Posted on 02/22/2010 12:15:34 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
I respectfully disagree. Since all civilizations grow, prosper, and eventually decline, "moving forward" only rushes us faster into the decay part of the curve, while conservatism seeks to hang onto, or even stay, in the prosperous period.
No, it's what it's called when they don't want to call it Marxism. Being a "liberal" USED to mean that you were in favor of personal freedom. Then the Marxists took over the label and the real "classical liberals" had to rename themselves "libertarians" (note the small L)
Alter lost his brains years ago. We know he lost his rug.
Liberalism is what they call it when they're afraid to call it what it REALLY is: Socialism.
Socialism is what they call it when they're afraid to call it what it REALLY is: Marxism.
There, I completed the progression. Every time I hear the term Progressivism or Liberalism I mentally replace them with the word Marxism. It works like a charm and things start making perfect sense in a depressing sort of way.
Was this really penned by Alter, or one of a certain number of FReepers?
Beck hasn’t whined about ANY of these examples:
* Only men voting: The 19th Amendment giving women the right to vote was the product of progressivisim. Beck thinks women are second-class citizens.
* No cell phone or low-cost long-distance telephone service: It was the breakup of AT&T in the 1970s under the progressive antitrust laws that allowed for today’s telecommunications (and computer) systems. Beck thinks corporations should have no restraints at all.
* State legislatures electing U.S. senators: The 17th Amendment, part of the progressive movement, allowed for the direct election of senators. If you think the Senate is bad now, imagine what it was like when state legislators were the only voters. (They defeated Abraham Lincoln in Illinois in 1858 even though he won the popular vote for Senate). Beck likes hacks.
Whomever wrote this has not a farking clue what Beck is about.
>> “However, it would have been better if they had kept the vote limited to landowners”
Amen! <<
Heck at this point it should be anyone who actually has a W-2 from a job. Or disqualify anyone from voting who is on the government teat. How can a person impartially vote for issues if the are being “paid off” by the government.
News w....who? Is that the “climbing” magazine? he he he he he....
Well said Rush will always the Master!
People who write stuff like that is just trying to divide the ranks more!
Partisan media shill Jonathan Alter, writing in Newsweek. Thanks Tolerance Sucks Rocks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.