Printable View
That "progressive" is the new Nazi/Commie/Hippie/Libreal buzzword in America.
All progresivess of the world from all walks of life and all sands of time have had one goal.
To take your gun, take your bible, and turn America into Eourpe...only more bankrupt!
... The point of the thread being? :tongue:
I thought such closed-ended jokes work only when inserted into an existing thread?
Im trying to build a consensusQuote:
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus
Gah, now I am too disoriented to concentrate on anything :dizzy2:
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
'Progressive' will not be a lasting term. The unwashed Conservative masses will find it too difficult to spell.
What is the opposite of Progress? Exactly. So anyone who hates progress auto-loses.
Regress, I think. But that assumes a false dilemma between progress and its opposite. We could always just stagnate. Of course, progress itself isn't the best defined. What are we moving toward? Greater equality? Greater freedom? Greater standard of living? Greater social justice? Greater wealth? Greater control over nature? Greater harmony with nature? Depending on your goal, progress can mean just about anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
Ajax
...Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Can any of you British Orgahs convince your government to invade us again? American independence was a neat idea but I don't think we were quite ready for it.
Humor....You don't get itQuote:
Originally Posted by jabarto
I'm well aware you were kidding. I would hope you'd realize that I was too. :juggle2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
ToucheQuote:
Originally Posted by jabarto
I, for one, thought that was a splendid idea. I just hope Cameron will have enough grace to keep Obama. After all, the GOP here is closer to BNP than the Tories... :juggle2:Quote:
Originally Posted by jabarto
watch out your frenchman is showing.Quote:
No.
'Progressive' will not be a lasting term. The unwashed Conservative masses will find it too difficult to spell.
i for one am still hoping for a peoples revolution. i want my own stalin.Quote:
I, for one, thought that was a splendid idea. I just hope Cameron will have enough grace to keep Obama. After all, the GOP here is closer to BNP than the Tories...
Did you expect the Left's rebranding efforts to go unmentioned?Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
What is interesting is how toxic "liberal" has become. Even people with liberal views often do not wish to be labeled as such. So, much like how Global Warming became Climate Change, liberals are now progressives. Beskar highlighted the thinking behind this shift perfectly... who wants to stand against progress? And Ajaxfish highlighted the fallacies of that thinking perfectly... one man's progress is another man's regress.
"Conservative", on the other hand, has suffered no such problem. When the Left seeks to draw a box around an opponent, they usually go the "right-wing" route. Even many democratic voters identify with conservatism. The Left will blame this on talk radio, but I blame it on Reagan. :P
I blame everything on Reagan. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
I KNEW it! I just knew that suave ******* had his mitts all over the Thirty Years War. Just his kinda thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by jabarto
I can safely say that in personal and business dealings, if someone says they are "conservative," I ask immediately what they mean by that, since the term, as used by 99.999% of people, is meaningless.
As for "progressive," it's just going through a rough patch due to Glenn Beck flogging it five hours a day on radio and teevee.
In my experience the people who call themselves progressives are deeply conservative, they just want to keep sitting where they are and want as little change as possible, they are relics from the seventies who lost all capacity for independent thought.
In American Politics there is only one label that fits.
And it fits both sides pretty well.
That is anal-retentive.
I thought the new buzz word was Retard
Did anyone notice how self-proclaimed liberals are to the right of Progressives in most cases? Or they are simply moderates masquerading as left-wingers in order to make it appear they are rebelling against the anti-Conservative lines of thought? Just something I have picked up from American politics.
Woah massive deja vu, including having deja vu of having deja vu of having deja vu... I need to drink less (I also remember typing that... Oh man, this is weird)... okay it is over now.
Insert spirited protests regarding the usage of the word Nazi and libreal in the same breath. Insert assertion that all progresivess being united is a flawed premise. Wonders which Bible was taken away, where, and by whom. Wonders why guns and Bibles go hand in hand in the first place. Notes that there wasn't any reference to teh gayness. Have we lost touch with true conservative valyoos? Say it ain't sew, Strike. Say it ain't sew.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
:clown:
in some ways nazis were liberal. No in any way morally or socially but in matters of economics it could be a stretch.
economically liberal?
Given how liberal when applied to economics could mean anything... from the freest of markets to the most progressive of socialist systems. Surely we aren't confusing German "national socialism" with actual socialist ideas? There's also a difference between liberal and socialist. Liberal itself is one of those words that gets tossed around quite, as some would say, liberally.
true but one of the pillars of the facist nazi government was the creation of a form of welfare state that would make devotion to the government more doable. Doesn't mean they were successful.Quote:
economically liberal?
Given how liberal when applied to economics could mean anything... from the freest of markets to the most progressive of socialist systems. Surely we aren't confusing German "national socialism" with actual socialist ideas? There's also a difference between liberal and socialist. Liberal itself is one of those words that gets tossed around quite, as some would say, liberally.
And yes Liberal is a very thrown around word. And it can represent many different political beliefs
We have had countless threads about this. Please don't turn this into another one, if only for the sake of my lingering sanity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Centurion1
sure. im done.Quote:
We have had countless threads about this. Please don't turn this into another one, if only for the sake of my lingering sanity.
i think the new buzzword in American politics is teaparty.
Most certainly not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus
I also find it noteworthy how different Europeans and Americans see the term "socialism".
I find it noteworthy how many Americans see the word "socialism" differently from other Americans.
I am sorry to say this but political language is beyond the comprehension of about half the Americans I've met, and it's something that many insist on using when they don't understand what things mean. Especially when it involves big concepts like economics or taxation. And to be fair, that's from all sides of the political spectrum.
Debate and intelligent discourse is impossible when we speak the same language, but don't understand it, or have different definitions for the same words.
now now, that is really not true, i don't want you going around making the BNP look good by comparing them to the Grand Old Party!Quote:
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus
seriously, neither the Cons nor the GOP have nothing in common with the BNP, just as Labour and the Dems don't either.
the BNP is a crazy fringe party of little historical provenance, totally unlike the four above.
the BNP is pretty much a single issue party, totally unlike the four above.
the BNP is has limited demographic pull and thus little plurality, totally unlike the four above.
there is no sensible comparison that can be made. :)
wait isnt the bnp the nazi party.Quote:
now now, that is really not true, i don't want you going around making the BNP look good by comparing them to the Grand Old Party!
seriously, neither the Cons nor the GOP have nothing in common with the BNP, just as Labour and the Dems don't either.
the BNP is a crazy fringe party of little historical provenance, totally unlike the four above.
the BNP is pretty much a single issue party, totally unlike the four above.
the BNP is has limited demographic pull and thus little plurality, totally unlike the four above.
there is no sensible comparison that can be made. :)
AP it is one thing to say you dislike the GOP and totally another to say they are Nazi's.
In history I was taught that Disraeli rebranded the Tories as "Conservatives", conserving the good and changing what needed to be changed. The brand may have different connotations nowadays, but the political opposite to the rebranded Progressives would be the originally rebranded Conservatives.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
The US Orgahs here probably have a different idea of some political terms from that understood by other Americans, as a result of their greater contact with Europeans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy
the BNP is not a nazi party:Quote:
Originally Posted by Centurion1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_National_Party
it might be the closest thing we have to a nazi party, but that does not mean that their is a substantial equivalence between the two.Quote:
The British National Party (BNP) is a far-right political party formed as a splinter group from the National Front by John Tyndall in 1982. Until 2009, when it was challenged in the courts on grounds of racial discrimination,[15] it restricted membership to people of "Caucasian origin".[16] After a vote by members in a February 2010 extraordinary general meeting the party dropped this policy, with chairman Nick Griffin saying that the party will now "accept anyone as a member providing they agree with us that this country should remain fundamentally British"[17]. The party will go back to court in March when a judge will decide if the new rules are within the law.[18]
The BNP seeks to restore the overwhelmingly white ethnicity of Britain that existed prior to 1948 through legal means, including "firm but voluntary incentives for immigrants and their descendants to return home",[19] and the repeal of anti-discrimination legislation. It believes that there are significant differences between races.[20] The party is ostracised by mainstream political parties in the UK.[21][22][23][24][25]
In 2005, the last UK general election, the party received 0.7% of the popular vote but had no candidates elected to Parliament. In the 2006 English local elections the party doubled its number of seats in England. The BNP finished fifth in the 2008 London mayoral election with 5.2% of the popular vote and secured one of the London Assembly's 25 seats.[26] They won their first county council seats in 2009[27] together with two seats in the European Parliament.[28]
so they are just racists.........
still insulting comparison.
Maggie Thatcher is classed as a left-wing Democrat in American politics. It is amusing.
The BNP are fascists with neo-nazi elements in its make up. "Young, Nazi and Proud" shows this off the best. It is a good programme at explaining it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Centurion1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...6632184074561#
not on any political spectrum she isntQuote:
Maggie Thatcher is classed as a left-wing Democrat in American politics. It is amusing.
?Quote:
Originally Posted by Centurion1
(Since Lemur is the one who said she was, I allow him to explain)
sure i want to hear as well i think of her as a rightie as well. but she is european and to some extent her politics reflect that, she is more socialist than any conservative here. that being said i wouldnt call her a far left american liberal, least because of her outlook on defense which is a major difference between left and right in america.
Maggie? She's a Marxist, mate.
She supported socialised healthcare, wanted to destroy the American way of life with the Global Warming scam, and supported the commies against the conservative, freedom loving Argie junta.
Thatcher was never socialist by choice. She maintained some socialist institutions because it would be political suicide (at the time) to disband them. But she hacked away at all she could, and psychologically laid the basis for her successors to hack away even more. She's right wing even by American standards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Centurion1
Keep 'em, I wouldn't know what to do with them anyway...Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
yes, an unworthy and insulting comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by Centurion1