Author Topic: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought  (Read 214975 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 129,560
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,257
  • Freespeecher
Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« on: July 27, 2007, 22:54:12 »
The political "Left" is violently against many things, and has struck bizzare alliances with shuch charming partners as Hezbollah, but what motivates them? One starting point for discussion from "Just Right"

http://jr2020.blogspot.com/2007/07/lefty-mind.

Quote
Friday, July 27, 2007
The lefty mind

In an excellent discussion between David Thompson and Ophelia Benson (co-author of ‘Why Truth Matters’) we get some insight into what goes on in lefty heads.

Ms. Benson is insists that postmodernism, for example, has little to do with the left. David Thompson, argues very coherently to the contrary:

    OB: ...There are core ideas and allegiances that do place people firmly and openly on the right or the left, but a sceptical view of postmodernism is not one of them....

    [...]
    DT: ... pomo’s key contemporary figures – its architects and advocates - are almost all leftwing and often pointedly so. I’m guessing this isn’t just a coincidence…
    [...]
    OB: ...I think the whole subject is mixed up with celebrity-worship, fandom, star-hugging, fashion, trendiness, attention-seeking, in a truly depressing and distasteful ..... But what on earth is 'left' about that? Nothing, I would say.
    [...]
    DT: Well, as to what’s ‘left’ about the worship of dubious figures, I’m inclined to cough and mutter Marx", "Castro", "Chavez" and Che Guevara T-shirts." Communist societies are surprisingly big on idolatry, aren’t they? .... Ditto the white middle-class lefties who wave placards announcing "We are all Hizballah now." I guess it’s something to do with "giving it to the man" or not liking one’s parents or something. It all seems a tad narcissistic to me, and just a little depraved.
    [...]
    OB: Yes, but is the idolatry of known Communist societies a feature of their Communism or of something else? .....Maybe it's just groupthink; maybe it's that simple and that obvious and there's nothing more profound to be said about it.
    [...]
    DT: It seems to me that your idea of what a left ought to be is rather at odds with what much of the left, perhaps most of it, has become. ...
    [...]
    DT: It’s easy to see what much of the left is against, if not the reasons why. It’s much harder to see what the left is for. I don’t see a coherent set of ideas. I see a patchwork of contradiction, often for its own sake, or the sake of appearance, or in some cases to enact some kind of personal psychodrama.

Here's the whole piece.

Posted by JR at 1:16 PM 

Labels: David Thompson, loony left, postmodernism
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline van Gemeren

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 660
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 391
  • Milnet coin # 038
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #1 on: July 28, 2007, 00:27:25 »
In regards to your emphasis, I would argue that, that is what you get when you try to lump together a vast array of different political thoughts and ideas into a 2 dimensional plane. I can't think of any political group where everybody agrees with each other on absolutely every single issue. If that were the case they would not be human, just clones/robots. Are you suggesting that the political "Right" is monolithic and that only coherent ideas are expressed? I would beg to differ.

P.S The link does not work for me. I always find these readings interesting because it gets the gears grinding even if I don't agree with them.


"It's tough being paranoid and having someone out to get you"
-Journeyman
http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php/topic,59309.msg555623.html#msg555623

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 129,560
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,257
  • Freespeecher
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #2 on: July 28, 2007, 11:19:13 »
http://jr2020.blogspot.com/    July 27, 2007

While neither the "Left" or the "Right" are monolithic entities, the "Left" has a disproportionate influence over us. About 2/3 of Canadian voters support left wing parties like the Liberals, NDP, Bloc and Green party; most of our electronic and print media comes through a "progressive" filter, discussions in schools and higher education are heavily bent to the left (How many schools are showing students "The Great Global Warming Swindle" either alone or after "An Inconveinient Truth"? Now how many schools plan to show students "An Inconveinient Truth" only?). Most of the Judiciary has been appointed by politicians who come from the Left side of the political spectrum, and I could go on.

Deconstructing this sort of thinking will go a long way to explaining recent history (i.e. the causes of why things are this way today), as well as attempting to predict future trends.

It certainly will pay to do a similar thought exercise on the right, and in fact you can see some of my attempts to do so in this forum (Libertarians, Conservatism needs work, Politics with more Dimensions, etc.).

Bon appitite.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 129,560
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,257
  • Freespeecher
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #3 on: September 19, 2007, 14:34:53 »
From "Alice the Camel". An interesting summary of the difference between the "Left" and "Right"

http://alice-the-camel.blogspot.com/2007/09/who-will-save-us.html

Quote
The modern liberal hangs the success of society on the integrity of its institutions. On the other hand, the non-modern-liberal hangs the success of society on the integrity of its citizens.

[I hadn't thought of it in such a way until reading Robert Bork's Slouching Towards Gomorrah, which, incidentally, as a camel with 3 curve scoliosis I slouch a lot, but that is neither here nor there and precisely here and there all at once.]

Strangely, it puts us at odds, quibbling over a journey where the destination is agreed. We stand on the highway of life arguing: Go left! No right! One could suppose, I suppose, that all roads lead to where we're going and that left or right will get us there in the end, but I'm not so sure.

Consider this road that has lead us to the left or banked us to the east if we were originally facing south. Our almighty institutions have become just that...Almighty. Scrambling to try to provide an answer for all the problems and discomfort of its vulnerable sheep, including the weather. Begging for rules of protection. Thy rod and staff comforts us. The Angel of Blame leadeth us beside still waters and restoreth our soul to a blissfully soothed state.

Our children are suffering. Why aren't the schools doing something? Crime is flourishing. When will the courts save us? Our people are in poverty. Who has a program to save us?

Yes, who?

Of course, the "Progressive" or "liberal" or what have you would seem to make the assumption that the "Institution" exists as a separate entity  from the people who compose its workers and directors, at least so long as it is a government institution. While a private corporation is also a legal person, there is no doubt that the corporate person lives or dies from the integrity of its directors and staff.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 129,560
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,257
  • Freespeecher
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #4 on: September 22, 2007, 01:39:36 »
Another interesting article:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/09/death_fears_of_the_boomer_left_1.html

Quote
September 21, 2007
Death fears of the Boomer Left
By James Lewis
"Back in the Sixties," sighs an ex-hippie lady I know, "everybody was happy. Really. Everybody." 

Gosh, that wasn't what other people remember. Most teenagers go through a lot of ups and downs, and in the Sixties the Baby Boomers were rollercoastering through their own adolescence. (Some still are.)

But as the Boomer Left thinks back to those glory years, they sound like the poet Wordsworth rhapsodizing about the early French Revolution -- before the heads started to roll from Dr. Guillotin's clever new contraption:

    Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive,

    But to be young was very heaven!

Well, bless their romantic little hearts. The Sixties! Woodstock! The Summer of Love!

Yet today Lennon is dead and Yoko is a little old lady; Jack Kennedy is long gone, brother Bobby and Dr. King are glorified Martyrs of the Left  -- which is odd, given that Bobby sent the FBI after Dr. King. Even elegant Jackie O has passed away. The Rolling Stones are gathering moss, and The Grateful Dead are looking a lot less grateful than they used to. But the enemies of the Boomer Left are still alive:  Richard M. Nixon is now reborn in George W. Bush as the Left's favorite hate object.

It wasn't supposed to be that way.

A lot of the loss of political sanity we see today reflects the death fears of the Boomer Left. The Baby Left was only a small  percentage of the Boomer generation. But starting in the Sixties, they managed to place their indelible stamp on the media, and haven't let up since.

"The Sixties" was itself a PR fantasy, whooped up by our objective media to flatter their younger audience, and to make converts for the Left. For Boomers themselves, swinging Left was a good career move: It got them noticed in the media, in colleges, in advertising, in the arts, in politics, and in the sexual meat market.

Europe had a slightly different version in the rebellious year of '68. It was all triggered by the biological clock of the post-war Baby Boom, of course, but the Left quickly took control of the generational narrative. A tiny minority of Boomers grabbed political and media power, and have exercised it with a vengeance, literally, over half a century.  Today they are having majot anger control problems, precisely because their media monopoly is being threatened. The traditional American narrative is not yet stamped into extinction.     

The rising Boomer Left openly conspired to conduct a "Long March through the institutions" -- to infiltrate and seize control over the  American media, universities, and bureaucracies. Those institutions are stacked today with aging Lefties, enforcing Political Correctness in all its maddest manifestations. Black faces dominate Madison Avenue ads, as do white women and teenagers, while middle-aged white males are demonized and ridiculed on billboards and TV. This has a devastating effect on boys looking to their Dads to be role models, only to see Dad put down mercilessly in all the pop media. Kids are very confused as a result. But Politically Correct agit-prop  satisfies the Boomer Left's need for psychic vengeance. PC is now the dominant style of our age.

When people confront their own mortality, their finiteness, they tend to project their personal fears onto the world. So we have Global Warming panic, Flesh-Eating Germs panic, Nuclear Power panic and scores of other imaginary fears. For anxious people the world is full of scary things, all because of their need to escape the prospect of personal end. The PC world is as full of superstitious phobias as the Mayan world of a thousand years ago; the Mayans controlled their fears by sacrificing children to ensure the sun would rise the next morning. We sacrifice conservatives: Newt Gingrich, George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, two Attorneys General in a row.

Oddly enough, this omni-panic goes along with omni-denial, as liberal Boomers turn a blind eye to real dangers, like the looming nuclear proliferation threat coming from Ahmadi-Nejad, the Syrians and the NoKos. On any given day the Washington Post and the New York Times will fire yet another denial out to a skeptical world. What nuclear proliferation? Bush lied! Today, the French Foreign Minister is more serious about Iranian nukes than the leading Democrats running for president of the United States.

But it's not just nuclear proliferation. On the Gay Left there is denial of such immediate dangers as HIV transmission, with some men having "bug chasing" sex parties with infected carriers. Europe continues to import millions of militant Islamists into its multicultural fantasy land, and now faces demographic extinction; but the Euromedia still live in blissful ignorance. Major Euromedia like the BBC, the Guardian and Der Spiegel  blame America and Israel for their own suicidal multicultural blunders; those scapegoats are making the peace-loving Muslims mad, you see. Such misdirected fears go hand-in-hand with misdirected denial and rage.

Just recently we saw yet another shameful display at the US Senate Armed Services Committee, as the Left united in publicly slandering a four-star General, a man who has seen combat on behalf of the United States, who has served us all his adult life, who literally wrote the manual on counter-insurgency, and who came back to report steady improvement in Iraq. General Petraeus drives the Left barking mad, in good part because he is so un-PC: Another middle aged white guy, super-competent, intelligent, honest, brave and modest, in uniform, telling us what we don't want to hear. Damn!

American victory in Iraq is a threat to the Left, which has always told us that "wars never solve anything." Google shows almost four million reptitions of that mantra.   Fighting is said to be a universal evil, running right against the rock-hard facts that tell us that civilized -- yes, civilized -- warfare abolished slavery, established peace and freedom in half the world, liberated the oppressed, spread democratic forms of government, and created the basis for world-wide prosperity today. American military strength protects us every single day of our lives.

We forget that at our peril.

No matter: The Left had to slander a victorious American commander in Iraq because he brought the unwelcome news that they were wrong --- again.  They felt betrayed, giggling wildly to the sad pun of "General Betray-Us."  But the American people did not feel betrayed. (Not by the General, anyway.)

The personal death fears of the Boomer Left are a key to contemporary politics. Death fear drives the lifelong quest for Hillary Clinton to be the First Woman President at any cost in personal destruction to her political enemies, the narcissistic need for John F. Kerry to see himself as his mythic hero JFK, and the grandiosity behind Al Gore's Global Prophecy of Doom, now playing to loud applause in Norway. (Where Al will no doubt receive the Nobel Peace Prize for peddling faux science to millions of dupes).

We can also see the Boomer Left's real fear in their constant need to shut out conservative voices, just like they shut out their parents' voices in the Sixties. Conservatives are too much in touch with reality. Conservatives are scary. The Left doesn't listen to conservatives as a matter of noble principle.

In the Sixties the Boomer Left discovered  the answer to war and human conflict, and indeed the secret of eternal life. Then reality came along with one shocking blow after another: JFK was killed, RFK was, too, Dr. King went down, and Vietnam happened. The Left twisted all those events. You will not read in their memoirs that JFK was killed by a Communist loner, that RFK was murdered by a Palestinian militant, and that our retreat from Vietnam was followed by the biggest crashing domino in the horrific history of Communism: Pol Pot's genocide of his own people in Cambodia. None of those facts exist for the Boomer Left. They never happened.

The fear of death is a basic human obsession. It may be the basic human fear. Judging from the archeological record, modern humans arose between 40 and 70 thousand years ago, when our ancestors began to decorate graves with red ochre, buried personal weapons and jewelry with the bodies of the dead, and gave them food and servant companions for the journey. Symbolic objects arose 30-70 millenia ago, and were constantly employed to ward off the fear of dying. The symbolic undoing of death is a universal marker for Homo Sapiens Sapiens today.

The Boomer Left created its own fantasy world without death. Well, they were hardly the first. The Egyptians built their pyramids and funeral mastabas, generation after generation over three thousand years, culminating in the super-sized Great Pyramid at Giza. They were all dedicated to the immortality of whichever pharaoh died and was buried there. Ancient grave mounds can be found in Scandinavia and the Americas, as a kind of proto-pyramid. By the beginnings of intensive agriculture and settled cities, six to ten millenia ago, we find humans grasping for eternity by way of great monuments in India, South-East Asia, Sumeria (Iraq) and China.

Conservatives don't have the answer to the fear of death; it's not the sort of thing you can find settled answers to. But we respect the ways in which humans have learned to cope: By religious faith -- the constructive kind, not the suicide-murdering version -- by contributing positively to the world in any number of ways, by raising children, by passing on what wisdom we have learned.  Conservatives don't believe in denial, by and large. Historically, Anglo-American conservatives have been skeptical about grandiose "solutions" to human frailties; but not closed-minded to reasoned progress. Balancing skepticism and open-mindedness is a conservative value.

The greatest flaw of the Boomer Left is to see life through plainly false ideas. Start with a false premise, and you'll end up with false conclusions. Begin with the conviction that we can turn all human conflicts into peace and love just by willing it, and you end up convinced that those who don't agree with you must be evil, or must be forced to obey. Start with the false certainty that youth is eternal, and you end up undermining responsible parenting and kids. Assume  that cultures are easy to change -- and not the treasured heritage of a hundred generations -- and you end up importing millions of dangerously indoctrinated militants into your peaceful land. Or take it on faith that brain-altering drugs are harmless, and you end up with vulnerable people hooked on smack and crack, killing each other to feed their habit. Or fall for the idea that women are better than men, and you ignite a war between the sexes, and lead children astray.

The biggest error we tend to make is to confuse the Boomer Left with the Boomer Generation as a whole. The Left has managed to peddle that illusion. As usual, liberals fool themselves into believing that they are The People; But the conservative revival in the United States shows it isn't true. It's good to keep in mind that General Petraeus is also a Boomer.

Conservatives represent what Sigmund Freud called the "Reality Principle," the principle of sane adulthood. Starting in the Sixties, the Left began to deny the Reality Principle, leading to a kind of mass neurosis. Whole Leftist philosophies, like post-modernism, explicitly deny that reality is real. Terms like "Reality Principle" and "mass neurosis" have therefore lost popularity;  but they capture the essence of the problem.

To be sure, conservatives are vulnerable to all the usual human frailties. But to be "conservative" is a near-synonym for being grown-up. A big part of maturity is to come to terms with one's own limits -- without neurotic denial, without blaming and raging at others, and without undue fear.

General Petraeus, as a US combat leader, has come to terms with his own fear of death in a civilized and disciplined way. But last week, the Senate Armed Services Committee kept on swerving into black comedy when Democrats reminded him that people die in war. It was cringe-making, sink-through-the-floor embarassing.

As a grown-up making thoughtful decisions under the most difficult circumstances, Petraeus is clearly the moral superior of all the neurotics who slandered him last week. We survive and thrive as a civilization only because of people like him.

One of these days it would be nice for the grown-ups to take the culture back.

James Lewis blogs at dangeroustimes.wordpress.com
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline ArmyRick

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,830
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,867
  • What the????
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #5 on: September 22, 2007, 06:27:49 »
Very intresting read.
Please do not bother to comment on my post unless you actually read it and understood what I am getting at. Its kind of like receiving orders and noth bothering to do a mission analysis. Make sure you get the point.

Offline Zip

  • GODLESS HEATHEN
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 1,467
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,145
    • UNCOMMON SENSE
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #6 on: September 22, 2007, 08:15:19 »
Quote
I’m inclined to cough and mutter Marx", "Castro", "Chavez" and Che Guevara T-shirts."

Ah yes, psudeo-communism, separating stupid leftists from their money in the most capitalistic way since 1962...  ;D

LOL!!!  While looking for a date to put at the end of my comment I came across this on google...
Quote
Che Guevara - For all your revolutionary needs shop at theCHEstore.com
LOL
"I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man; nor ask another man to live for mine."
UNCOMMON SENSE

Offline time expired

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 7,275
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 411
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #7 on: September 22, 2007, 09:50:54 »
a-majoor,
           Outstanding post,James Lewis has captured my innermost
thoughts.
            Regards
nothing is better for the morale of the troops
as occasionally to see a dead general
               field marshal slim

Offline Flip

  • Grateful civilian
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 1,310
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 639
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #8 on: September 22, 2007, 12:46:54 »
A Majoor,

Nice mini series there......The following leaps out.

Quote
To be sure, conservatives are vulnerable to all the usual human frailties. But to be "conservative" is a near-synonym for being grown-up. A big part of maturity is to come to terms with one's own limits

If circumstances were to change toward the more serious, I suspect there would be
movement to the right. Liberalism is a product of affluence maybe????

The liberal democracy has only one flaw.....There will be liberals.

No user serviceable parts inside.
Warranty void if cover is removed.

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 340,200
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,615
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #9 on: September 22, 2007, 16:38:15 »
Those interested in this topic might want to read The Age of Abundance: How Prosperity Transformed America's Politics and Culture by the Cato Institute's Brink Lindsey.

He starts from the premise that 20th century America marked the first time in human history that abundance became the norm for most people. He then traces the evolution of American social-political thought and action, especially from 1950 until today.
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 129,560
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,257
  • Freespeecher
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #10 on: October 08, 2007, 23:30:14 »
Interesting look at abundance as seen by the Left. Mark Steyn is bang on as usual and he also provides a link to another related piece:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YzgyZWFiOTkxMTJiMTBlMGNkYTgyOTViZGIxNjQ0YjY=http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y

Quote
The new poor [Mark Steyn]

Over the weekend, I posted a couple of things re Graeme Frost, the Democratic Party's 12-year old healthcare spokesman. Michelle Malkin reports that the blogospheric lefties are all steamed about the wingnuts' Swiftboating of sick kids, etc.

Sorry, no sale. The Democrats chose to outsource their airtime to a Seventh Grader. If a political party is desperate enough to send a boy to do a man's job, then the boy is fair game. As it is, the Dems do enough cynical and opportunist hiding behind biography and identity, and it's incredibly tedious. And anytime I send my seven-year-old out to argue policy you're welcome to clobber him, too. The alternative is a world in which genuine debate is ended and, as happened with Master Frost, politics dwindles down to professional staffers writing scripts to be mouthed by Equity moppets.

But one thing is clear by now: Whatever the truth about this boy's private school, his family home, his father's commercial property, etc, the Frosts are a very particular situation and do not illustrate any social generality - and certainly not one that makes the case for an expensive expansive all-but universal entitlement.

A more basic point is made very robustly by Kathy Shaidle: Advanced western democracies have delivered the most prosperous societies in human history. There simply are no longer genuinely "poor" people in sufficient numbers. As Miss Shaidle points out, if you're poor today, it's almost always for behavioral reasons - behavior which the state chooses not to discourage but to reward. Nonetheless, progressive types persist in deluding themselves that there are vast masses of the "needy" out there that only the government can rescue. An editorial in Canada's biggest-selling newspaper today states:

    A total of 905,000 people visited food banks across the Greater Toronto Area in the past year.

The population of Toronto is about two-and-a-half million. Is the Star suggesting one in three citizens of one of the wealthiest municipalities on earth depends on "food banks"? Or is it the same one thousand people getting three square meals a day there? Or ten thousand people swinging by a couple of times a week? And, in that case, how many of them actually "depend" on food banks? Only the Star knows. But the idea that 905,000 Torontonians need food aid is innumerate bunk.

So, in the absence of real need, we've persuaded ourselves that we need to create more and more programs for the middle-class and wealthy. Several correspondents have written to scoff at the idea that the Frosts are wealthy, citing family friends who suggest the grandparents chip in for the private-school fees.

But hang on. That's as it should be. That's the kind of healthy transgenerational solidarity without which no society can survive (see Europe). Graeme Frost's maternal grandfather died last December, and The Baltimore Sun reported:

    At Bendix, he helped develop the first microwave landing systems for commercial aircraft and worked on NASA's manned space program from 1960 to 1977. For the next decade, he worked in management at Bendix facilities in Iowa, Florida, New Jersey and Baltimore. From 1989 to 1991, he was vice president of engineering at Nurad Technologies, which manufactures antennas.

    Mr. Sebring never officially retired, serving as an engineering consultant for the Navy for 15 years, assisting with communication systems between helicopters and surface ships.

So executive vice-presidents' families are now the new new poor? I support lower taxes for the Frosts, increased child credits for the Frosts, an end to the "death tax" and other encroachments on transgenerational wealth transfer, and even severe catastrophic medical-emergency aid of one form or other. But there is no reason to put more and more middle-class families on the government teat, and doing so is deeply corrosive of liberty.

And, if the Democrats don't like me saying that, next time put up someone in long pants to make your case.

[UPDATE: Mister Innumerate, heal thyself. The population of the "Greater Toronto Area" - rather than the city itself - is, in fact, about five million. A reader writes:

    So that would imply that about 1 in 6 people in the Greater Toronto Area visited a food bank in the past year. Is that so hard to imagine?

Er, yes, it is. One in six people in the Greater Toronto Area visited a food bank? At the very trough of the Depression, one in four American workers was unemployed and the lines at the soup kitchens snaked down the streets. If one in six Torontonians needed food from food banks, you'd notice it.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline rw4th

  • Kung Fu Hamster
  • Member
  • ****
  • 715
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 240
  • Kung Fu Hamster
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #11 on: October 09, 2007, 00:03:01 »
Quote
Er, yes, it is. One in six people in the Greater Toronto Area visited a food bank? At the very trough of the Depression, one in four American workers was unemployed and the lines at the soup kitchens snaked down the streets. If one in six Torontonians needed food from food banks, you'd notice it.

People who don't need it visit food banks all the time. Some do so because the are just plain cheap and want free crap, others have decent incomes but waste them supporting gambling or drug habits.

Offline Hunteroffortune

  • Thankful Civilian
  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 54
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #12 on: October 09, 2007, 02:31:23 »
People who don't need it visit food banks all the time. Some do so because the are just plain cheap and want free crap, others have decent incomes but waste them supporting gambling or drug habits.

Same with the tent city in Edmonton, now that it's getting cold, they are moving indoors, but heck, if you can work, without having to pay rent during the summer, why not? I would like not to pay my mortgage for a few months too, but I can't. Yet the lefties yell about free housing, well sure, for the people who really need it, but for pikers? NO.

Before you jump on me, I volunteer for a guide dog organization, I see how our most disadvantaged live, and it's not pretty. You try to live on less than $1000 a month. Too bad lefties have money to spend on druggies and needle injection sites, but none on the real people who need our help.

Great articles presented, food for thought.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 129,560
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,257
  • Freespeecher
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #13 on: October 09, 2007, 09:26:06 »
I wonder about the perverse incentives that keep people trapped in Toronto or other cities where their Welfare is less than the amount needed to pay rent or eat. Given the mass pile on of ads extolling the virtues of living and working in Saskatchewan we see right now in Ontario, or the very well known labour shortages in Alberta, where is the stream of poor people moving to where the jobs are?

Perhaps the real question should be "what makes it more attractive to live on welfare in Ontario than moving west?"
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 45,830
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,664
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #14 on: October 09, 2007, 10:33:01 »
Interesting, in the 20 & 30's many of the left were willing to go fight in the Spanish Civil War, I somehow doubt our current left has the balls for such sacrifice.

Offline IN HOC SIGNO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • -180
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,386
  • Vocatio Ad Servitium
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #15 on: October 09, 2007, 11:29:48 »
I visited a friend who runs a fish plant here on the south shore of NS over the weekend. He was telling me that it is really hard to get workers here who have a work ethic anymore. You know the ethic that the forefathers of these people had when they carved a living out of the woods and plyed the waters in dangerous wooden boats to feed their families. He told me that most of them only want enough time "at work" to qualify for their UIC which they live off for the rest of the year. When they are on the job they are, for the most part,  lazy and unmotivated. We are now into the third generation of people who rely on a system of handouts instead of encouragement of hard work in order to put food on the table.
It is really interesting too to listen to the majority of folks down here who hate the current PM for having stated the truth a few years ago that there is "a culture of defeat" in Atlantic Canada. This culture of defeat was created by the Federal Government and there is no sign that it's going to be reversed anytime soon. I'm sure it's all very progressive.  ::)

Offline GAP

  • Semper Fi
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 177,095
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,321
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #16 on: October 09, 2007, 11:35:05 »
Well, the Conservatives are being derided for that comment and a whole bunch of other things, so now's the time to make the changes.....one more can't matter.
REMEMBER SOME PEOPLE ARE ALIVE SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS ILLEGAL TO SHOOT THEM

Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I´m not so sure about the universe

Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.

My mind is like lighting, one brilliant flash, then its gone.....

A young boy asks his father "Dad, where did I get my intelligence from?"

Dad replies "You must have gotten it from your mother, I still have mine."

Offline Iterator

  • Returning the favour.
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 257
  • Identidem
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #17 on: October 09, 2007, 14:29:47 »

You have to really doubt an article that states the following:

Another interesting article:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/09/death_fears_of_the_boomer_left_1.html
...
Conservatives don't have the answer to the fear of death; it's not the sort of thing you can find settled answers to. But we respect the ways in which humans have learned to cope: By religious faith...
...


And then follows it in the very next paragraph:

...
The greatest flaw of the Boomer Left is to see life through plainly false ideas. Start with a false premise, and you'll end up with false conclusions. Begin with the conviction that we can turn all human conflicts into peace and love just by willing it, and you end up convinced that those who don't agree with you must be evil, or must be forced to obey....
...


Extreme left wing ideas can find root in Canada because extreme leftist hide within centre-left parties.

Centre-right parties almost only ever get voted in here based on the scandal level achieved by the centre-left parties. Canadians justifiably fear right wing extremists; and aside from law-and-order, what else does the centre-right offer that doesn’t have a down side?

We are always going to be stuck with leftist nonsense as long as the Conservatives associate with religious fundamentalists and promote the destruction of government services.

As fun as it is for the right to point out the problems with the left; it won’t matter unless the right can present a valid alternative.

 


Pro Patria

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 27,420
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,783
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #18 on: October 09, 2007, 20:17:43 »
I never would have thought that fear of religious beliefs and the prospect of individual freedom and responsibility would be blamed for a tendency to socialism when simple human greed and laziness would serve.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

Omnia praesidia vestra capta sunt nobis.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Schadenfreude is one of the perqs of being classically liberal.

Offline Iterator

  • Returning the favour.
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 257
  • Identidem
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #19 on: October 10, 2007, 04:32:05 »
I never would have thought that fear of religious beliefs and the prospect of individual freedom and responsibility would be blamed for a tendency to socialism when simple human greed and laziness would serve.

Common need is the reason for socialism. We have a common need for defence so we collectively form a military – the same applies for other services. Without some level of socialism you do not have a country.

Using religious and individual freedoms as excuses for shovelling money over to religious organizations, or to treat religious people as if they require special blue parking spaces, is a far greater sign of greed and laziness than keeping Canadians healthy and educated.

Pro Patria

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 27,420
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,783
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #20 on: October 10, 2007, 12:35:15 »
>Without some level of socialism you do not have a country.

You've conflated "socialism" with "government".  While I understand how socialists would dearly love to score a propaganda coup by co-opting all government functions under the socialist umbrella, that sleight-of-mind will only work on the hard of thinking.  "Socialism" is the name for a subset of government functions which is, to a close approximation, welfare (public social spending).

"Freedom" is the excuse for all shovelling of money, generally to provide economic freedom and sometimes to shelter people from consequences of exercising freedom.  For example, the socialist argument for income supplements is to provide individual economic freedom.

Religious people seeking publicly-funded denominational school systems have not asked for special treatment; they have asked to be treated the same as everyone else and to have the educations of their children publicly funded.  Right to education, freedom of choice, freedom of association, and freedom of belief.  The lazy and greedy people are by definition the ones arguing to defund the Catholic schools in Ontario: greedy because they don't want to spend that money on those children; lazy because they aren't willing to make the public spending adjustments necessary to fund all children irrespective of schooling choice.

But I might be wrong about the fear of individual freedom and responsibility.  For all their diversionary noise about freedom and diversity, progressives are so scared sh!tless that some people actually will choose to exercise, practice, and promulgate different beliefs that they act to manoeuvre everyone into one system (which they currently judge, with reason, that they control) in contradiction to our own Charter, a UN statement of principles, and basic human decency and common sense.  Hypocrites to a man.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

Omnia praesidia vestra capta sunt nobis.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Schadenfreude is one of the perqs of being classically liberal.

Offline Iterator

  • Returning the favour.
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 257
  • Identidem
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #21 on: October 10, 2007, 13:26:30 »
>Without some level of socialism you do not have a country.

You've conflated "socialism" with "government".  While I understand how socialists would dearly love to score a propaganda coup by co-opting all government functions under the socialist umbrella, that sleight-of-mind will only work on the hard of thinking.  "Socialism" is the name for a subset of government functions which is, to a close approximation, welfare (public social spending).
...


I disagree, if it can be termed “socialized medicine” how can it not be, for example,  “socialized policing”.


Further response here:

...
Pro Patria

Offline Zip

  • GODLESS HEATHEN
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 1,467
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,145
    • UNCOMMON SENSE
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #22 on: October 10, 2007, 14:45:51 »
Policing is a function of any and all states, medical care by a state is not.
"I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man; nor ask another man to live for mine."
UNCOMMON SENSE

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 27,420
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,783
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #23 on: October 10, 2007, 16:18:41 »
My, what a fun and pointless game to play - adding an adjective as if it could magically change the character of the object.  But in real life, an adjective is chosen to suit the character of the object, not to editorialize it.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

Omnia praesidia vestra capta sunt nobis.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Schadenfreude is one of the perqs of being classically liberal.

Offline Iterator

  • Returning the favour.
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 257
  • Identidem
Re: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought
« Reply #24 on: October 10, 2007, 16:38:42 »
My, what a fun and pointless game to play ...
...

We are in a democracy - attempts to label some government services as socialist and others not, are pointless.


This brings us back to your earlier statement:

...
...would be blamed for a tendency to socialism when simple human greed and laziness would serve.

Trying to arbitrarily label some government services as socialism (and therefore to you: as being the result of greed and laziness) is pointless unless you can define why they are socialist and others not.
Pro Patria