• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Liberals: Moderates vs. Progressives

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I didn't say it was designed or planned. But it is influenced and controlled by those who control it. Competing interests doesn't imply different interests. The bottom line is that the political rivalries only really matter to those at the top. To the average citizen, it doesn't really matter which duke, mafia chieftain, or tinpot dictator rules the fiefdom. It's all the same at the bottom.

I never said that they weren't competing with each other and that each side wants to win, but it only really matters to those at the top. When the general public gets suckered into it and believing that the issues of the elite should also be their issues - that's when we have problems such as the kind we're having now.

The problem for the elite nowadays is that their canned agenda doesn't sell as well as it used to, primarily because the internet has opened up the playing field to so many other competing interests, large and small. The elite are no longer able to control the game as much as they once did, and that's what frightens them.
Sounds like an awfully nicht einmal falsch conspiracy.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
As a Canadian, I am somewhat to the left of most American liberals, and yet I still consider myself quite a moderate liberal. I have found those who like to label themselves as "progressives" (here in Canada, they would be the New Democratic Party, for instance), to be somewhat intolerant of personal freedom, and feel that government can accomplish much more than I believe is possible. It is impossible to plan for, and achieve, economic outcomes on a national or state scale. In this sense, I am a true capitalist, and believe that economies work best when they are left mostly free to operate under the guidance of that "invisible hand" of Adam Smith. (Be aware, that does NOT mean God!)

But notice that word "mostly" free. I think that even capitalism requires a few rules: you can't destroy the environment to make a profit, or you can't harm people to make a profit. And there are of course, others. Now, I admit that rules like that usually involve a cost. That does not bother me in the least. Companies will simply accept those as a "cost of doing business," and build those costs into their pricing strategies. Does that mean the public will pay a little more for products? Sometimes, yes. But often enough -- if you remain true to capitalism -- competition will arise that can reduce prices.
 

Samael_Khan

Qigong / Yang Style Taijiquan / 7 Star Mantis
Why describe them that way _is that what is of foremost importance?

Well that seemed to be the focus in their intro in their wikipedia article:

"The Squad is the informal name for a group of four women elected in the 2018 United States House of Representatives elections, made up of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan. All are women of color under 50,[1] have been supported by the Justice Democrats political action committee, and are on the left wing of the Democratic Party.[2][3] All four hold safe seats in the House of Representatives, with Cook PVIs of at least D+26.

The group has been said to represent the demographic diversity of a younger political generation and the advocacy of progressive policies such as the Green New Deal, which have sometimes clashed with their party's leadership.[4][5][6][7] Ocasio-Cortez coined the "Squad" name in an Instagram post a week after the 2018 election. The photo, taken at a VoteRunLead event where all four members spoke, subsequently went viral.[8]"

Even though they are probably excellent on their own merit, the name of the group apparently comes from:

"The colloquial use of the word "squad" arose from East Coast hip hop culture and describes "a self-chosen group of people that you want to identify with". Its use by Ocasio-Cortez signaled familiarity with millennial slang[9] as a playful reference to youth social cliques.[3] Ocasio-Cortez's home borough of The Bronx was the origin of a hip hop group called Terror Squad, formed in 1998; musical acts with "Squad" in their name and lyrics started from the 1990s to the present day.[10]

The New York Times considers the "Squad" to be sui generis, fitting neatly into neither the usual Congressional groupings of a "gang" (a bipartisan group focused on particular legislation) nor a "caucus" (a pressure group based on special interests). It notes that the term, with a militaristic connotation, conveys values of self-defense, allegiance, and having "something important to protect".[10] The moniker has been used pejoratively by some Republicans, but the four women use the term self-referentially to express solidarity among themselves and with supporters.[9] For example, the Justice Democrats tweeted a quote from Pressley saying: "We are more than four people... Our squad includes any person committed to creating a more equitable and just world."[11]

The average age of the Squad was 38.3 years as of mid-2019, nearly two decades younger than the overall House average age of 57.6 years"
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
But notice that word "mostly" free. I think that even capitalism requires a few rules: you can't destroy the environment to make a profit, or you can't harm people to make a profit. And there are of course, others. Now, I admit that rules like that usually involve a cost. That does not bother me in the least. Companies will simply accept those as a "cost of doing business," and build those costs into their pricing strategies. Does that mean the public will pay a little more for products? Sometimes, yes. But often enough -- if you remain true to capitalism -- competition will arise that can reduce prices.
You do know that we have such rules already?
And did you know that Ameristan's Hat is arguably more capitalistic than are we?
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Well that seemed to be the focus in their intro in their wikipedia article:

"The Squad is the informal name for a group of four women elected in the 2018 United States House of Representatives elections, made up of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan. All are women of color under 50,[1] have been supported by the Justice Democrats political action committee, and are on the left wing of the Democratic Party.[2][3] All four hold safe seats in the House of Representatives, with Cook PVIs of at least D+26.

The group has been said to represent the demographic diversity of a younger political generation and the advocacy of progressive policies such as the Green New Deal, which have sometimes clashed with their party's leadership.[4][5][6][7] Ocasio-Cortez coined the "Squad" name in an Instagram post a week after the 2018 election. The photo, taken at a VoteRunLead event where all four members spoke, subsequently went viral.[8]"

Even though they are probably excellent on their own merit, the name of the group apparently comes from:

"The colloquial use of the word "squad" arose from East Coast hip hop culture and describes "a self-chosen group of people that you want to identify with". Its use by Ocasio-Cortez signaled familiarity with millennial slang[9] as a playful reference to youth social cliques.[3] Ocasio-Cortez's home borough of The Bronx was the origin of a hip hop group called Terror Squad, formed in 1998; musical acts with "Squad" in their name and lyrics started from the 1990s to the present day.[10]

The New York Times considers the "Squad" to be sui generis, fitting neatly into neither the usual Congressional groupings of a "gang" (a bipartisan group focused on particular legislation) nor a "caucus" (a pressure group based on special interests). It notes that the term, with a militaristic connotation, conveys values of self-defense, allegiance, and having "something important to protect".[10] The moniker has been used pejoratively by some Republicans, but the four women use the term self-referentially to express solidarity among themselves and with supporters.[9] For example, the Justice Democrats tweeted a quote from Pressley saying: "We are more than four people... Our squad includes any person committed to creating a more equitable and just world."[11]

The average age of the Squad was 38.3 years as of mid-2019, nearly two decades younger than the overall House average age of 57.6 years"

Possibly more than either of us cared to know!
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
This thread is intended for liberals (in the American sense), but all are welcome to weigh in.

Do you consider yourself to be on the more “moderate” or more “progressive” ends of the liberal spectrum? What are your primary concerns / criticisms with liberals on the opposite end of the spectrum?

In the US, they say there are two camps among Democrats: the moderates (epitomized by figures like Biden, among others) and the progressives (epitomized by figures like Bernie and AOC, among others).

I consider myself to be a moderate. The biggest problem I have with the progressive camp is what I believe to be their misplaced confidence that their ideas appeal to a strong majority of American voters. I just don’t see it. I have seen firsthand how many Americans positively loathe gun control, universal healthcare, free college, BLM, open borders, addressing climate change and many other things that many / some liberals think are wonderful. Just watch a video of a packed Trump rally and you will see what I mean. I have a VERY hard time believing people were flying Trump / Pence flags on their pickup trucks as a form of protest because the Democratic Party didn’t nominate a socialist, like Bernie, who they really wanted.

For that reason, I don’t believe progress can be made without strategic compromises with the “other” half of America that thinks windmills cause cancer. Joe Biden refused to promise to ban fracking, for example. I think this was smart. This is much better than promising to ban fracking, losing to Trump, and having at least four more years of the US being one of the only nations to remain out of the Paris Agreement.

I am fairly progressive, but the whole political spectrum is a huge sliding scale.However, I can see portions of even the conservative mindset that are useful, such as fiscal responsibility. But the problem with that is of course, the right seems only to care about fiscal responsibility when campaigning, and not while in office. both philosophies have strong points and weaknesses.
 
Top