Progressive to WHAT?

Vanity ^ | 11/30/2013 | Dick Bachert

[Dick Bachert]

We simply must refuse to allow libtards to continue their nefarious and dangerous practice of hijacking and twisting our language, the most pernicious example of which is their application of the term “progressive” to themselves.

Here's a question for those of you who somehow escaped the government school indoctrination process with your critical thinking skills intact: When these people say “progressive”, to where or to what do they propose to progress?

Among America's founding documents is the Declaration of Independence. Because many of you younger readers may not have been exposed to the Declaration in school (or, worse, were exposed to an altered or redacted version of that document), allow me to remind you of THE key principles upon which the Founders established this nation:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Read those words until you fully grasp their meaning.

Let me again ask the question: To where or to what do those who call themselves “progressives” propose to progress? How IS IT POSSIBLE to “progress” beyond those beautifully stated and, at that time as today, seldom articulated truths?

Back when a “journalist” respected truth and honesty, the Baltimore journalist Henry Louis Mencken declared “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.”

And, that, my friends is another truth of which we all must be mindful as these so-called “progressives”, by their tendentious torturing and twisting of the language, seek to move us AWAY from our founding principles. Their agenda seeks to take us BACK to some form of the same dictatorial RULE under which nearly all men who walked the earth before those American ideals were set to parchment lived as SLAVES!

If these people wish to wear a label, let it be an honest one. My suggestion would be “REGRESSIVES”.

[Dick Bachert]

We WILL NOT go gently into their night!!

[Cyber Liberty]

New Tagline. Henry Louis Mencken declared “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.”

[Dick Bachert]

Thanks. Yup, Henry had it right!! Be safe out there!

[bigheadfred]

i have some suggestions but they are all in cursive

[Marylander]

I think progressive means dismantling the founding documents by erosion rather than amending through laws

[Bryanw92]

>>Let me again ask the question: To where or to what do those who call themselves “progressives” propose to progress?

They claim to progress the human race beyond the greed of capitalism, beyond the need for the biological imperative of families, and beyond the superstition of religion.

[Cyber Liberty]

IOW, they want to progress us back to the stone age.

[glennaro]

“Progressive” — as in cancer is a progressive disease — is quite descriptive of the Left.

[factoryrat]

There’s no shortage of idiots and intellectually lazy individuals to exploit. And everyone wonders how hitler, lenin, stalin, and mao managed to pull off all of the atrocities that they did.

[Hugin]

One problem with the word “progressive” is it has meant very different things to different people at different times. For example, to Teddy Roosevelt and V.I. Lenin.

Roosevelt used progressive in the common sense that Americans used it in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It meant supporting progress in industry and the economy, science and technology. Building railroads, dams, cities etc. out of wilderness. Politically it wasn’t about replacing our system, but improving it’s flaws within the system.

To Marxists, the future was supposedly known and inevitable; mankind was supposed to be forced by inexorable historic forces from tribalism, to feudalism, to capitalism, to socialism and finally to communism. Any people who aided that “progression” were by definition “progressive”. The same people could be either “progressive” or the opposite (reactionary) depending on how far along the society was. The left may not use all the Marxist verbiage but that’s still the gist of what they mean.

[loveliberty2]

". . .the most pernicious example of which is their application of the term “progressive” to themselves."

They are more aptly to be described as "progressive regressives."

Our Constitution embodied a UNIQUE IDEA. Nothing like it had ever been done before. The power of the idea was in the recognition that people's rights are granted directly by the Creator - not by the state - and that the people, then, and only then, grant rights to government. The concept is so simple, yet so very fundamental and far-reaching.

America's founders embraced a previously unheard-of political philosophy which held that people are "...endowed BY THEIR CREATOR with certain unalienable rights...."

This was the statement of guiding principle for the new nation, and, as such, had to be translated into a concrete charter for government. The Constitution of The United States of America became that charter.

What so-called "progressives" are attempting to accomplish, and have been working at over several decades, is to turn that idea upside down, putting themselves in charge of a "government-over-people" government structure, and erasing the idea of the "Creator" altogether.

[Mr. K]

Good Question.

Sort of like “Hope and Change” and “fundamentally transform”

TO WHAT?????

[we know: it’s socialism]

[BenLurkin]

“Progressive” = Communist.

[thecodont]

“Progressive” — as in cancer is a progressive disease — is quite descriptive of the Left.

You, sir.

Please accept a hearty cyber-handshake from me.

(I would love to link to the March 23, 2008 "Bloom County" comic strip, in which Opus the Penguin encounters a cancer cell. In that strip the cancer represented out-of-control "growth.")

[Steve_Seattle]

I’ve been making a similar point about the term “progressive” for quite a while. The Left thinks it means “making progress towards equality and justice,” but what it means in practice is progressive authoritarianism and progressive loss of liberty. All of these news stories which some see as silly - about school administrators suspending students for having toy guns, or drawing a picture of a gun, or banning home-made lunches, or cities banning sodas or smoking in one’s own home, or even more serious things like having cameras at every stoplight in town, the government restricting political speech and spying on the populace and using the IRS to harass political opponents - those things are what progressivism IS.

[Bryanw92]

>>IOW, they want to progress us back to the stone age.

Not really. That’s our biggest mistake when we think of Progressives. We assume that they want to destroy or hurt. They honestly believe that they know a “better way” so when they are proselytizing to new converts, they come off sounding very authentic.

They make the argument that what we currently have is not working, and there are many who believe that. Perception is reality for most people, and the Progs do a better job of shaping people’s perception than we do.

[cotton]

If these people wish to wear a label, let it be an honest one. My suggestion would be “REGRESSIVES”.

That's what I've been calling them ever since they claimed to be progressive. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Cyber Liberty]

In the "stone age," there was no capitalism, families were communal (as opposed to nuclear), and there was no religion as a civilizing influence. IOW, a "Progressive's" dream.

I was just going from what you said above. There is more to the story, indeed.

Of course, everything you added is true as well. They may not want to "destroy and hurt" (they say) but we know that destruction and misery will be the result, there's plenty of historical proof. It's easy for a commie to convince people what we have "is not working." Just conflate wants and needs, and ask them if they have everything they could ever want. If the answer is no, then there you have it: what we have "is not working" because there are people left in need.

We have to make the distinction between "want" and "need." If the LIVs don't get it, we have to teach them. There is no other way because there is no end of free stuff the progs can promise when they aren't required to deliver. They'll always be able to top us with empty promises, so we have to prove the promises are empty. That's hard to do, it requires analytical thought. If we just wait for their promises to fail, it will be too late because the functional society will have been destroyed.

We're seeing that now with the health care system. Great damage has already been done to the insurance industry. It is already going to be a major task repairing it, just to get it back to where it was.

My old tagline applies: "It's easier to believe the liar if he's telling you things you want to believe."

[Bryanw92]

>> If the LIVs don’t get it, we have to teach them.

That is exactly my point. I’m not defending the Progs. But, they do a better job of teaching the LIVs what they want them to know than we do.

We used to be a nation where a man with a high school diploma could earn a nice living for his family by working in a factory for his entire life. What does the Conservative movement have to offer a man with a 100 IQ and a high school diploma? We tell him that he doesn’t deserve a good living and that he doesn’t even have the right to organize. We tell him that his job has to move overseas because we need to raise the stock value a couple dollars. We call him an LIV, but the Prog calls him a valuable human being. Of course, the Prog is lying, but who is telling him what he needs to hear?

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

Wealth is equivalent to power. Golden Rule: he who has the gold can buy the power and he who has the power can steal the wealth.

In a free society people accumulate wealth by making or doing something worthwhile to others. There are those who would like wealth but are not willing to make or do useful things. So they set about inventing a morality to shame others into giving up some of their wealth. The progressives have made a science out of their Lust for Power." They understand organization. They understand how to move the lazy and perverse to act as a mob to demand their "just" slice of the pie. Left unchecked they will destroy our society.

The remedy is to organized, promote the virtues of capitalism and personal freedom, and expose the progressives for their greed where they steal through the use of power. This will take leadership where a charismatic person can withstand the shit that progressives throw. It will require individuals to share some time supporting these leaders. It's not going to be easy, but it is necessary.