Understanding left wing "progressives"

[markofan]

" For example, I found that progressives were rarely amenable to rational persuasion.  Facts, logic and even experience rarely changed their minds.  You couldn’t really argue with a progressive.  You would argue; they would fight.  They would get angry, insult and change the subject."

From this article.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/12/james-ostrowski/never-trust-progressive-journalist/

It's worth reading to know and understand the warped thinking of the left/marxist mindset.

This especially applies to the "global warming" crowd but also helps to understand their crackpot theories on economics. 

As to their thinking on climate change and those that "deny" climate change, take a look at this video featuring the progressive left's very own pseudo-intellectual Thom Hartmann.

[Thin Lizzy]

It takes a lot of emotional maturity to accept that you've backed the wrong horse, in this case, Socialism.

Most Leftists don't have it in them to do this. So, they're left with coming up with excuse after excuse, and lie after lie.

[DroppingPlates]

Let's be honest here, the internet isn't the best place for a constructive dialogue about politics, no matter someone's political preference.

[Thong Maniac]

" For example, I found that progressives were rarely amenable to rational persuasion.  Facts, logic and even experience rarely changed their minds.  You couldn’t really argue with a progressive.  You would argue; they would fight.  They would get angry, insult and change the subject."

From this article.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/12/james-ostrowski/never-trust-progressive-journalist/

It's worth reading to know and understand the warped thinking of the left/marxist mindset.

This especially applies to the "global warming" crowd but also helps to understand their crackpot theories on economics. 

As to their thinking on climate change and those that "deny" climate change, take a look at this video featuring the progressive left's very own pseudo-intellectual Thom Hartmann.

I think most progressives like myself, tend to cringe at the pyschobabble religion-fueled morality policing policy's of modern right wingers of today. If right wing meant actual hands off govt, no intrusion into private life, was pro science, and was fiscally conservative...I myself would be "right wing", as would many others. College educated people see modern right wings as old cranky Jesus freaks, which is actually usually accurate for the last 30 yrs.

Also, I'll let climate scientists and ecological scientists solve the global warming issues. I am trained in neither of those disciplines. That's why it's beyond funny when my cranky father in law gets on his soap box about science issues and how they are "left wing fakes". That is why left wingers like myself tend to fall more left of things

[mr.turbo]

" For example, I found that progressives were rarely amenable to rational persuasion.  Facts, logic and even experience rarely changed their minds.  You couldn’t really argue with a progressive.  You would argue; they would fight.  They would get angry, insult and change the subject."

From this article.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/12/james-ostrowski/never-trust-progressive-journalist/

It's worth reading to know and understand the warped thinking of the left/marxist mindset.

This especially applies to the "global warming" crowd but also helps to understand their crackpot theories on economics.  

As to their thinking on climate change and those that "deny" climate change, take a look at this video featuring the progressive left's very own pseudo-intellectual Thom Hartmann.

I tried to read that article to find the specific examples that support the thesis but couldn't find any... can someone help

the author cites "the entirety of journalism for the last 50 years" so where are we supposed to get our information?

Does he include his own journalism as support?

looking forward to discussing the evidence for this as it's a potentially serious matter!

[Tapeworm]

I believe untempered capitalism and the the financial shell game are detriments to the progress of man, yet I earn more than most socialism hating conservatives.

[SuperTed]

You have the intelligent, thoughtful and rational progressives, but you also have the moronic, misinformed and delusional ones.
It's exactly the same with conservatives too.
I don't personally identify myself as either right or left wing since my opinions will change depending on the topic being discussed. I hold some liberal views and also some conversative ones. This is how I feel most people should be, instead of clinging onto party politics.

[Irongrip400]

I think most progressives like myself, tend to cringe at the pyschobabble religion-fueled morality policing policy's of modern right wingers of today. If right wing meant actual hands off govt, no intrusion into private life, was pro science, and was fiscally conservative...I myself would be "right wing", as would many others. College educated people see modern right wings as old cranky Jesus freaks, which is actually usually accurate for the last 30 yrs.

Also, I'll let climate scientists and ecological scientists solve the global warming issues. I am trained in neither of those disciplines. That's why it's beyond funny when my cranky father in law gets on his soap box about science issues and how they are "left wing fakes". That is why left wingers like myself tend to fall more left of things

This is why I think Trump is so appealing to many people. He signals a changing of the guard for the republican establishment. The party will be dead soon without a change like him.

[TheShape.]

You can't argue with either side and win.

[drkaje]

There's no such thing as a progressive.

[_bruce_]

Any political label is stupid although it's funny to take sides. In the end we want to survive and be among peers that share our ideals.

Official Politics has been tremendously dumb'd down - just watch discussions on youtube from the 70/80ies and compare that to the hogwash that's being delivered today. Any kind of substance has been removed - leaving the people with a predefined set of empty phrases and weaponized words.

Just think of the lines that the Bordeaux dude in "Canada" has been spreading... "normally" he should have been laughed off the stage.

[Parker]

I think most progressives like myself, tend to cringe at the pyschobabble religion-fueled morality policing policy's of modern right wingers of today. If right wing meant actual hands off govt, no intrusion into private life, was pro science, and was fiscally conservative...I myself would be "right wing", as would many others. College educated people see modern right wings as old cranky Jesus freaks, which is actually usually accurate for the last 30 yrs.

Also, I'll let climate scientists and ecological scientists solve the global warming issues. I am trained in neither of those disciplines. That's why it's beyond funny when my cranky father in law gets on his soap box about science issues and how they are "left wing fakes". That is why left wingers like myself tend to fall more left of things

Your woman likes the Kardashians, and you like women with implants and boyish backsides. Really, is that progression? Enough said.

Also, those cranky Jesus freaks are the ones that would end a fight. The oppo of that would be "offended".

[doison]

This is why I think Trump is so appealing to many people. He signals a changing of the guard for the republican establishment. The party will be dead soon without a change like him.

The establishment hates Trump

I don't know that I'm ready to vote for him....but as a socially liberal fiscal conservative, the fact that the neocon base hates him and he's leading in the polls tells me something positive is happening

[mr.turbo]

Any political label is stupid although it's funny to take sides. In the end we want to survive and be among peers that share our ideals.

Official Politics has been tremendously dumb'd down - just watch discussions on youtube from the 70/80ies and compare that to the hogwash that's being delivered today. Any kind of substance has been removed - leaving the people with a predefined set of empty phrases and weaponized words.

Just think of the lines that the Bordeaux dude in "Canada" has been spreading... "normally" he should have been laughed off the stage.

Bordeaux ?

Did you mean Merlot? Malbec? Shiraz?

 

[mr.turbo]

this is the part where we point out the the US Navy is probably not run by so-called "progressives"

neither is NASA, Coca Cola or Walmart.

basically anyone not crazy or a fucking idiot is now a "progressive" in whatever fringe circle this material comes from.

[_bruce_]

Bordeaux ?

Did you mean Merlot? Malbec? Shiraz?

 

I mean "Jaqueline Bordeaux"... or something. Names do not really matter anymore, because it's 2015.

[mr.turbo]

I mean "Jaqueline Bordeaux"... or something. Names do not really matter anymore, because it's 2015.

but wouldn't that make you a "progressive"

 

[_bruce_]

but wouldn't that make you a "progressive"

 

"No need for your Turbo-bigotry... because it's not 2016" 

[mr.turbo]

"No need for your Turbo-bigotry... because it's not 2016" 

OK!

 

[Parker]

Any political label is stupid although it's funny to take sides. In the end we want to survive and be among peers that share our ideals.

Official Politics has been tremendously dumb'd down - just watch discussions on youtube from the 70/80ies and compare that to the hogwash that's being delivered today. Any kind of substance has been removed - leaving the people with a predefined set of empty phrases and weaponized words.

Just think of the lines that the Bordeaux dude in "Canada" has been spreading... "normally" he should have been laughed off the stage.

When you said the 70s/80s discussions, it reminded me of Michael Manley's  interviews. Concise, intellectual, no buzzwords, no dumbing down.

Here he talks about the New International Economic Order

[/youtube]

[Thong Maniac]

Your woman likes the Kardashians, and you like women with implants and boyish backsides. Really, is that progression? Enough said.

Also, those cranky Jesus freaks are the ones that would end a fight. The oppo of that would be "offended".

you must study my every post. Great memory, but not sure how your response addresses my comments. I suppose you disagree with everything I said, or just some of it. Not sure, feel free to comment...or not. HTH

Jesus freaks fight opponents? Sorry, help us understand that part. Thanks

[Parker]

you must study my every post. Great memory, but not sure how your response addresses my comments. I suppose you disagree with everything I said, or just some of it. Not sure, feel free to comment...or not. HTH

Jesus freaks fight opponents? Sorry, help us understand that part. Thanks

Hahaha.


No, the Jesus freaks, the old school ones, are the ones that would fight. Those dirty south to Midwest folks are very much like Muslims, they will fight/kill/or die for their beliefs. Progressives who tend to liberal can't understand that, like you said, you can't understand that part.
As the saying goes, the person who goes the furthest wins. A person who is willing to die or kill for an idealogy will win over those who will not.

If you look at today's society, is this truly progression? A society falling apart at the seams. Again, like you had asked about the Kardashians. Is this truly progression when women idealize women who have basically whored themselves out? Progressives seemingly hate themselves, it's like some sort of deep seated self hate. Men hate themselves, women hate themselves, women hate men, and so on.

[Howard]

It takes a lot of emotional maturity to accept that you've backed the wrong horse, in this case, Socialism.

Most Leftists don't have it in them to do this. So, they're left with coming up with excuse after excuse, and lie after lie.

I voted for Obama both times and regret doing so the 2nd time.
Had Romney got elected in 2012, the USA might be a bit more respected in the world now.

I never considered myself a liberal or conservative but rather a pragmatist.
In my view, the GOV should simply do what works best in the most efficient manner.
Put in fair laws and policies and then let the chips fall where they may.

It amazes me that many liberals seem have problems with people being poor or left out, etc.
But, it's basic statistics that show  50% will be above avg and 50% below.

Take any sport and let 2 teams compete with officials to enforce the rules.
When it's over the final score tells the story.

Fair simply means everyone has a shot to win, but it doesn't guarantee anyone will 50% of the time.

[mr.turbo]

I voted for Obama both times and regret doing so the 2nd time.
Had Romney got elected in 2012, the USA might be a bit more respected in the world now.

I never considered myself a liberal or conservative but rather a pragmatist.
In my view, the GOV should simply do what works best in the most efficient manner.
Put in fair laws and policies and then let the chips fall where they may.

It amazes me that many liberals seem have problems with people being poor or left out, etc.
But, it's basic statistics that show  50% will be above avg and 50% below.

Take any sport and let 2 teams compete with officials to enforce the rules.
When it's over the final score tells the story.

Fair simply means everyone has a shot to win, but it doesn't guarantee anyone will 50% of the time.

how do you feel about the government bailing out banks and general motors during the crisis?

did the market sort that one out?

no because the free market rules don't apply to everyone, is that a fair system?