Progress towards what?

Post Reply New Topic

I have heard the term "Progressive" used in reference to people with social agendas, a term constantly sought amelioration for by those who seek to label themselves as such, but for them I would ask, "progression towards what goals?" Toward a future in space or rather progress toward some social "utopia"? I would rather have space than some ridiculous social agenda, but "progressives" seem to seek more of the "social progress" than progress towards the colonization of space and space-faring in general. Perhaps some want both, and I could see that, but the social agendas of many "progressives" seem to seek more progress towards eugenics programs and other crap we don't need than toward any useful technological progress.

I often wonder about this. 'Progressivism' tends to mean nannying, prohibitionism, soft authoritarianism and generally telling others what to do. Add to that a good dose of leftist economics and you have progressivism right there.

There is nothing progressive about it.

Progressive is striving towards a state of increase social equality, environmentally sustainable industrialization, and broader education. In sort, a belief in Enlightenment era ideals moulded towards present reality where we realize crude industrialization cannot continue unchekced.

Progress toward something more perfect. Obviously beyond our planet.

My friends, I had not intended to discuss this controversial subject at this particular time. However, I want you to know that I do not shun controversy. On the contrary, I will take a stand on any issue at any time, regardless of how fraught with controversy it might be. You have asked me how I feel about whiskey. All right, here is how I feel about whiskey:

If when you say whiskey you mean the devil's brew, the poison scourge, the bloody monster, that defiles innocence, dethrones reason, destroys the home, creates misery and poverty, yea, literally takes the bread from the mouths of little children; if you mean the evil drink that topples the Christian man and woman from the pinnacle of righteous, gracious living into the bottomless pit of degradation, and despair, and shame and helplessness, and hopelessness, then certainly I am against it.

But, if when you say whiskey you mean the oil of conversation, the philosophic wine, the ale that is consumed when good fellows get together, that puts a song in their hearts and laughter on their lips, and the warm glow of contentment in their eyes; if you mean Christmas cheer; if you mean the stimulating drink that puts the spring in the old gentleman's step on a frosty, crispy morning; if you mean the drink which enables a man to magnify his joy, and his happiness, and to forget, if only for a little while, life's great tragedies, and heartaches, and sorrows; if you mean that drink, the sale of which pours into our treasuries untold millions of dollars, which are used to provide tender care for our little crippled children, our blind, our deaf, our dumb, our pitiful aged and infirm; to build highways and hospitals and schools, then certainly I am for it.

This is my stand. I will not retreat from it. I will not compromise.

Obviously, progress away from the religious barbarism and UKIP style ethnic purism certain conservatives (who may be here) advocate.

Progressive as the definition taken by the UK's ConDem'ed government is the converse of the word, it is really repressive imho tho joking as side.

Progressive in the political scene, or what you wound call Progressivism is a political attitude favoring or advocating changes or reform through governmental action. For example a government making legislative changes to housing laws to encourage landlords to improver living conditions for the tenets.

Last edited by cdfox7 on 12 Apr 2011, 7:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

By eugenics do you mean things like stem cell research?

Social programs that help the disadvantaged are the opposite of eugenics. Pro Choice, Social Programs, Gay marriage, and protecting the Environment are the four main issues that separate those with traditional/conservative views.

Other than the creation of jobs, I don't see a huge impact on technology, regardless of who is in office. If we could get past the special interests of oil, we could make great strides in the development of new technology for energy. The results though, seem to be close to the same, regardless of who is in charge.

We gained many advances in technology with the race to space; but I don't see either progressives or conservatives putting in on the front burner, with the economic problems we have. The battle over what is good for the economy will probably be on the front burner for whomever is in office from now until forever.

Ethnic purism?! Where'd you get that from?

Utter nonsense!

UKIP are not ethnic purists, not by a long shot. For that you want the BNP, the National Front, the National Democratic Party of Germany, the Greater Romania Party and others.

UKIP are, in the main, just eurosceptic conservatives with some classical liberals and libertarians. Racist extremists are not welcome in my party and get booted out as soon as they are found out… see their run-ins with the BNP for instance. There have been calls for the BNP and UKIP to merge but they have always come from the BNP and not UKIP. The BNP have tried, multiple times, to infiltrate UKIP and have always been rebuffed. In the extremely unlikely event that there were any attempts made to merge UKIP with the BNP I would leave in disgust.

I never get tired of saying this but there isn't that much that UKIP and the BNP agree on besides wanting to leave the EU. Even our nationalisms are very different - the BNP are white, ethnic nationalist and want to boot all non-Europeans out of the country; UKIP are multiracial and civic nationalist. We have quite a few non-white members in UKIP, some standing for elections and even a black fella standing for the post of Leader last time (Nige won by a landslide but I never thought that was really in any doubt).

The BNP are much more associated with racist hooligans (due to their violent and neo-Nazi past).

To give an idea what I mean, see this clip from This Is England (though the 'Combo' character is actually a racist English nationalist rather than racist British nationalists like the BNP):

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7pL6iuw-g0[/youtube]Which is why people will never really vote for them, save the odd seat in the European Parliament at the most (they just barely scraped that second seat in the North West). I live in the part of the UK with the most BNP support and even here it is minimal except for in a few, mostly deprived and racially/religiously polarised areas.

Progress towards a label with less negative associations than liberal is my guess.

progress towards the elimination of labels in general

on a slightly more serious note i think progress is any adaptation made that benefits the current state of living for the majority of consciouss beings

Maybe to form a more perfect union, to promote the general welfare, etc. I know Ive heard that somewhere before. It'll come to me.

That there is an arc to social justice is a fact of history. Progressives have played a role in that. To demonize them and pretend they have no value is just pure hatred by those who are easily led to hate others. Same old story.

I can not for the life of me understand why liberal is such a bad word.
I can not see a single definition of the word that is negative.

Personally I feel that we should be progressing towards opening up space. All of us crammed in on one planet is a bad thing, for more than one reason. I'm of the opinion that some day there will be religiously chartered colonies where people can go and practice what they preach, and likewise there will be privately chartered colonies where anarchists can form their own civilizations, or whatever. I think having the option of moving millions of miles away from ideas you disagree with will lead to a renaissance in Humankind

or a lot of creepy cult planets.