Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hey, when did the Democrats change from strict construction to the very liberal kind of thought they have today? I always wondered when that was.
Then Ronald Regan opening up Washington to the corporate interests....well basically the whole sixties generation and the women's movement, civil rights movement, enviormental movement etc. etc.
Liberals advocate Equality of Outcome, instead of Equality of Opportunity.
Simply put, Liberals don't believe their constituents are adept or capable, so "greasing the skids" to give certain segments a leg up is their driving philosophy. In other words, Liberals think their constituents are just plain stupid.
Apparently you don't know any liberals. No liberal I know believes in what you claim liberals believe in.
Conservatives yearn for a past that never was and progressives try to create a better future for all.
That is why I am a progressive.
CONSERVATIVE, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others. - Ambrose Bierce.
-----
I'd say that the primary conceit of the progressive is that they understand the world well enough to shape it by layer after layer of imposed law and regulation. Each new accretion is a response to those pesky humans who just won't behave in the desired manner.
All the items you have listed are reasons the conservatives cannot tolerate Progressive ideas. All of these things increased individual rights and freedoms at the cost to the owners. Conservative still consider emancipating slaves to be a taking without compensation. Progressives find slavery and its descendants like company towns and usuorious interest rates to be repulsive.
Freedom of the individual from discrimination verses the right of the organization or owners to dictate who CAN AND CANNOT BE FREE. We consider freedom from famine one of the basic needs. This is why I am a progressive.
It was people you would call progressives who tried to "change America" in the fight to end slavery.
It was people you would call progressives who tried to "change America" who brought about women's right to vote.
It was people you would call progressives who tried to "change America" who brought about black people's right to vote.
It was people you would call progressives who tried to "change America"who created universal public education, and then began the struggle to end racial discrimination in public education.
It was people you would call progressives who tried to "change America" and created the most successful anti-poverty program we've ever known: Social Security.
It was people you would call progressives who tried to "change America" who gave us vast national mechanisms for the creation and protection of wealth and opportunity, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Interstate Highway System, and a myriad of other regulatory agencies without with everyday commerce would be impossible.
It was people you would call progressives who tried to "change America" who created the Internet and every other communications network that you use every day.
It happens that yesterday was the anniversary of the ratification of the United States Constitution. It is largely due to the work of people you would call progressives that the United States is a freer, more vital place now than it was on June 21, 1788. I don't personally know anyone who thinks things would be better if we had had no change since 1788, but maybe you're the first.
For now, I'll just say that I don't think we had achieved perfection on June 21. 1788, and I still don't think we've achieved perfection.
No, that would be the actual definition. "Progressives" today care nothing at all about cracking open a dictionary. They're more regressing back to the super nanny-state where they'll have a ruling leader (like a king) and everyone is poor....
No, that would be the actual definition. "Progressives" today care nothing at all about cracking open a dictionary. They're more regressing back to the super nanny-state where they'll have a ruling leader (like a king) and everyone is poor....
My guess? A very loose grip on reality. I'm constantly amazed by what a warped, distorted view most conservatives have of progs/libs/whatever. Their definition does not fit me, nor any left of center person I've ever met.
I promise I'm not trolling (I'm a newbie), but I really want to understand why progressives want to change America.
America was founded on freedom, an escape from the tryanny of British rule. Our founding fathers wanted limited government (not NO government). Why do progressives want to change what this country was founded on? America is the last bastion of freedom (for now anyway) and those of us that believe in freedom want to protect it!
Expansive government has been tried time and time again only to be a failure. America has survived over 230 years (which is a long time for a government) by giving control to its citizens instead of a king/ruler/dictator...etc.
If you want the government to take care of you, why don't you move instead of screwing up what we have?!
It wasn't always this way, in the past decade the rich have tripled their wealth at the expense of all Americans. The top 400 make as much as 22% of the entire population of America, the top 1% have as much as the bottom 50%. So it isn't "Progressives " who are changing America
I don't see that we want to "change" America, we just feel that some of the fundamentals of what it was founded on have been hijacked.
So the founding fathers wanted money and labor taken from one man and given to another who did not earn it? I guess I did not see that in the Constitution.
The guarantee of America has always been EQUAL OPPORTUNITY, not EQUAL OUTCOMES.Every political system which has tried the EQUAL OUTCOMES route has failed miserably. The problem with a free system is that there will be people who succeed and those who fail. However, a rigged and unfair playing field involves confiscating resources from those who have succeeded and giving them to those who have not. This is further a gross misallocation of resources, such that those who have failed have already clearly demonstrated that they cannot develop those resources in the first place.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
