• 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.

Progressives are always right...

NoScotsman

Critical Thinker
NoScotsman
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
292
Historically speaking, aren't progressives always "right" ...in the sense that their ideas eventually bear fruit? Politically speaking, aren't they always ahead of the curve? And don't reactionary (or conservative) politics always lose over the long term? As the past rarely works as prologue...

Certainly, there are exceptions (e.g., nutters and extreme radicals could be labeled "progressives") But generally speaking, conservative politics don't seem to conserve much of anything (at least for long). The past simply isn't worth conserving (this has been particularly true with social causes, civil rights, economic models etc.).

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
if when you say Progressives, you mean folks who want to protect our environment, use cleaner and more sustainable sources of fuel, secure human rights, protect abortion rights, limit the amount of guns,..

then yes, we are always right.

:)
 
Thunder said:
if when you say Progressives, you mean folks who want to protect our environment, use cleaner and more sustainable sources of fuel, secure human rights, protect abortion rights, limit the amount of guns,..

then yes, we are always right.

:)
Click to expand...

By always being "right," I suppose I mean being right in the sense of ultimately winning the political debate. For example, whom do you suppose will win the debate over gay rights, conservatives or progressives? The inevitable tide of history says the progressives will (eventually). Over time, conservatives always lose.
 
Last edited:
Progressives have been "winning" for the last few centuries, except in North Korea, which is as conservative as ever.
 
We could start a list of things that are progressive by your definition that didn't work out.

Of course we remember the good new ideas, because they.are still around because they were good. Saying that many good things are new does not mean that all new things are good.

I understand what you are saying, but I think it is an illusion of cognitive biases and logical leaps.
 
Yesterday's change is today's status quo.

The only problem is that not every change sticks and, being human, we tend to remember the winners and forget the losers.
 
well, Progressives may have been wrong when it comes to Muslims and the Burka.

religious freedom is all fine and dandy, until it compromises public safety and women's rights.
 
A progressive idea that didn't work out: Prohibition

A country where progressive ideas fell away: Iran

But I, too, do not think much of the original framing. Progressive often just means 'change from tradition' and that's kind of built into the way societies evolve. So are all those things we haven't abandoned victories for conservatism? The English language? Mathematical notation?
 
Last edited:
marplots said:
A progressive idea that didn't work out: Prohibition
Click to expand...

banning hard liqour was a Liberal/Progressive idea?

this is the first time I heard this. I thought it was led by Religious purists who wanted to protect America's "moral fiber".

Prohibition was a Conservative idea.

Prohibition was an important force in state and local politics from the 1840s through the 1930s. The political forces involved were ethnoreligious in character, as demonstrated by numerous historical studies.[8] Prohibition was demanded by the "dries" — primarily pietistic Protestant denominations, especially the Methodists, Northern Baptists, Southern Baptists, Presbyterians, Disciples of Christ, Congregationalists, Quakers, and Scandinavian Lutherans. They identified saloons as politically corrupt and drinking as a personal sin. They were opposed by the "wets" — primarily liturgical Protestants (Episcopalians, German Lutherans) and Roman Catholics, who denounced the idea that the government should define morality.[9]
 
Last edited:
NoScotsman said:
A progressive is someone who seeks to change the existing order from a liberal perspective.

Looking at the last few hundred years they seem to be winning.
Click to expand...

Well, lets look at some progressive ideas;

1. Conservation? Check.

2. Federal workplace standards including health and safety and prohibition of Child Labor? Check.

3. Equal Sufferage? Check.

4. Campaign finance laws. Check. *but recently lost*

5. Open Government? Check.

6. 8 hour day? Check.

7. Abolition of convict labor. FAIL.

8. Social security and personal health care. PARTIAL.

9. National Health Service? Check.

10. National regulation of inter-state corporations? PARTIAL.

11. Patent Reform? FAIL.

12. National Highway System. Check.

13. Currency in control of federal government? FAIL.

14. Development of navigation of major rivers, and flood control thereof? Check.

15. Protective Tariffs? FAIL.

16. Graduated Income Tax? Check, but losing ground since 1960.

17. Parcel Post system? Check.

18. Civil Service reform? Check.

On the whole, I'd say that over the last century, Progressives won.

This is even though the party they founded to push forward their ideas failed and its relics are part of the Democratic Party now.
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
banning hard liqour was a Liberal/Progressive idea?

this is the first time I heard this. I thought it was led by Religious purists who wanted to protect America's "moral fiber".

Prohibition was a Conservative idea.
Click to expand...


Yeah, that's the problem with the original post. If the traditional way of doing things is conservative, then legal alcohol consumption was the norm and prohibition was the progressive idea. If abstinence is the conservative idea, then Prohibition was conservative. It is why I don't think the question is well defined.

For instance, the newer smoking regulations -- conservative or progressive? After all, the restrictions do mirror Prohibition in the sense they are protecting our citizens from harming themselves.
 
I think the dynamic tension between the demands for "progress" and "tradition" turns out to work best. Think of the country as a car; the progressives are the gas pedal. Obviously without an accelerator, the country doesn't move forward. Conservatives are the brakes; without them the country would pretty quickly run into a ditch.
 
There's a selection bias in play. We only get to consider those ideas which first passed the legislative process (and were modified thereby). I am not enough of a political historian to know what ideas progressives pushed but didn't go anywhere.

My guess would be things under the categories of Immigration reform, Unions and universal health care (I was around for Hillary's attempt).

My impression is that no legislation actually enacted is entirely progressive or completely satisfactory to its first proponents.

How is Americor/Peace Corp doing? Was the No Nukes thing progressive? How about the national 55 mile per hour speed limit?

I have a hard time remembering what didn't work out, so I think I too have a selection bias.
 
Last edited:
NoScotsman said:
Historically speaking, aren't progressives always "right" ...in the sense that their ideas eventually bear fruit? Politically speaking, aren't they always ahead of the curve? And don't reactionary (or conservative) politics always lose over the long term? As the past rarely works as prologue...

Certainly, there are exceptions (e.g., nutters and extreme radicals could be labeled "progressives") But generally speaking, conservative politics don't seem to conserve much of anything (at least for long). The past simply isn't worth conserving (this has been particularly true with social causes, civil rights, economic models etc.).

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

My thought is that your distinction between "progressive" and "conservative" is simply dead wrong. It's not only progressives that desire a change, they just do so at a much greater pace. In that sense it could just as easily be said conservatives were historically always correct, since many of the changes were only implemented after being substantially watered down, and only after the time was right for them.

Neither this position nor yours is completely correct. While it is true that many of the goals championed by progressives eventually won are now considered major victories, there are also many goals (e.g. socialism) that were likewise championed by progressives, from which much of the world was spared, due to, in no small part, conservatives.

Simply put, you need both sides if you like that or not.

McHrozni
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom