By theft? Fairness is not a solution! I want details and what is their argument going to be to push forward something that has already proven to fail!
The impression I get from people who support Bernie Sanders and the AOC’s is that they look at places like Norway and Sweden and think that is what America should be like. They have a romantic view of being a socialist country is the answer! I want to have this debate! Lets put socialism on trial!
And do you equate progressive and socialist? For that matter, why can’t a solid socialist or progressive feel good about a candidate that is not an exact match to their politics? People are more than their political stance. There are questions of integrity, wisdom, judgment, that can attract one to a candidate. Are you on the right incapable of seeing this? Do you honestly prefer to say, hurr durr Trump’s the best, libs owned…and then count that as a debate?
You are not making a case! You are just babbling and obfuscating the topic here and demigogueing people from the right. Try Again. Please tell us why you think Socialism is the answer? Its a straight forward question and spare us the other nonsense diatribe you seem to want to rant about! This is a debate. Are you up for it or will you slink away into your safe space like you always do?
Do you even know what the history of Progressivism or its meaning is? I am willing to bet you don’t and its just a term you like to rally around to support your cult personalities that promises you free shit!
No one said that you couldn’t! Pick a candidate that best represents your cause and we can discuss it further!
Are you incapable of seeing anybody from the right’s point of view? Why do you come here to this thread if you are not willing to listen to any opposing views to your own?
No one mentioned Trump here, you did! Is that your fall back position by avoiding discussing the merits of socialism?
Dam! Not sure what happened. Pretty funny nevertheless!
Ha! So true, and really hits on the double standard the Democrats always display!
You asked for a debate between progressivism and conservatism but didn’t define what you think it means. How do we frame a discussion without the base of your debate defined. Not only that, but you didn’t pick a side of the debate and defend it. You however chose to attack progressivism instead.
Progressivism is the reason you have a Internet forum to make incoherent arguments. Progressivism is the reason why you are able to post this forum from a WiFi hotspot in Home Depot. Progressivism is the reason why you know the earth is round. Progressivism is the reason why you don’t die of small pox. Progressivism is the reason why black people arent slaves anymore.
I can go on and on… however I will throw you this bone…
Unchecked progressivism is not good as well. Even progressives can go too far. For example “banning” straws in California.
That is where conservatism comes in. It’s the check on progressivism. It’s the brakes to the gas pedal. Conservatism seeks to keep the status quo… resist change. Conservatism is good for preventing debt but bad for social progression.
I disagree with your beginning salvo and the problem I have with you most of the time is you are genuinely dishonest in how you frame your responses and have a problem with your reading comprehension. If you think I am attacking progressivism then its up to you to defend it.
But I was pretty clear from the beginning, its that you want to control the narrative!
“why they think their way is better than conservatism”
You don’t understand what Conservatism is as evidenced by your statement and the definition you are providing!
My point to you is, I don’t think you know what Progressivism is either, and I am ready for that debate. So the question is what is the Progressive platform in your definition?
This year? This month? This week? Today? For the next five minutes? You’ll have to be more specific.
Well I am asking this question on a fundamental level, assuming we go all the way back to its founding. People like Pragmatic who call themselves progressives I am willing to bet that they have no idea what that means.
I’m not sure it’s a fair question. Their “platform”, if you want to call it that, keeps changing depending on the newest fauxrage du jour. Sometimes even on the hour. Remember the Iraq resolution and all the “I was for the war before I was against it” nonsense? And that’s just ONE example. Progressivism? More like hypocrisy abound.
There’s a reason their champions are the equivalent of human kites. (I’m looking at you Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama, and Al Gore.)
I think you are describing the Democratic party not progressivism! Progressivism as an ideology is what I am more referring to.
They are certainly intertwined so that would explain the confusion. Even the Democratic Socialist has changed his stance a few times since running last time. Meanwhile, those against allowing illegal immigration? Still against allowing illegal immigration. Say what you want about Conservatism, at least it’s followers are consistent.
It shouldn’t be confusing, this is a debate not about political parties but the ideologies in which they are founded on. Democratic Socialists is not the same as Progressivism, in terms of the ideology, while the two can cross pollinate in their causes, the two have separate births of thought!
So you’re saying Bernie Sanders isn’t a progressive? You might need to tell him that.
No, he is not! He is a socialist who masquerades as a progressive. Of course the progressive brand today is no where near the brand when it was founded in the 1870’s much like the term “Liberalism” has been hi-jacked by the left, which brings into question the people who call themselves progressives do they really know what that means?
Uh huh. Why haven’t any of the real socialists claimed him as one of theirs then? I missed where he advocated for government ownership of the means of production or distribution which would be the dictionary definition of socialist. You seem confused to say the least.
