I guess I'm not a progressive after all
I'll be sticking with the "socialist" label after reading this study.
Proulx and his colleagues narrowed down the issues to four general tendencies that distinguished progressives and liberals. First, progressives supported imposing immediate changes to increase diversity, such as maintaining diversity quotas. Second, progressives were opposed to cultural appropriation. Liberals, in contrast, were more likely to agree with statements such as “People should be permitted to adopt whatever cultural characteristics that appeal to them [music, fashion], regardless of status inequalities.”Thirdly, progressives supported publicly censuring those perceived to hold discriminatory views. In other words, progressives tended to agree with statements such as “Those who express bigoted views should be exposed and deserve the backlash that follows.” Finally, progressives were less likely than liberals to express a desire to incrementally promote equality for the long-term and tended to disagree with statements such as “Most progress has been made by ignoring social identity and appealing to our shared experiences.”
“Relative to traditional liberals within the U.S. left-wing, it appears that progressives are more likely to 1) advocate for ‘Mandated Diversity’ within institutional settings, 2) show ‘Cultural Appropriation Concerns’ regarding creative expression, 3) apply ‘Public Censure’ of divergent views, and 4) are less likely to pursue a ‘Recourse to Existing Institutions’ to bring about political change,” Proulx told PsyPost.
Comments
These past few years have fueled reexaminations by many of us.
Names of social or political ‘clans’ are like multiple choice questions on exams. For me, the correct answer to most all of these multiple choice pigeon hole monikers is most often “None of the above”, but for me socialist seems to fit better than most.
“Questioning Human” would be even better, but I’ve yet to find that on any multiple choice questions or party affiliation registrations.
“ …and when we destroy nature, we diminish our capacity to sense the divine,and understand who God is, and what our own potential is and duties are as human beings.- RFK jr. 8/26/2024
Politics is the art of making words mean things that they don't
Back in the 19th Century Liberalism was mostly about free-market capitalist reforms. But even then they still opposed the rentier class, it's power and policies.
In the 19th Century Libertarianism was a anarcho-socialist concept, in which maximum freedom can be found in non-centralized, egalitarian communities.
In the early 20th Century Progressivism was partly about anti-corruption/clean government reforms, anti-monopoly, but it was also the leading elements of universal economic reforms that would become the New Deal.
None of those three words mean the same thing today.
@gjohnsit I, and I feel most who
I, and I feel most who identify as progressives, are Eleanor Roosevelt progressives.
Eleanor Roosevelt
...was quite dedicated to building consensus between culturally different groups. If Progressiveness means using diplomacy to achieving consensus between different cultures then the label fits. Consensus is not the same as negotiation and can require many years of continuous dialogues. It's more about semantics and using words that are expansive enough to express each culture's understanding of the agreement. When consensus is done properly, shared values will be recognized and expressed. All parties will realize a lasting benefit for their people.
I can accept the New Deal as Progressive, but not the kind of token Progressiveness we find in Congress today.
Toward the end of her life, Eleanor Roosevelt worked with leaders of 50 different countries and cultures to reach consensus about the wording of the 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights.' The process if codifying Human Rights was a mind-expanding experience for the nations involved. Together and separately, the nations of the world were establishing the baseline value and dignity that must be afforded to every human being. World leaders would pledge to uphold and provide baseline Human Rights, including the right to life, to all persons. Four years after she began the Human Rights mission, the Declaration of Human Rights was unanimously adopted at the UN General Assembly in Paris in 1948.
It would be nice to see the State Department employ that kind of high-minded progressiveness. But attempts at diplomacy has ended for the US and aggressive hybrid wars are on the march. The US government appears to be desperate and their actions have bankrupted the people's future — as they build more nation-destroying weapons, and position themselves to attack independent nations and force them to submit to US rule. The Progressives in Congress say nothing, so perhaps that is what "progressive" becomes when it wins an election.
Now, the US Overlords have new concerns: "Did the American media brainwashing stop working?"
...Because recent generations of curious, questioning Americans want to know what Communism is really all about — and why the US employs so much murder and mayhem and economic destruction to prevent other nations from using the economic system that they prefer. Younger Americans are looking at the future in the 21st century — and they see a world that is largely industrialized and increasingly efficient. With the right leadership, just about anything seems possible, sweeping improvements are within reach. In the wealthier nations of the world, people seem to live good lives, and they have the means to pursue their dreams. Finally, when it comes to Communism, there is no denying the happiness of the Chinese people or the overwhelming approval they have for their Communist government. For them, the future is very bright.
It appears that the meaning of the word Communism has changed, just as the words 'liberal' and 'progressive' have.
No, who could possibly deny...
How happy do these people look? (They were even less happy a short time later when being beaten and dragged off by police)
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/07/10/china/china-henan-bank-depositors-pro...
Just not the *immediate* future... and for many millions the present is not so hot either.
"The Chinese party calls itself 'socialist' and 'communist,' but its great-power chauvinism, hegemonism and violations of human rights have nothing to do with 'socialism' and are not worthy of the term 'communism'..."
Kazuo Shii
Chairman, Japanese Communist Party
January, 2020
https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Inside-Japanese-politics/Japanese-Commu...
I think more than anything
we would find that people are complex. That it is difficult to find an exact box that each person might fit in.
And I think that most people really do not like being put in a box. I most certainly do not.
Depending on the issue, sometimes I fall in the liberal category, sometimes in the conservative, sometimes libertarian. And oftentimes I find myself shifting as I mature in my thinking about that issue.
At this time I think generally I would consider myself a socialist, a societalist.
Afterthought: I forgot to mention that one of the most important concepts that has emerged over the last couple of centuries is that of "The Commons". That there are some things, be they concrete or abstract that cannot and should not ever be subject to individual or even consolidated ownership. That this item is owned collectively by the masses and has stewards, never owners.
Eg, never again a Reagan, selling our heritage for profit.
In my experience
the term "progressive" came into use to distinguish us from the "SJW" Hillbots.
Accuse your enemy/scapegoat of being you. Ironic but effective.
On to Biden since 1973
Towards the end of the article the author come close to
categorizing me.
This is an excellent breakdown of the money laundering
Biden is doing in Ukraine. Moon of Alabama describes how it works.
Gee just think of what that money could be used for here at home where millions of kids are going to bed every night hungry. Or could be used to help homeless Americans and especially veterans that are sleeping on the streets each night. Or could help the millions of people here that are at risk of having their electricity cut off because they can’t pay their bills. Or, or, or! How much money do defense companies get every year in tax breaks and subsidies while more Americans fall deeper into poverty? How much of that money gets funneled back into congress' pockets as campaign contributions when they are just actual bribes? And when the hell will Americans say that enough robbery has happened and demand congress put a stop to it? And what the hell happened to the anti Vietnam war people that they can overlook how what they protested against is still happening?
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
You can call me Ray,
or you can call me Jay.
I am for taking from the !% and redistributing wealth and power back to the 99%.
Us. Us.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
Ukraine war escalating
Note: This report may be over-hyped.
I have decided to delete this. Even if Russia were to use a "tactical nuke" it wouldn't put them in Crimea. They have the ability to send their missiles from thousands of miles away. I'll leave the link if someone is curious.
No offence intended but having checked out his web site.
It sort of reminded me of English tabloids. Not that everything stated was wrong but it seemed that 2+2=5.
I have looked at more sites and I have to agree with you
Maybe I should just delete this?
It is no big deal but you could just say that the video ....
contains plenty of speculation. also our back and forth shines some light on its contents.
My suggestion - edit comment at the top indicating
after C99 member input and further research appears to be propaganda or at minimum exaggerations.
As we move through these troubling times it will become more difficult to identify propaganda. It is important to understand none of us is infallible. Our actions and response to questions of quality of information lets the rest of the community know we are doing our best and appreciate their help in sorting out the various truths.
The video was persuasive. Appreciate the dialog indicating there may be problems with the information and source.
Still yourself, deep water can absorb many disturbances with minimal reaction.
--When the opening appears release yourself.
Take this for what it's worth
Russia is on the record for saying it will not be the first to use nuclear weapons.
The US is the only nation (that admits to having them) to claim that it has war plans that start with a first strike.(note however my theory that Theresa May ordered a strike in 2016 and was refused)
On to Biden since 1973
You are right
Russia would never use a nuke against Ukraine unless the US entered the war. They are winning and they can always escalate, if necessary, using conventional arms. Right now they are maximizing Ukrainian loses while minimizing their own.
Putin DID say the SMO was to denazify and demilitarize Ukraine. If Ukraine gave up now he could not achieve those results. The longer Ukraine takes to capitulate, the more area he will annex. Possibly even the area that was given away by Lenin:
I am not a socialist.
A socialist is just a more equitably compensated capitalist.
They do nothing to solve corruption in govt. Have only indirect influence on a social safety net and actually exacerbate the difficulty of preserving the ecosystem.
Because all socialism is is workers owning the means of production. Collective Capitalism does not address progressive issues.
Like Groucho...
“I sent the club a wire stating, PLEASE ACCEPT MY RESIGNATION. I DON'T WANT TO BELONG TO ANY CLUB THAT WILL ACCEPT ME AS A MEMBER.”
― Groucho Marx
Don't fence me in... (great fun version)
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kg_zurRBHlg]
Just sayin' putting ourselves in boxes divides us and is counter productive to my mind. Lots of folks seem to need to label themselves in order to know what they think and make sure everyone else does.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
I find it easier
these days to just refer to myself as a "leftie" as that is where the math ends up, as I'm not sure there is a clear distinction, in the public mind or mine, between liberalism and the more recent term progressivism, and bc my views are a blend of prog, 60s-type liberalism, and center-left pragmatism -- what can realistically get done in today's toxically divided political landscape. Using a more general term like leftie gives me more leeway and allows me more freedom not to be too closely identified as a fan-follower of Biden, Pelosi, Bernie and whoever is generally considered a liberal today. It's also a better way to invite discussion on the various issues that constitute my nuanced leftie description.
Re progressives, how can the term be meaningful if HRC called herself a progressive, and as today so many of them in elected office are pro-war, pro-intel community and soft on the MIC? Ditto for liberals, whoever they are. It's almost as meaningless, or confusing, as self-describing as a conservative.
My problem with the label left...
...is that's what they repeatedly call Pelosi...and I bet you ain't that!
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
No I'm not --
though I do admire her designer kitchen and choice of gelato treats.
Attaching the usual traditional political labels to current pols just suggests to me that's it's a matter of perspective, it's all in the eye of the beholder, objective characterizations are hard to come by and a tally of voting records can be very misleading. MAGAists and others on the far right would be more inclined to refer to her as a leftie, or far-leftie, or liberal, or San Francisco Liberal. Well, for the right and far-right, they are going to call any D this side of Manchin and Cinéma something they consider derisive, whether "leftie", "socialist" or "communist". But I don't usually try to adjust my position based on what some others I don't respect are saying.
I agree it is about policy concepts
rather than labels. I can't think of any Dim, including AOC and Bernie, which I consider on the "left". Additionally there's a big difference between lip service and action ...for example like working on a medicare for all bill, voting against the wars and military budgets, and so on. The only antiwar voices I hear are libertarian rethugs, but I'll ally with anyone with an antiwar stance regardless of party or label.
Be well and take care!
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
I'm inclined to agree.
I''ll now simply self-identify as "agnostic".
A good friend once told me that "Agnostics are simply atheists with commitment issues". True enough- comes to religion, I'm atheist through-and-through. But comes to politics, being atheist will get you shot these days. I'm good with the implied wishy-washyness...
Twice bitten, permanently shy.