re: Stop using the terms "progressive" and "liberal"

Stop making bad threads trying to drum up interest in non-binary distinctions

quote:

---

You are helping them butcher the language. Pushing the spectrum leftward is an Alinsky rule dude. He's fricking bending you over right now.

---

Speaking of butchering the language...didn't you just post this:?

quote:

---

socialists don't advocate violence
communists do

---

What would you say the stated policy differences are between Socialist dogma and Communist dogma?

If you were listening to them present their world view, how would you tell them apart?

If you vote Democrat, you suck no matter WTF you want to label them.

Establishment RINO Republicans suck too, just not as bad.

The problem with RINO's is they just want to play the game of Politics and amass wealth and power and influence, and they tend to use the Military Industrial Complex, absurd Cronyism, and Deep State tactics to do it. They are just as much Collectivists/Globalists as anyone on the Left, EXCEPT they are on the Right side of the political chess board and exploit Rightwing ideology and talking points to play their games.

The Democrats are all just fricked in the head. They are anti-anything that they can exploit that affords them voters. That's priority number 1, 2, 3, through 20. Champion every goddamn minority/persecuted/manufactured cause anyone can conceive because this equates to votes.

They are a walking talking breathing ultra-huge conflict of interest. They will never solve a single problem/cause because they can't. As soon as they solve a problem and are no longer the champion of that problem, they lose those voters, because every problem or cause that's no longer a problem or cause is simply that group living in the realm of Rightwing ideology.

Bottom-up economics is the playground of the Democrat Championship. They need this playground. They want this playground. Everything the Democrats do is to ensure the existence and sustenance of this playground... and hopefully it's growth and expansion at the expense of everyone else.

Top-down economics is the realm everyone strives to live and play in. It's free market capitalism done right.

And right now, we don't have that. The Collectivists have ensured we live in a monopolistic non-competitive limited-market controlled by an Oligarchy and Political Elite.


I have many friends who are Classic Liberals that I can at least have civil and respectful conversations and interactions with. But even they ultimately suck when it comes to knowing how to make and keep this country truly free and prosperous and fair.

Classic Liberal, Liberal, Progressive, Democratic-Socialist(LOL!), Socialist, Communist....

frick you all. 99% of you either voted for Hillary, or at the very least voted against the Anti-Establishment candidate(s), and likely just pull the "D" lever every election.

well first off, I wouldn't listen to them present their world view

socialism sucks - why would I listen to that shite? But if they advocate it peacefully, they are.... liberals.

but communists are, for instance, the little ANTIFA fricks. They advocate violence. They need their asses beaten. That's a communist.

quote:

---

Classic Liberal, Liberal, Progressive, Democratic-Socialist(LOL!), Socialist, Communist...

---

again, not the same thing

You don't like facts. I get it. You and I vote the same, but damn you're hard headed as shite.

you are helping leftists win propaganda battles. Hope that helps you sleep tonight.

progressive notates something/someone which/who pushes progress

progress

economic progress for instance - that's not inner city Detroit, for instance

progress is not class warfare propaganda and false flags

progress is not being a fricking idiot and thinking gun control is a neato thing

for instance

quote:

---

well first off, I wouldn't listen to them present their world view

socialism sucks - why would I listen to that shite? But if they advocate it peacefully, they are.... liberals.

---

Well, first off, why are you avoiding a simple question? Remember...you are the one parsing definitions. In order to do that, I assumed you evaluated each, because without doing that how is it possible to arrive at any definition that separates one from the other?

quote:

---

But if they advocate it peacefully, they are.... liberals.

---

So, in other words, you value style over substance?

That's just the point. Labeling leftists as "liberals" is lazy. Style over substance? Not sure about that, it's just lazy.

Go back and simplify your thinking. Stop calling leftists "liberals"

You're complementing them. Why would you complement a leftist?

Stop being lazy.

Leftists and liberals are not the same people. Use the right label.

quote:

---

you're even contradicting yourself!


the group I"m referring is not in power, I get it, but that's not a reason to mislabel them

---

you are missing the point. The group you are referring to is gone. The "average" liberal isn't what you are referring to anymore. I recognize that today's liberal isn't the same as 20 years ago. I think that's the point you are trying to make.

But, that version of liberal is extinct.

quote:

---

Liberals are never heard from in the media now days

---

That's because they are few in number.

quote:

---

You are helping them butcher the language

---

The semantics doesn't matter. The important aspect is the despicable "radical leftist" you are referring to is the normal, down the middle of the fairway democrat.

quote:

---

Pushing the spectrum leftward is an Alinsky rule dude. He's fricking bending you over right now

---

I don't think I'm getting bent over by noting the obvious.

(no message)