• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

So what form does the resistance take?

Emily's Cat said:
I'm quite openly opposed to the vast majority of progressive positions. Not being progressive doesn't make me not classically liberal. It just makes me pragmatic and able to consider the likely consequences of those policies. Seriously, being able to use extrapolative thinking to see that legalizing the use of hard drugs and providing wet shelters for addicts is likely to deteriorate the quality of life for everyone else in that community, and that it does not reduce the impact of addiction and improve long-term health and well being for addicts isn't exactly an illiberal observation.
Click to expand...
Did you really just unironically use the term "classical liberal"? You are telling on yourself more than you realize.
 
Reformed Offlian said:
As is "Sex Workers", which became a thing because the workers themselves wanted to be called something less stigmatizing and dehumanizing than other terms traditionally used to describe them, so it's ironic that some people want to reframe it as something sinister.
Click to expand...
Yes, many of the customers want to buy their services and despise them while doing so.
 
Susheel said:
What sort of wokeness is this? You keep using that word? What do you define as woke? A lot of what is defined as "woke" was something that the right wing just created out of thin air to rile up the simple minded.
"If the US had a system with more than two parties, these would be isolated on the wings, and not gain the agenda in the fashion that actually happened."
And thus ensure a status quo where the extreme right and the conservative lite would continue to run a government primarily benefiting the rich.
Click to expand...
It has reached the point where beleiing that all races should have equal rights and the sexes should be equal is woke.
Yes, there was an awful lot of silliness peddled under the term Woke....I thin the 1619 project, for instance,is bad history...and people were called racist in history dicussion for insisting that the Ancient Egyptians were not blacks....but it has gone from legititmate calling out of bad history to the promotion of bigotry.
 
Reformed Offlian said:
As is "Sex Workers", which became a thing because the workers themselves wanted to be called something less stigmatizing and dehumanizing than other terms traditionally used to describe them, so it's ironic that some people want to reframe it as something sinister.
Click to expand...
It's also because a lot of people who aren't prostitutes work in the sex industry. It's a better term.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Sure, sure. The right wing totally invented out of thin air
  • defund the police
  • eat the rich
  • occupied autonomous zones in major cities
  • sanctuary cities for illegal entrants
  • legalized public use of hard drugs
  • wet shelters
  • making it illegal to move tents out of public walkways
  • racially-based safe spaces that exclude white people
  • microaggressions
  • males competing in female sports, using female intimate spaces, and being placed in female prisons on the basis of their unverifiable claim to an inner essence
  • different college entrance requirements and scoring metrics based on race
  • suspending public noise ordinances for islamic calls to prayer to be broadcast across the town before dawn
  • lower physical strength and capability requirements for females in police, fire, and military roles
  • shifting sex education from being protection-focused to being pleasure-focused and pushing that down to younger and younger ages
  • reframing the exploitation of females as usable commodities as "sex work"
Yep. I can totally see how none of that has ever actually happened, it's all just some made-up paranoia from the right wing.
Click to expand...
I have no idea what your onjective with this list was....but it just seems to prove my point. Every thing in that list is basically a right-wing twisting and stretching of actual policies. The very first "defund the police" was basically the Dems calling for basic accountability for money being poured into police departments that end up being spent on tech and weapons, and even paying off settlements for bad policing, rather than proper training, or opening better services that will help the community. Nobody was calling for shutting down police stations.
I am not even going to attempt to explain the rest of the drivel on that list.
 
dudalb said:
It has reached the point where beleiing that all races should have equal rights and the sexes should be equal is woke.
Yes, there was an awful lot of silliness peddled under the term Woke....I thin the 1619 project, for instance,is bad history...and people were called racist in history dicussion for insisting that the Ancient Egyptians were not blacks....but it has gone from legititmate calling out of bad history to the promotion of bigotry.
Click to expand...
The ancient Egyptians weren't necessarily white either. And as for the Ptolemaic dynasty, the term Greek descent does not necessarily reference the modern European(?) genetics of present day Greeks. And the Ptolemaic royalty does not necessarily refer to the rest of the populace of the period.
 
Susheel said:
I have no idea what your onjective with this list was....but it just seems to prove my point.
Every thing in that list is basically a right-wing twisting and stretching of actual policies. The very first "defund the police" was basically the Dems calling for basic accountability for money being poured into police departments that end up being spent on tech and weapons, and even paying off settlements for bad policing, rather than proper training, or opening better services that will help the community. Nobody was calling for shutting down police stations.
I am not even going to attempt to explain the rest of the drivel on that list.
Click to expand...
Exactly this. The right in USA politics does not seem capable of debating actual policies. Their knee-jerk reaction is to create strawmen to set fire to. And their sycophants seem incapable of recognizing this.
 
Reformed Offlian said:
Heck, given that list, it sounds like it doesn't even have to be scary to scare them.
Click to expand...
I think it's mostly slippery slope scariness. People are scared of transsexuals because the liars in charge fill them with the fear of consequences like involuntary sex reassignment in schools, scared of black pilots because of the prospect that pilots' credentials will disappear and they'll all be gangbangers with stripes, etc. etc., just as they were scared twenty-five years ago here in Vermont of civil unions because the scumbrained proto-fascists of the day convinced them that the result would be that we'd all be forced to be gay and people would marry their cats. Paint a scenario of the comfortable and familiar society being smothered by wokeness gone mad and nothing needs to be real or likely to be scary enough.
 
Emily's Cat said:
I'm quite openly opposed to the vast majority of progressive positions. Not being progressive doesn't make me not classically liberal.
Click to expand...
Are you opposed to —
  • Women being outside the home without a male chaperone?
  • Women having to hide their hair when out in public?
  • Women being able to vote?
  • Women being able to hold seats in legislative assemblies?
  • Women being able to drive vehicles?
  • Females in any profession other than teaching and nursing?
  • Women getting a loan without their husband's signature?
  • Women holding a credit card?
Because at one time in many places all of the above were progressive policies!
 
Susheel said:
I have no idea what your onjective with this list was....but it just seems to prove my point. Every thing in that list is basically a right-wing twisting and stretching of actual policies. The very first "defund the police" was basically the Dems calling for basic accountability for money being poured into police departments that end up being spent on tech and weapons, and even paying off settlements for bad policing, rather than proper training, or opening better services that will help the community. Nobody was calling for shutting down police stations.
I am not even going to attempt to explain the rest of the drivel on that list.
Click to expand...
giffords.org

Trump budget defunds the police

White House budget slashes ATF funding by more than $400 million. “These cuts will spur violent crime across the country.”
giffords.org giffords.org
 
Blue Mountain said:
Are you opposed to —
  • Women being outside the home without a male chaperone?
  • Women having to hide their hair when out in public?
  • Women being able to vote?
  • Women being able to hold seats in legislative assemblies?
  • Women being able to drive vehicles?
  • Females in any profession other than teaching and nursing?
  • Women getting a loan without their husband's signature?
  • Women holding a credit card?
Because at one time in many places all of the above were progressive policies!
Click to expand...
Now now, to be fair, Project 2025 is rapidly working to remove all those bolded 'rights' women cannot handle anyway.
To protect them of course.
 
Blue Mountain said:
I believe you're trying to be humorous here. As far as I know the project 2025 document doesn't include anything of the sort.
Click to expand...
However, there is a lot in there that removes a woman's agency primarily with what she can do with her body. And there is a lot in there that pushes pretty regressive male centric christo-fascist conservatism. You think there is no chance of a slippery slope? The past decade should have provided more insight.
 
Gulliver Foyle said:
Well if you think that Thatcherite reich-wingers and Hitlerite reich wingers are poles apart.
Me I reckon you couldn't slip a rizla paper in the ideological crack between the "moderate" dems and the party of treason on most issues.
Click to expand...
It's the same people who pay them for the same services. And they pay them even more after the election when they know for sure who'll be in charge for the next four years or so. The only new thing in this respect is that they have started paying exorbitant amounts, not for services to be rendered but to avoid the damages the guys in charge threaten to do to their fortunes.
It used to be the kind of thing that would make the bourgeoisie rebellious enough to dethrone autocrats and replace them with elected officials, but that's not in vogue with shareholders nowadays.
 
Reformed Offlian said:
Did you really just unironically use the term "classical liberal"? You are telling on yourself more than you realize.
Click to expand...
I've always been fiscally conservative and preferred smaller government. On the other hand, I've been generally socially liberal and a fan of strong, well-thought-out regulation, and socialization of natural monopolies and municipal utilities. I strongly support education as a public good, including pre-school and post-secondary education that incorporates trades, and I would like to abolish the private education system entirely. I think the provision of health care should be nationally endowed and managed for critical illness and acute events, with a private system of insurance for routine and chronic care coverage. I favor a moderate by meaningful social safety net to provide short-term assistance, backed by a societal value of volunteer and charitable work.

Just because you and others of your ilk have warped the meaning of the term doesn't actually make it disappear, nor does it make it synonymous with Republicans.

What I will 100% own is that I'm quite clearly NOT PROGRESSIVE. Not because I oppose progress, but because most of what gets framed as progressive policy is horribly limiting, oppressive, authoritarian, and pretty much looks like a great path to becoming a People's Republic of Marxist Idiocy.
 
"fiscally conservative" = "I don't know how the monetary system works".
"small government" = "I imagine that I don't need the government, because I'm currently doing fine".

The combination is code for "I want to pay less in taxes, even though I could easily afford it".
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom