons who want to appear smarter than they are go into such snide detail as you.

Enjoy your (probably brief) stay here.

I don't see you still trying to defend that stupid remark you made either, now do I? You're back to your empty aspersions. You go with that....

I stand by my statement that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a Religion. In fact I am debating it with someone now, unlike my posts with you, which are nothing more than your pathetic attempt to avoid the conversation at hand.

Eight Elements of a Religion

1. BELIEF SYSTEM or WORLDVIEW:
   Many beliefs that fit together in a system to make sense of the universe and our place in it.
2. COMMUNITY:
   The belief system is shared, and its ideals are practiced by a group.
3. CENTRAL STORIES/MYTHS:
   Stories that help explain the beliefs of a group; these are told over and over again and sometimes performed by members of the group. They may or may not be factual.
4. RITUALS:
   Beliefs are explained, taught, and made real through ceremonies.
5. ETHICS:
   Rules about how to behave; these rules are often thought to have come from a deity or supernatural place, but they might also be seen as guidelines created by the group over time.
6. CHARACTERISTIC EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCES:
   Most religions share emotions such as awe, mystery, guilt, joy, devotion, conversion, inner peace, etc.
7. MATERIAL EXPRESSION:
   Religions use things to perform rituals or to express or represent beliefs, such as: statues, paintings, music, flowers, incense, clothes, architecture, and specific sacred locations.
8. SACREDNESS:
   Religions see some things as sacred and some not sacred (or profane). Some objects, actions, people and places may share in the sacredness or express it.

Share with us how you see all eight of those key traits of a religion found in progressivism. At least using the above outline you have a framework that you can use to drive the discussion. Go for it. Have fun.
_____________

Just so you understand where I'm coming from....You say you want to initiate a discussion about the nature and extent in which modern progressivism is as much a religion as, say, Christianity, Roman Catholicism, or Hinduism. The topic is reasonably interesting in the abstract, but frankly I'd never given it any consideration. I would be happy to engage on that line of discussion, but seeing as I've not thought about it in the context you have in mind -- and you can't know when you are creating the thread that anyone else has either -- you need to guide the direction and context in which you want people to think about the topic and discuss it. It's your burden to put the framework out so others can consider it.

What did your OP do? It tossed someone else's ideas at us (the blog) and your only personal contribution to the topic it amounted to, "See, see. I told you so. I've been saying this all along and here a blogger agrees with me." (BTW, I googled "Blue Team Progressivism" to see what it is. I quickly found nothing about it and the quote you posted was "out of the blue;" thus it wasn't apparent just what to make of it. I don't even know if the quoted words are yours as your name isn't at the top of the quote.)

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

That's not much of a positive and thoughtful conversation starter. That's little other than pride braggadociously expressed. Why is that so?

• You didn't offer any of your own nuanced spin on the blog post.
• You didn't expound on the ideas in the blog post.
• You didn't put any of your own ideas on the table in advance of asking us to do the same.

It's fine that you use the blog post as a high level rubric for the discussion, but without your putting your own "something" out there with it -- something beside a blanket "he says the same thing I do" affirmation -- it's not you that we'd be discussing, it's the blogger's ideas, and he's not here to defend or explain them. And all you said, was basically, "me too and I told you so." What else is that but you expressing a feeling of validation? Nothing. That all that is.

Think of it as though you found a recipe (the blog post) for apple pie. You read it and it's close to what you want to bake, but you put your own take on it and add apple brandy to the recipe and then ice the pie crust with hard sauce. Now it's not someone else's pie/recipe, it's your pie/recipe and the people to whom you serve it will have a reason to talk about it with you.

I prefer to start a discussion with minimal input, and let the ideas hash themselves out through discussion. If you don't like that, feel free to infest other threads.

And to me progressivism has many of the traits you list above, What really is the clincher is how they deal with "heretics" or those with beliefs outside their own system.

More like start with minimal thought then apply minimal honesty.

 

[Mac1958]

Mind if I quote you?

I haven’t yet quite come to terms with this over-the-top hysteria.

Well, you had 4 years in 2 cases. Conservatives stating they will not hire anyone because we have Obama in office; gun store owners refusing to serve people who voted for Obama.

And you had 2 years since the court ruled on SSM to “come to terms” with why conservative clerks wouldn’t issue marriage certificates.

How much more time do you need?

I can see why the traditional partisans would be upset, they were absolutely sure that we were on a inexorable march towards a Euro-social democracy (so was I, by the way), and this has just stunned them. That would explain their intensity.

The part that I don't yet understand is the way it has ignited such hatred throughout the entire Left side of our culture. There is simply nothing in our history, as far as I know, that compares with this.

Oh… you don’t?

Perhaps you missed this:

2008–13 United States ammunition shortage - Wikipedia (the page has 500 edits plus…it wasn’t started last week so yes, it was “a thing”). You don’t think that was “over the top” hysteria?

But that was just an example of hysteria that lasted 5 years that you claim to be completely unaware of….

Lets go back to 2009 when Obama hadn’t done much of anything to piss anyone off yet: You may recall that the President of the US wanted to broadcast a message to some school kids. Pretty innocuous, right? Wrong:

Many conservatives enraged over Obama school speech - CNN.com

One “level headed” conservative said: “"Thinking about my kids in school having to listen to that just really upsets me," suburban Colorado mother Shanneen Barron told CNN Denver affiliate KMGH. "I'm an American. They are Americans, and I don't feel that's OK. I feel very scared to be in this country with our leadership right now.”

School Districts in Six States to Refrain from Showing Presidential Address Next Week

Proves it was widespread.

I guess you missed the Town Halls in 2009—right after Obama took office in January 8 months earlier. Politico described the supposedly “non hysterical” protestors as this:

Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress.

Guess you missed that one too.

Hysterical behavior is the staple of both sides when they lose the election; somehow you only cite it when the left is guilty of it and plead ignorance to all of the other examples.

One clue may be in the increase in sheer hatred towards "the rubes", those who don't live in the bluest states. You can see it all over this board, it's a little disturbing.
.

I guess you missed Ms. Streep’s comments and how much love they generated by the right wing when she said that MMA wasn’t an “art”. But the again, the right wing posters here (you mentioned the board) have always loved Hollywood; right? <sarcasm>

Whatever…everyone feels they are under attack 100% of the time on the board.

But FWIW…

I’ve yet to see any “sheer hatred” of the “rubes” as you put it that has been beyond the usual comments that supposedly educated people make about the supposedly uneducated… on this board at least. I see much more venom in the other direction as a matter of fact. What I think you’re seeing is that people who love the nation (and many Republicans too) know that Mr. Trump is, at best, several fathoms in over his head with no inkling of how to begin to tackle the problems of the nation; all the while professing unique expertise in solving those specific problems. And when you air those concerns…naturally…the people who installed this douchebag are (or at least feel) they are being targeted for being dumb enough to think he knew more than the generals about ISIS, that he had a plan to replace Obamacare, that he actually did care about veterans, and that he will bring jobs back when simple mathematics makes it nearly impossible.

So all this means that you disagree that the Left has been unusually animated about Trump's win.

Is that a fair conclusion?

And have you not seen ANY of guno's posts, for example?
.

 

[NightFox]

I do think there is a danger here. Once ideology infects us at a cultural/societal level, a momentum can take over and cause literal schisms, I'd think. Not just silly little verbal slap fights, but something more tangible and destructive.

Maybe I'm wrong. That would be nice.
.

You're probably not wrong but maybe the questions you should be asking are:
1. What are you really afraid of?
2. What can you do to prevent it?
3. If prevention proves to be impractical or impossible what is your strategy to mitigate the effects?

Personally I think that a gaggle of incoherent, brain washed anti-Trump ding bats running around trying demonstrate what mindless drones they really are is the least of our problems given that the Republic is facing an ever increasing risk of currency destruction and the economic chaos & political uncertainty that will surely follow.

"Every hand is turned against you. Even the ground beneath your feet carries the seeds of your destruction! " -- Dark Voice, Starcraft II

 

[Mac1958]

I do think there is a danger here. Once ideology infects us at a cultural/societal level, a momentum can take over and cause literal schisms, I'd think. Not just silly little verbal slap fights, but something more tangible and destructive.

Maybe I'm wrong. That would be nice.
.

You're probably not wrong but maybe the questions you should be asking are:
1. What are you really afraid of?
2. What can you do to prevent it?
3. If prevention proves to be impractical or impossible what is your strategy to mitigate the effects?

Personally I think that a gaggle of incoherent, brain washed anti-Trump ding bats running around trying demonstrate what mindless drones they really are is the least of our problems given that the Republic is facing an ever increasing risk of currency destruction and the economic chaos & political uncertainty that will surely follow.

"Every hand is turned against you. Even the ground beneath your feet carries the seeds of your destruction! " -- Dark Voice, Starcraft II

I've pretty much given up trying to ask. The only response I've gotten so far is to deny that the behavior is at all unusual.

I think they believe the behavior is perfectly justified.

If you can't agree on a fundamental premise, there's nowhere to go from there.
.

 

[martybegan]

Blog: Why the left hates Trump so intensely

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

reinforcing lessons of inclusion, tolerance, feminism, and anti-racism


So fly over country wanted bigotry and racism, anti feminism, anti inclusion, and anti tolerance back?

They don't want the feminism being spouted now, that deals more with women trying to find some advantage over men, rather than being equal to men

They don't want the anti-bigotry that states that if you oppose progressive policies like affirmative action, immigration amnesty, and open borders, you are a bigot.

They don't want the anti-racism that states basically the issues I listed above.

How tolerant is the left these days over the lifestyle of most of middle america? Why are words like rubes, and deplorables seeming A-OK in the leftist lexicon?

I think it was more about MONEY...what they believe has affected their own pockets, and they just wanted to see jobs return...they seem to believe if affirmative action was not there... they, as in white America, would have more jobs, if immigrants were not here, they'd have more jobs and money, and those few against feminism thoughts of... if women were not in the workforce, 'they' would have more jobs and money....

that kind of thing....all related to their own prosperity....isn't the saying, ''people vote with their pocketbook''?

Some of it may be economics, but some of it also can be attributed to people don't like being called evil, and those terms bigot, racist, misogynist, homophobic, are just fill in words for calling someone evil. That, and the level of "evil" has been devolved down to disagreement on politics, and this disagreement has been lowered to the level where the left basically just says "shut up" when someone has an opinion that doesn't fit within progressive orthodoxy.

That's funny....!

I don't and never have, seen any of you on the right, 'shut up', you are more vocal than Liberals, on near everything, for at least 3 decades from my eye view.

You can't compare a message board to "real life". In real life, especially on the coasts, progressive views are the norm, and non-progressives often feel pressure to keep their traps shut. Be it for reasons of personal comfort, down to reasons of personal and/or economic safety.

You also see it in the scores of conservative/libertarian speakers being either shouted down, or even stopped from speaking on campuses.