4 votes

The DP community is the definition of “progressive” in the context of a balanced budget

1. We love people and we love to give a helping hand.
2. We are the champions of civil rights.
3. We ARE the anti-war movement at this time.
4. Our leader has chosen to go after the biggest of the bigs in the FED as his signature plank on his platform.

As, and if, the discussion evolves on this thread I will attempt to justify the hypothesis that follows, but I do not want to get the cart in front of the horse.

Assuming that the definition of “progressive” is the exact same definition that Glenn Greenwald uses to define “progressive”, as opposed to some sort of grand Fabian conspiracy to enslave the masses within some sort of egalitarian mandate by man, I wish to make the following declarations:

1. We are more progressive than Bernie Sanders.
2. When we all become grand masters at the game of life, we begin to understand the importance of each and every single move and how it affects the individual at large.
3. We begin to see that we are actually the voice of the most down trodden that have the smallest voice; our children, grandchildren, and unborn heirs.
4. We understand that a COLLECTIVE maximum employment, minimum poverty, maximum happiness and utility, and minimum suffering and pain, will result in maximum selfish INDIVIDUAL profit.

Absent a balanced budget, and present a fiat currency, none of those 4 statements are true. Instead we get these:

1. Bernie Sanders is more progressive than us.
2. Each move in our life is arbitrary and has no or little affect on individuals at large.
3. Our children, grandchildren, and unborn heirs can choose to pass the buck several more generations ad infinitum with an ever-increasing wealth gap.
4. INDIVIDUAL profit can only be maximized at the expense of the COLLECTIVE.

I have been a Libertarian since the late 80’s and I have not come to this very specific realization until exactly this moment.

Do you think Ron Paul had anything to do with it?

We can all argue about how Liberty can be achieved but if that were the argument, we wouldn’t be arguing about the things that we are currently arguing about.

That would be a good thing.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
reedr3v's picture

The progressive movement has always been

regressive.

It betrayed the Enlightenment and Classical Liberal ideas of individual liberty and responsible, voluntary interactions, and open opportunities (free markets) for all.

Progressivism went for fantasy short cuts to right all wrongs through coercion by a supposedly noble elite, be they Marxist, socialist, whatever collectivist that believed itself the repository of all virtue with the burden of shaping up the ignoble majority into correct behavior. It was always authoritarian, hierarchical, and religiously moralistic -- except for one GIANT flaw: the use of force, law, coercion, guns, extortion, ANY means to achieve its abstract notions. In so doing, it was predictably corrupted by power and devolved naturally to its lowest common denominator -- ruthless violence, tyranny, and, in the final stages democide which we've not yet reached but the progressives (including the big gov Republicans) are well on track to take us there if they stay in power.

Who is we?

1. I love people and I love to give a helping hand, but not by force of government.

2. We are the champions of civil rights, strike that, I am a champion for individual rights!

I have no idea why you were voted down...

or for that matter, who was responsible. But I'll bump for a fellow 'individual rights' advocate, and I voted you up, as well.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15