## What is social progressivism?

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

### What is social progressivism?

What is social progressivism, or to put it another way, what is leftwing social control/authoritarianism?
By social I mean as opposed to fiscal, not socialism the economic theory.

Is it (a species of) speech/thought control?
Is it gun control?
Is it giving more positive and negative rights to minorities and women than the majority and men?
Is it compulsory education?
Compulsory healthcare?
Animal rights?
Environmentalism?
One or more of the above/something else?

I think social conservatism is easier to define than social progressivism because it's been around longer.
We've had it for centuries if not millennia whereas social progressivism appears to be a relatively recent phenomenon.
Social conservatism is basically the imposition of religion and traditional moral values (in the west, that would be Christianity, white nationalism, patriarchy, heteronormativity as they say and moderation: don't eat or drink too much or take reactional drugs, work hard, don't lie, cheat or steal, be responsible).

When the Marxists took over Russia, they attempted to impose some social programs on the Russian people, forced atheism and so on (I'm far from an expert on this subject, perhaps others could fill us in as to many of the social programs they tried to impose and how they differ from contemporary social programs).
I suspect their programs were more mixed, containing some stuff that was both progressive and conservative, whereas ours are more strictly progressive.
It wasn't the same as the social progressivism we have today, but you could say it started there.

I would also like to add by social progressivism I don't mean libertarianism.
I'm not talking about progressivism as something negative/the absence of x, merely the depoliticization or removal of social conservatism from politics and law, I'm talking about it as something positive/the presence of x, the imposition of new moral values, or at least the removal of social conservativism from, not only politics and law, but from the business world and even our sociopersonal lives.

Also, what do you think of social progressivism, do you think it's positive/negative?
If you're a socialist, do you think it complements socialism, or is it a hinderance, even antithetical?

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 3293
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

### Re: What is social progressivism?

"it (a species of) speech/thought control?
Is it gun control?
Is it giving more positive and negative rights to minorities and women than the majority and men?
Is it compulsory education?
Compulsory healthcare?
Animal rights?
Environmentalism?"

You know if you first made significant structural changes to economy and society in the way of the 'socialism', and in say a couple years or so - projecting a significant increase in employment, income, access to medical, regulated rent and interest rates so that expenses and debts are less, ... and some kind of corporatization of the job/field each person works in so that there is better more even distribution of profit... - the vast majority of people might more easily agree on an answer to each of those and be far less obstinate.

Think of it like this. If approximately equal people take each side of each argument there, it means something makes sense about their position and they believe fervently in it.

This being the case, it's demonstrated that there can't be a 'right' answer to those arguments, and that what matters, now, is that a majority make the decision... as that's as close to what we can get to a reasonable solution.

But now imagine if people were less divided in other ways so that, perhaps, that spirit of obstinacy and the feeling of importance of defending one's position against the perceived enemy at any cost, would be less severe.

Even the fact of being divided and calling a set of core, principle beliefs the 'basis' of a party, predisposes someone to vilify the opposition.

Never mind I'm swerving. The point is that if each side of an argument are approximately equal in their duration and strength, there's nothing to prove one or the other is the 'right' way to conclude the argument objectively (these aren't math problems), and we end up at compulsory intersubjective agreement anyway. Only there happens to be two of these agreement sets.

First step is for the world to recognize there IS NO objective right answer to the guns and animals and environment and everything else, and then to modify the whole fuckin so sigh it tee so that people no longer vilify the other side.

Real talk. When's the last time you saw a pro choice leftist admit that while he thinks what joe the christian believes regarding the soul and the moment of conception, etc., etc., is nonsense, he nonetheless understands how joe might find his position the most reasonable one to have; no abortion. change society so that accidental pregnancies stop happening. Restore old protestant work ethic values, etc.

Now this is reasonable. But that doesnt make it right, or wrong. Just a different way to address a problem.

In the same way, it's perfectly possible to make abortion illegal and pentalize it. Doing this could be made 'reasonable' with the proper support of more arguments, and so on.

And in turn righty needs to understand why lefty is pro choice, and examine his beliefs and arguments.

Not until they stop bickering and accept that what 'makes sense' to someone is not something they can control, they can begin the discussion about reconfiguring and resolving the problems.
promethean75
Philosopher

Posts: 4039
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Social, cultural, and racial Marxism mixed with big corp technological humanism for a one world order that solely exists for the global elites but simultaneously tricks the small people into believing that they'll somehow benefit also when in reality the objective goal is their total elimination or annihilation. One big massive cognitive dissonance circle jerk for everybody everywhere.

Zero_Sum
Special Commisar Joker

Posts: 4100
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: The People's Republic of the U.S.S.A - My pronouns are 'Fuck You'-

### Re: What is social progressivism?

promethean75 wrote:"it (a species of) speech/thought control?
Is it gun control?
Is it giving more positive and negative rights to minorities and women than the majority and men?
Is it compulsory education?
Compulsory healthcare?
Animal rights?
Environmentalism?"

You know if you first made significant structural changes to economy and society in the way of the 'socialism', and in say a couple years or so - projecting a significant increase in employment, income, access to medical, regulated rent and interest rates so that expenses and debts are less, ... and some kind of corporatization of the job/field each person works in so that there is better more even distribution of profit... - the vast majority of people might more easily agree on an answer to each of those and be far less obstinate.

Maybe, maybe if we solved our economic problems, maybe people wouldn't care much about this sociocultural stuff, one way or the other.

Think of it like this. If approximately equal people take each side of each argument there, it means something makes sense about their position and they believe fervently in it.

This being the case, it's demonstrated that there can't be a 'right' answer to those arguments, and that what matters, now, is that a majority make the decision... as that's as close to what we can get to a reasonable solution.

But now imagine if people were less divided in other ways so that, perhaps, that spirit of obstinacy and the feeling of importance of defending one's position against the perceived enemy at any cost, would be less severe.

Even the fact of being divided and calling a set of core, principle beliefs the 'basis' of a party, predisposes someone to vilify the opposition.

Never mind I'm swerving. The point is that if each side of an argument are approximately equal in their duration and strength, there's nothing to prove one or the other is the 'right' way to conclude the argument objectively (these aren't math problems), and we end up at compulsory intersubjective agreement anyway. Only there happens to be two of these agreement sets.

First step is for the world to recognize there IS NO objective right answer to the guns and animals and environment and everything else, and then to modify the whole fuckin so sigh it tee so that people no longer vilify the other side.

Real talk. When's the last time you saw a pro choice leftist admit that while he thinks what joe the christian believes regarding the soul and the moment of conception, etc., etc., is nonsense, he nonetheless understands how joe might find his position the most reasonable one to have; no abortion. change society so that accidental pregnancies stop happening. Restore old protestant work ethic values, etc.

Now this is reasonable. But that doesnt make it right, or wrong. Just a different way to address a problem.

In the same way, it's perfectly possible to make abortion illegal and pentalize it. Doing this could be made 'reasonable' with the proper support of more arguments, and so on.

And in turn righty needs to understand why lefty is pro choice, and examine his beliefs and arguments.

Not until they stop bickering and accept that what 'makes sense' to someone is not something they can control, they can begin the discussion about reconfiguring and resolving the problems.

Yea, all, or at least a lot of this stuff is subjective.
Much of our values come down to subjective cognition, feelings, personal experience.
If we want to live together, we have to compromise, or get a divorce, we're never all going to agree.

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 3293
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Gloominary wrote:What is social progressivism, or to put it another way, what is leftwing social control/authoritarianism?
By social I mean as opposed to fiscal, not socialism the economic theory.

Is it (a species of) speech/thought control?
Is it gun control?
Is it giving more positive and negative rights to minorities and women than the majority and men?
Is it compulsory education?
Compulsory healthcare?
Animal rights?
Environmentalism?
One or more of the above/something else?

I think social conservatism is easier to define than social progressivism because it's been around longer.
We've had it for centuries if not millennia whereas social progressivism appears to be a relatively recent phenomenon.
Social conservatism is basically the imposition of religion and traditional moral values (in the west, that would be Christianity, white nationalism, patriarchy, heteronormativity as they say and moderation: don't eat or drink too much or take reactional drugs, work hard, don't lie, cheat or steal, be responsible).

When the Marxists took over Russia, they attempted to impose some social programs on the Russian people, forced atheism and so on (I'm far from an expert on this subject, perhaps others could fill us in as to many of the social programs they tried to impose and how they differ from contemporary social programs).
I suspect their programs were more mixed, containing some stuff that was both progressive and conservative, whereas ours are more strictly progressive.
It wasn't the same as the social progressivism we have today, but you could say it started there.

I would also like to add by social progressivism I don't mean libertarianism.
I'm not talking about progressivism as something negative/the absence of x, merely the depoliticization or removal of social conservatism from politics and law, I'm talking about it as something positive/the presence of x, the imposition of new moral values, or at least the removal of social conservativism from, not only politics and law, but from the business world and even our sociopersonal lives.

Also, what do you think of social progressivism, do you think it's positive/negative?
If you're a socialist, do you think it complements socialism, or is it a hinderance, even antithetical?

It is a result of envy.
It is made by people who are in some way irreparably deformed (probably often enough only in their own mind) and thus have no perspective on healthy forms of happiness and are tormented by seeing healthy, wholesome people. There are of course some better people who get caught up in it by being made to feel guilty, but the root is envy from depravity.
Envy is the most powerful "sin". Marx is its most powerful manifestation.

You see it in ogres like zuckerborg en bill getz. The more money they make, the more frustrated they get, as they realized that money is not going to make them less ogre-like. So they spend their fortunes on destroying the lives of the wholesome to "get even".

I may be seen to be simplifying it just a little bit, but Ive come to realize that it is essentially this simple.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
-
Before the Light - Philosophy 77 - sumofalltemples - The Magickal Tree of Life Academy

Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper

Posts: 11050
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Zero_Sum wrote:Social, cultural, and racial Marxism mixed with big corp technological humanism for a one world order that solely exists for the global elites but simultaneously tricks the small people into believing that they'll somehow benefit also when in reality the objective goal is their total elimination or annihilation. One big massive cognitive dissonance circle jerk for everybody everywhere.

FTMP that's how I feel about them.
I agree with fiscal progressives on some things, like affordable housing, education, healthcare and higher wages, but I agree with sociocultural progressives on abortion, some environmental concerns and that's about it.
I can get along with fiscal progressives who're socioculturally libertarian or moderately conservative, see eye-eye with them on quite a bit, but not with social progressives.
Unfortunately the social progressives appear to have come to dominate the left.

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 3293
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Gloominary wrote:
Zero_Sum wrote:Social, cultural, and racial Marxism mixed with big corp technological humanism for a one world order that solely exists for the global elites but simultaneously tricks the small people into believing that they'll somehow benefit also when in reality the objective goal is their total elimination or annihilation. One big massive cognitive dissonance circle jerk for everybody everywhere.

FTMP that's how I feel about them.
I agree with fiscal progressives on some things, like affordable housing, education, healthcare and higher wages, but I agree with sociocultural progressives on abortion, some environmental concerns and that's about it.
I can get along with fiscal progressives who're socioculturally libertarian or moderately conservative, see eye-eye with them on quite a bit, but not with social progressives.
Unfortunately the social progressives appear to have come to dominate the left.

And (social) progressives seem to be pushing this Covid tyranny the most.

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 3293
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Fixed Cross wrote:
Gloominary wrote:What is social progressivism, or to put it another way, what is leftwing social control/authoritarianism?
By social I mean as opposed to fiscal, not socialism the economic theory.

Is it (a species of) speech/thought control?
Is it gun control?
Is it giving more positive and negative rights to minorities and women than the majority and men?
Is it compulsory education?
Compulsory healthcare?
Animal rights?
Environmentalism?
One or more of the above/something else?

I think social conservatism is easier to define than social progressivism because it's been around longer.
We've had it for centuries if not millennia whereas social progressivism appears to be a relatively recent phenomenon.
Social conservatism is basically the imposition of religion and traditional moral values (in the west, that would be Christianity, white nationalism, patriarchy, heteronormativity as they say and moderation: don't eat or drink too much or take reactional drugs, work hard, don't lie, cheat or steal, be responsible).

When the Marxists took over Russia, they attempted to impose some social programs on the Russian people, forced atheism and so on (I'm far from an expert on this subject, perhaps others could fill us in as to many of the social programs they tried to impose and how they differ from contemporary social programs).
I suspect their programs were more mixed, containing some stuff that was both progressive and conservative, whereas ours are more strictly progressive.
It wasn't the same as the social progressivism we have today, but you could say it started there.

I would also like to add by social progressivism I don't mean libertarianism.
I'm not talking about progressivism as something negative/the absence of x, merely the depoliticization or removal of social conservatism from politics and law, I'm talking about it as something positive/the presence of x, the imposition of new moral values, or at least the removal of social conservativism from, not only politics and law, but from the business world and even our sociopersonal lives.

Also, what do you think of social progressivism, do you think it's positive/negative?
If you're a socialist, do you think it complements socialism, or is it a hinderance, even antithetical?

It is a result of envy.
It is made by people who are in some way irreparably deformed (probably often enough only in their own mind) and thus have no perspective on healthy forms of happiness and are tormented by seeing healthy, wholesome people. There are of course some better people who get caught up in it by being made to feel guilty, but the root is envy from depravity.
Envy is the most powerful "sin". Marx is its most powerful manifestation.

You see it in ogres like zuckerborg en bill getz. The more money they make, the more frustrated they get, as they realized that money is not going to make them less ogre-like. So they spend their fortunes on destroying the lives of the wholesome to "get even".

I may be seen to be simplifying it just a little bit, but Ive come to realize that it is essentially this simple.

Yea, there's probably a lot of truth to that.

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 3293
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Traditional values could be characterizes as a series of hierarchies:

Superior>Inferior
Christian>NonChristian
Western>Nonwestern
White>Nonwhite
Male>Female
Monogamy>Polyamory
Fertile>Sterile
Able>Disabled
Adult>Child
Fit>Fat
Sober>Drunk
Hardworking>Lazy
Saver>Spender
Rational>Irrational
Law-abiding/Lawbreaking

Progressive values aren't so much new values, as they are the inversion of traditional values.
Superior>inferior are reconstrued as Oppressor>Oppressed.
Social justice is giving more positive and negative rights to the oppressed, as a form of compensation for perceived past and present injustices, until the oppressed are thought to no longer have inferior sociocultural standing.

There are other aspects of social progressivism, like gun control, compulsory education, compulsory healthcare and environmentalism, which I don't believe are necessarily socially progressive in the sense I meant it above, western education, healthcare and science may even be seen as antithetical to social progressivism, because they developed in the occident.
Hardcore social progressives may even be anti-western education, healthcare and science, or apprehensive about aspects of it.

As for gun control, from what I gather, many conservative authoritarians implemented gun control, so I don't see it as necessarily being progressive or conservative, more generally authoritarian.
As for environmentalism, if environmentalism is practiced more for the sake of wildlife, then I see it as being more strictly progressive (inverting traditional values: civilization>environment becomes environment>civilization), whereas if its practiced more for the sake of humanity, like conserving wildlife and natural resources for the sake of future generations, so they can enjoy their beauty and utilize their resources, then I don't see it as being strictly progressive.
Last edited by Gloominary on Wed Dec 16, 2020 11:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 3293
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

### Re: What is social progressivism?

To me, Social Progressivism is Corporate Authoritarianism, Big Tech, MSM takeover of "Truth" ("fact-checking"), and takeover of the internet, or internet "culture".

"Cancel-Culture" (attacking and destroying Conservative-Right institutions and people) is their primary weapon.

BLM and Antifa are their Strong-arm, enforcement agency. They use Race and "Critical Race Theory" as another tool/weapon and mean of Leverage.

They claim a lot of "progress", in terms of Environment, Politics, and Race, but they do almost the exact-opposite of what they claim. They are Dupes, of the DNC establishment. Pawns in a war. They are "progressing" nothing.

They are actually Regressivists, not Progressives.

They are driven by lust for Power, and do not stand upon Virtues. Thus they are morally corrupt.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher

Posts: 4396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Dude...

Urwrong,

It’s very obvious that you are either being paid to post here or you’re fucking insane.

There are no other options.

You’ve been radicalized by propaganda, that much is obvious.

Your posts are a joke dude. Trump is a joke.

Did Biden win? Maybe not. But I can tell you this for 100% certainty! If Biden didn’t win, trump didn’t either.

You think about that as you take a shit on your toilet and get back to me.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend

Posts: 11458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Shut the fuck up, Ecmandu, retard.

Say something smart or quit pissing in people's threads. We are here for Philosophy, not your psycho-manic episodes where you cry-out "ME ME ME ME SOMEBODY LISTEN TO MEEEE!!!"

Take some meds and fuck off.

(My apologies to Gloominary)
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher

Posts: 4396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Urwrongx1000 wrote:Shut the fuck up, Ecmandu, retard.

Say something smart or quit pissing in people's threads. We are here for Philosophy, not your psycho-manic episodes where you cry-out "ME ME ME ME SOMEBODY LISTEN TO MEEEE!!!"

Take some meds and fuck off.

(My apologies to Gloominary)

You know what’s funny Urwrong...

And this may actually send chills down your spine...

Everyone who’s ever lived eventually sees the entire life stories of everyone who’s ever lived.

I don’t know who the fuck you think you are... but next time you take a shit in a toilet about who you are; think about that
Ecmandu
ILP Legend

Posts: 11458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Excuse me while I start counting these $100, C-notes... *flip flip flip flip flip* *sniffs the luscious green wad of cash* You jealous?? Urwrongx1000 Philosopher Posts: 4396 Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm ### Re: What is social progressivism? Urwrongx1000 wrote:Excuse me while I start counting these$100, C-notes...

*flip flip flip flip flip*

*sniffs the luscious green wad of cash*

You jealous??

Urwrong,

Not a bit. I’m never jealous of a moron. I have the most beautiful mind on earth... I’m still in hell, but having my mind even makes hell somewhat beautiful.

What do you have? Pieces of cloth-paper. In heaven, where most things are given to you free of charge (this gets a little complicated - but go with me for a moment) what do you think pieces of cloth paper mean?

Nothing. Not one damn fucking thing.

Am I jealous of you? I pity you.

I don’t think you understand the full magnitude of me...

I’m a resurrected being who’s been to hell.

And none of that does or could make any sense to you...

But what can make sense to you, is that spiritually, my friends are the spirits that can and will send you to hell.

I earned my ‘bones’ in hell... I’m one of the super elite spirits. I understand things like: “Ecmandu is just trying to overcompensate for his lack of superiority”

Dude, you have no fucking clue what’s occurring here.

My best advice to you: stop

Will you listen to me? Fuck no.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend

Posts: 11458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Urwrongx1000 wrote:To me, Social Progressivism is Corporate Authoritarianism, Big Tech, MSM takeover of "Truth" ("fact-checking"), and takeover of the internet, or internet "culture".

"Cancel-Culture" (attacking and destroying Conservative-Right institutions and people) is their primary weapon.

BLM and Antifa are their Strong-arm, enforcement agency. They use Race and "Critical Race Theory" as another tool/weapon and mean of Leverage.

They claim a lot of "progress", in terms of Environment, Politics, and Race, but they do almost the exact-opposite of what they claim. They are Dupes, of the DNC establishment. Pawns in a war. They are "progressing" nothing.

They are actually Regressivists, not Progressives.

They are driven by lust for Power, and do not stand upon Virtues. Thus they are morally corrupt.

FTMP I agree.
Even many fiscal progressives don't want anything to do with social progressives/divisive identity politics.
While there may be some genuine social progressives on the fringes of the left, social progressivism is mostly a tool used by the deep state to deflect, distract, divide and rule, to attack libertarians and populists, to use as a pretext to militantly globalize the world, because that's what these people, the heads of the international organizations and multinationals want ultimately, the total centralization of wealth and power.

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 3293
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Urwrongx1000 wrote:Shut the fuck up, Ecmandu, retard.

Say something smart or quit pissing in people's threads. We are here for Philosophy, not your psycho-manic episodes where you cry-out "ME ME ME ME SOMEBODY LISTEN TO MEEEE!!!"

Take some meds and fuck off.

(My apologies to Gloominary)

No worries, maybe Ecman will approach our threads more constructively in the future, but I won't hold my breath.

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 3293
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Oh that’s funny,

Define constructive. Actually, define unconstructive from my posts.

I’m of the old guard of the Internet ... where people debated points raised. I know that’s a really complicated idea for all of you, but the internet actually used to be this way.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend

Posts: 11458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Yea, racial and other minorities will be the 1st on the chopping block after they've outlived their usefulness.

If you think the dem/lib establishment and the MSM, the banks and the multinationals, which donated billions to BLM give a shit about you, you've got another thing coming.

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 3293
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

### Re: What is social progressivism?

So social progressivism, more narrowly defined, is the inversion of social conservatism or traditional values.
Much of what we regarded as bad becomes equal to or greater than what we regarded as good.
What's bad is either differentiating good and bad, or what's good.
Women, minorities of all kinds, and noncitizens good, men, the majority and citizens bad.

By this definition, gun control is not necessarily progressive, in fact arms control has been practiced by the authoritarian right for millennia, if anything it may be rightwing.
Compulsory education and compulsory (mental) healthcare aren't so much examples of progressive authoritarianism, as they are examples of scientific authoritarianism, some hardcore progressives even reject scientific authoritarianism, because they see it as too western, too rational and oppressive (healthy/sane/good, sick/insane/bad).
They may prefer no compulsory education or healthcare or a more inclusive education and healthcare, where prescientific ideas from Africa, the Americas and the orient, about medicine and nature are given more priority.
Environmental preservation (nature has intrinsic value) can be seen as more progressive authoritarianism, environmental conservation (nature has extrinsic value) as more scientific authoritarianism.

So there you have it, gun control isn't progressive authoritarianism, it's just authoritarian.
Compulsory western education, healthcare and environmental conservation isn't progressive authoritarianism, it's scientific authoritarianism.
Leftwing Identity politics is what progressive authoritarianism really is, if you want to narrow it down.
It ought to be distinguished from gun control, and scientific authoritarianism.
The left typically employs all three forms of authoritarianism, but there may come a time when scientific authoritarianism divorces progressive authoritarianism and becomes its own thing.
Look what the left has been able to accomplish with scientific authoritarianism, with Covid.
Perhaps the future of authoritarianism is scientific, rather than communism or leftwing identity politics.
They are not the same thing.
Last edited by Gloominary on Thu Dec 17, 2020 3:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 3293
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Gloominary wrote:Yea, racial and other minorities will be the 1st on the chopping block after they've outlived their usefulness.

If you think the dem/lib establishment and the MSM, the banks and the multinationals, which donated billions to BLM give a shit about you, you've got another thing coming.

Let me explain something to your puny little brain.

Left/ right was intentionally constructed by propaganda ministers in the United States ... everything you hear is a lie. The left was the party of higher taxes for the rich. That was hated by the rich, so they needed to switch polarity, and add confusion to the polar parties. The plan was to make the left seem the most evil and for the right to rescue us from this evil. You only need a few false flag moments to accomplish this goal for the average person (of which you are) I’m one of the exceptions.

Electronic voter fraud has been going on since 1992!!

Trump was NEVER elected by the American people.

You are so unbelievably misinformed (gigo - garbage in garbage out) that you actually think anything mass media is true in the US. It’s false. Electronic vote counting systems are coded by the United States government, that means that the United States government can hack all of them at will. This has been the case since the early 90’s.

I could go on, but I’ll stop here for a moment.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend

Posts: 11458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Ecmandu wrote:
Gloominary wrote:Yea, racial and other minorities will be the 1st on the chopping block after they've outlived their usefulness.

If you think the dem/lib establishment and the MSM, the banks and the multinationals, which donated billions to BLM give a shit about you, you've got another thing coming.

Let me explain something to your puny little brain.

Left/ right was intentionally constructed by propaganda ministers in the United States ... everything you hear is a lie. The left was the party of higher taxes for the rich. That was hated by the rich, so they needed to switch polarity, and add confusion to the polar parties. The plan was to make the left seem the most evil and for the right to rescue us from this evil. You only need a few false flag moments to accomplish this goal for the average person (of which you are) I’m one of the exceptions.

Electronic voter fraud has been going on since 1992!!

Trump was NEVER elected by the American people.

You are so unbelievably misinformed (gigo - garbage in garbage out) that you actually think anything mass media is true in the US. It’s false. Electronic vote counting systems are coded by the United States government, that means that the United States government can hack all of them at will. This has been the case since the early 90’s.

I could go on, but I’ll stop here for a moment.

You're a waste of time.

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 3293
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

### Re: What is social progressivism?

I’m just a waste of time?

You must realize that when I speak about earthlings, I’m being polite to you.

I have all of existence on my mind.

I gave you some throw-away sentences to me to stay on topic for you.

The idea that you think my facts in this species are a waste of time is on you, not on me.

And trust me when I say this... I know what’s on you and I know what’s on me.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend

Posts: 11458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Gloominary wrote:So social progressivism, more narrowly defined, is the inversion of social conservatism or traditional values.
Much of what we regarded as bad becomes equal to or greater than what we regarded as good.
What's bad is either differentiating good and bad, or what's good.
Women, minorities of all kinds, and noncitizens good, men, the majority and citizens bad.

By this definition, gun control is not necessarily progressive, in fact arms control has been practiced by the authoritarian right for millennia, if anything it may be rightwing.
Compulsory education and compulsory (mental) healthcare aren't so much examples of progressive authoritarianism, as they are examples of scientific authoritarianism, some hardcore progressives even reject scientific authoritarianism, because they see it as too western, too rational and oppressive (healthy/sane/good, sick/insane/bad).
They may prefer no compulsory education or healthcare or a more inclusive education and healthcare, where prescientific ideas from Africa, the Americas and the orient, about medicine and nature are given more priority.
Environmental preservation (nature has intrinsic value) can be seen as more progressive authoritarianism, environmental conservation (nature has extrinsic value) as more scientific authoritarianism.

So there you have it, gun control isn't progressive authoritarianism, it's just authoritarian.
Compulsory western education, healthcare and environmental conservation isn't progressive authoritarianism, it's scientific authoritarianism.
Leftwing Identity politics is what progressive authoritarianism really is, if you want to narrow it down.
It ought to be distinguished from gun control, and scientific authoritarianism.
The left typically employs all three forms of authoritarianism, but there may come a time when scientific authoritarianism divorces progressive authoritarianism and becomes its own thing.
Look what the left has been able to accomplish with scientific authoritarianism, with Covid.
Perhaps the future of authoritarianism is scientific, rather than communism or leftwing identity politics.
They are not the same thing.

That's a good point when put into context.

What is "progressive" in terms of Scientific Medical Authoritarianism? How about violating the US Constitution and forcing people to wear masks and/or vaccinate?

What is "progressive" in terms of Gun Control? United States is one of the only places left in the world where citizens can arm & defend themselves against the government.

What is "progressive" in terms of Critical Race Theory? How about "canceling" tradition, conservativism, history, and purging the memory of 19th Century slavery and 20th Century Jim Crow laws?

When put into context, left & right, liberal & conservative, democrat & republic, can be inverted by what determines "Progressive" from a historical context.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher

Posts: 4396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

### Re: What is social progressivism?

Urwrongx1000 wrote:
Gloominary wrote:So social progressivism, more narrowly defined, is the inversion of social conservatism or traditional values.
Much of what we regarded as bad becomes equal to or greater than what we regarded as good.
What's bad is either differentiating good and bad, or what's good.
Women, minorities of all kinds, and noncitizens good, men, the majority and citizens bad.

By this definition, gun control is not necessarily progressive, in fact arms control has been practiced by the authoritarian right for millennia, if anything it may be rightwing.
Compulsory education and compulsory (mental) healthcare aren't so much examples of progressive authoritarianism, as they are examples of scientific authoritarianism, some hardcore progressives even reject scientific authoritarianism, because they see it as too western, too rational and oppressive (healthy/sane/good, sick/insane/bad).
They may prefer no compulsory education or healthcare or a more inclusive education and healthcare, where prescientific ideas from Africa, the Americas and the orient, about medicine and nature are given more priority.
Environmental preservation (nature has intrinsic value) can be seen as more progressive authoritarianism, environmental conservation (nature has extrinsic value) as more scientific authoritarianism.

So there you have it, gun control isn't progressive authoritarianism, it's just authoritarian.
Compulsory western education, healthcare and environmental conservation isn't progressive authoritarianism, it's scientific authoritarianism.
Leftwing Identity politics is what progressive authoritarianism really is, if you want to narrow it down.
It ought to be distinguished from gun control, and scientific authoritarianism.
The left typically employs all three forms of authoritarianism, but there may come a time when scientific authoritarianism divorces progressive authoritarianism and becomes its own thing.
Look what the left has been able to accomplish with scientific authoritarianism, with Covid.
Perhaps the future of authoritarianism is scientific, rather than communism or leftwing identity politics.
They are not the same thing.

That's a good point when put into context.

What is "progressive" in terms of Scientific Medical Authoritarianism? How about violating the US Constitution and forcing people to wear masks and/or vaccinate?

What is "progressive" in terms of Gun Control? United States is one of the only places left in the world where citizens can arm & defend themselves against the government.

What is "progressive" in terms of Critical Race Theory? How about "canceling" tradition, conservativism, history, and purging the memory of 19th Century slavery and 20th Century Jim Crow laws?

When put into context, left & right, liberal & conservative, democrat & republic, can be inverted by what determines "Progressive" from a historical context.

Right, depending on one's assessment of them, gun control, progressive, and scientific authoritarianism can be seen as progressive, positive or regressive, negative.
I call progressives, progressives because that's what they call themselves and to contrast them with conservatives, not because I think they're necessarily progressive.

I think it's important to differentiate progressive authoritarians, the left with scientific authoritarians, which're neither the left, nor the right.
Progressive authoritarianism is the inversion of conservative authoritarianism.
Progressives maximize equality and inclusivity, conservatives inequality and exclusivity.
Scientific authoritarianism is not the inversion of conservative values, but the imposition of scientific values.
What are scientific values?
Scientists see the world less in terms of good and bad/evil, the way both conservatives, and progressives see them, and more in terms of functional, ordered, healthy, sane, rational and dysfunctional, disordered, unhealthy, insane, irrational.

If you think about it, we've never really had a country who's foundational ideology was scientific authoritarianism or technocracy.
We've had various conservatisms, libertarianisms and progressivisms, but not much technocracy.
But look how people responded to the scamdemic, when it comes to conservative and progressive authoritarianism, people have a lot of reservations, but when it comes to medical crises, real or imagined, people will very readily surrender their rights and freedoms.
A lot of people don't trust priests, conservatives or progressives, but they seem to trust technocrats.
The future of authoritarianism may be technocracy, rather than fascism or communism.

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 3293
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Next

Return to Society, Government, and Economics

### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: polishyouthgotipbanned