Deconstructing "Progressive " thought

[Jarnhamar]

Progressive thought.

I punch you in the face then charge you with assault and call you a racist.

 

[Kirkhill]

I think there’s real problems within the left — theoretical, political, discursive, pragmatic. I say these things out of a deep and sincere belief that we must fix our own problems before we can hope to gain power necessary to fix the world.

That right there is the problem I have with the Left.  The world is not fixable.  If it were it would have been done by now..... and, probably, none of us would be here as the unexpected would have shown up and shattered the perfect crystal.

The good news is that we have a tendency to behave more like cats than sheep and are difficult to herd.  And even sheep are hard to pen up.

 

[a_majoor]

This goes a long way to explaining how the "Progressives" view the rest of the world nowadays (although George Orwell had them to a "T" back in the 1930's). So long as they maintain their smug insularity, they may think they are enlightened, but in fact the world is changing rapidly from underneath them and they are almost entirely unaware of what is happening or why:

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/269668/#respond

ITS ORIGIN AND PURPOSE, STILL A TOTAL MYSTERY:

Shot:

Trying to regain their footing, the mainstays of consensus thought have focused on domesticating the threat. Who are these Tea Partiers and internet recluses, these paleoconservatives and tech futurists, and what could they possibly want? The Atlantic mapped the coordinates of the “rebranded” white nationalism or the “internet’s anti-democracy movement” in the previously uncharted waters of 4chan and meme culture. In Strangers in Their Own Land, Berkeley sociologist Arlie Russell Hochschild peers over the “empathy wall” between her and her rural Louisiana Tea Party contacts, while in Hillbilly Elegy, Ohio-born lawyer J. D. Vance casts a melancholic look back—from the other side of the aisle, but, tellingly, from the same side of the wall—on the Appalachian culture he left behind for Yale Law and a career in Silicon Valley.

— “Final Fantasy: Neoreactionary politics and the liberal imagination,” James Duesterberg, The Point, July, 2017.

Chaser:

Everywhere, they flew the colors of assertive patriots. Their car windows were plastered with American-flag decals, their ideological totems. In the bumper-sticker dialogue of the freeways, they answered Make Love Not War with Honor America or Spiro is My Hero. They sent Richard Nixon to the White House and two teams of astronauts to the moon. They were both exalted and afraid. The mysteries of space were nothing, after all, compared with the menacing confusions of their own society.

The American dream that they were living was no longer the dream as advertised. They feared that they were beginning to lose their grip on the country. Others seemed to be taking over–the liberals, the radicals, the defiant young, a communications industry that they often believed was lying to them. The Saturday Evening Post folded, but the older world of Norman Rockwell icons was long gone anyway. No one celebrated them: intellectuals dismissed their lore as banality. Pornography, dissent and drugs seemed to wash over them in waves, bearing some of their children away.

But in 1969 they began to assert themselves. They were “discovered” first by politicians and the press, and then they started to discover themselves. In the Administration’s voices–especially in the Vice President’s and the Attorney General’s–in the achievements and the character of the astronauts, in a murmurous and pervasive discontent, they sought to reclaim their culture. It was their interpretation of patriotism that brought Richard Nixon the time to pursue a gradual withdrawal from the war. By their silent but newly felt presence, they influenced the mood of government and the course of legislation, and this began to shape the course of the nation and the nation’s course in the world. The Men and Women of the Year were the Middle Americans.

— “Man and Woman of the Year: The Middle Americans,” Time magazine’s cover story, January 5, 1970.

Why yes, the left does churn these “who are these strange aliens on the right” pieces out like clockwork the year after a president with an (R) after his name is elected. (Though the alt-right angle that Duesterberg focuses on makes for interesting reading.) Or as James Lileks wrote in response shortly after GWB was reelected, “once upon a time the major media at least pretended that the heart & soul of the country was a porch in Kansas with an American flag. Now it’s the outlands, the Strange Beyond. They vote for Bush, they believe in God, they’d have to drive 2 hours for decent Thai. Who are these people?”

Note this passage Duesterberg wrote:

Amid the diffuse politics and intractable ironism of the alt right, neoreaction promises a coherent ideology, a philosophical backbone and a political program directly opposed to what we have: they call it a “Dark Enlightenment.” If these thinkers are especially disturbing to read it is because, unlike the meme warriors of 4chan and Twitter, they seem to have reasons for the nasty things they say.

As Fred Siegel wrote in his 2014 book, The Revolt Against the Masses: How Liberalism Has Undermined the Middle Class, “The best short credo of liberalism came from the pen of the once canonical left-wing literary historian Vernon Parrington in the late 1920s. ‘Rid society of the dictatorship of the middle class,’ Parrington insisted, referring to both democracy and capitalism, ‘and the artist and the scientist will erect in America a civilization that may become, what civilization was in earlier days, a thing to be respected.’”

That’s been the spoken or sotto voce motto of the left since the days of H.G. Wells and Woodrow Wilson. It helps to explain why Obama was dubbed “President Spock” by his DNC-MSM supporters for his distanced view of Americans, and why he seemed far more eager to wage war against Republicans and the middle class than he did ISIS and Al Qaeda. I don’t truck with alt-right racism or violence, but the left shouldn’t be surprised after decades of openly wanting to “rid society of the dictatorship of the middle class,” and reporting on it with the distance of Dian Fossey in Gorillas in the Mist (when not viewing it with racist contempt), that some on the right might begin to reciprocate those gestures.

(Via Kathy Shaidle.)

86 Posted at 8:32 pm by Ed Driscoll   

 

[daftandbarmy]

This goes a long way to explaining how the "Progressives" view the rest of the world nowadays (although George Orwell had them to a "T" back in the 1930's). So long as they maintain their smug insularity, they may think they are enlightened, but in fact the world is changing rapidly from underneath them and they are almost entirely unaware of what is happening or why:

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/269668/#respond

Like the Clinton Democrats, right?

 

[a_majoor]

No worse punishment for Progressives indeed:

http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.ca/2017/08/the-pettiness-of-left.html

The Pettiness of the Left

It was when driving across Arizona I had a small, but important epiphany.  I had the cheapest car I could rent, a cell phone approaching 3 years old, Wal-Mart attire, and would be sleeping on buddy's couch instead of having my own hotel room.  Yet, despite these hallmarks of a lower-middle income life, I was perfectly happy, for soon I would be meeting my best friend for some hiking on some of Phoenix's finest trails.

But then it dawned on me.

One of these trails (Camelback Peak) was located in the prestigious "Paradise Valley" neighborhood of Phoenix.  This neighborhood was so rich, they often mocked and ridiculed Scottsdale as a place they "make investments."  But although my income came nowhere near to that of your average Paradise Valleyite, how was my life any measurably worse than one of theirs?  I had a car, I had grub in my stomach, I was going to enjoy the exact same trails they got to, and I was going to be listening to podcasts on my phone the entire way.  One could have even argued I was better off given my digital nomad career.  What, precisely then, did the richest man of Paradise Valley have that I didn't?

This then got me thinking.  Precisely what are the left so jealous of the rich over?  What does the rich have that they don't?  And as I thought about it, I soon realized a dark and sad truth about leftist psychology and leftism in general:

Just how pathetic and petty their jealousy is.  And consequently, how that jealousy ruins their lives.

It is here we need a bit of historical context to understand the point I'm trying to make.  We all know that today our poorest of the poor live like the richest of kings 500 years ago.  Inventions like electricity, penicillin, plumbing all make today's humans infinitely better off than the richest of yesteryear.  But we don't have to go 500 years ago in the past to see how incredibly better off today's humans are compared to past humans.  Consider just 50 years ago.

There were no cell phones, the cars (though pretty) were drastically inferior (and more dangerous), food today is markedly improved as well as dirt cheap, clothing is dramatically cheaper, we have PC's, and houses are almost thrice the size with a fraction of the heating and cooling costs.

But forget 50 years ago.  Let's just consider 20 years ago.

We have the internet.  Smart phones.  Exponentially faster computers and internet speeds.  Netflix, huge and cheap flat screen TV's, hybrid cards, Tesla home batteries, Amazon, and the world's information at our finger tips.  This allows us to teach ourselves, find things more rapidly, have ANYTHING we want delivered to our doorstep, not to mention this has opened up fields such as telecommuting, Ubering, and becoming a digital nomad.  Consequently, our lives are dramatically improved compared to 1997 as we no longer have to commute (though we stupidly choose to), we no longer have to find dates at loud nightclubs, we can watch movies at home, we can run a myriad of chores from home (banking, bills, etc.), and we (I predict) will make college education free via the internet.

And ALL of these great technologies, and the opportunities that lay within, are available to EVERYONE.

Rich, poor.
Young, old.
Fat, skinny.
Male, female.

EVERYONE can avail themselves of all these innovations and advancements.

So what is it, precisely, the left has its envious green panties in a bundle over?

Well, consider 6 different items that the left would presumably begrudge the 1% over, which also, I believe, account for the majority of envy and jealousy on the left.

1.  Cars

Cars are a classic example of the have and the have nots.  Some people own used, salvaged Kia Rios. Others own Ferrari's and Telsa's.  But aside from about $250,000 in price, can somebody tell me what the REAL difference between a used Hyundai Elantra is and a Mercedes G65?

In all reality, nothing.

My used, salvaged Kia Rio, which I paid $3,000 for, can do about 98% what the Mercedes G65 can.  It can transport me in comfort, night or day, long distances regardless of the weather outside, all while playing music or podcasts from my cell phone.  And not only can it do that, it can do it for a lot less in gas and about 1/100th the price.

Period.

The only thing the Mercedes G65 can do that my battled up Kia can't is heat my tush with leather heated seats and adjust the windshield wipers automatically to the amount of rain.  Oh, and self-tinting windows.  Can't forget that.  The windows self-tint. 

Yet, despite this true pittance of a difference between my car and that of a Winnetka trophy wife's, poor, middle income, and lefties are greener than Kentucky Blue Grass over those stupid enough to buy luxury vehicles.  They see a Ferrari drive by and can only come up with "huurrr, compensating for a small penis."  I can't tell which is dumber.  Blowing $250,000 for transportation that you could get for $3,000 or getting envious over it to the point you make penis jokes and vote to take their money.

2.  Planes

Specifically coach vs. first class.

In the grand scheme of things all people aboard the flying aluminum bus should be AMAZED at the technology they're all availing themselves of.  You're in a flying beer can, going nearly the speed of sound, which allows you to travel to far away places for a couple hundred dollars, that just a mere century ago was not a possibility for all of human kind.

But instead of marveling at this amazing technology and being thankful to be alive to take advantage of it, you're jealous of the smug looking dude bro in a suit sitting in first class.

Again, the 99%/1% metaphor is lost on most OWS protestors and leftists in general.  You are enjoying 99% of what air travel is offering, but you get your leftists tits in a sling over the fact Thadeus up in first class has a little more leg room and free drinks.  Perhaps you can get further pissed as he rents a Corvette and you rent a Kia after you land.

3.  Homes

I recently rented a boat on Lake Minnetonka to celebrate paying off my house.  Lake Minnetonka is home to family fortunes such as the Pillsburies, The Daytons (Target and Dayton Department Stores), Cambria, and Breath Right Nasal Strips (yes, the inventory has a house out there!).  The captain of the boat also informed us that a couple of these estates would have Aerosmith and Tim McGraw play on their beaches where boaters could anchor and listen to the band occasionally.  And although those veritable mansions were impressive, all I could think of was "that's a lot of vacuuming, dusting and rooms I ain't going to use."

It doesn't matter how many bedrooms, bathrooms, jacuzzi's or guest houses you have on your estate, you can only sleep in one bed at a time, shit in one toilet at a time, and converse with people in one dining room at a time.  The rest, in reality, is pointless excess that goes beyond the shelter, comfort and entertainment a house is supposed to provide.

But if we were to have taken your average leftist on my celebratory victory lap around Lake Minnetonka, instead of being in awe of the architecture and beauty of these homes, and instead of questioning more philosophically why a single couple would need an 18 bedroom palace, all they would be able to think of is how much more money these people had than them.  All they could think about is how much "nicer" and bigger those mansions were than their simple bungalow in Longfellow.  Never mind their simple bungalow or condo provides them heat in the winter, air conditioning in the summer, and a comfortable and adequate place to live.  Nope, it's just that "Rat Bourgeoisie Bastard Mark Dayton" has a nicer house than they do.

4.  Clothes

Clothes are personal to me because I remember getting in fights in school because I didn't wear Cavaricci jeans or wore France Varnet shirts.  I also remember getting into fights because I had Wal-Mart velcro shoes while every other boy had "Nike High Tops."  And though I was young, I knew enough to know that these kids were idiots to think the name of a shirt or the brand of some jeans was worth beating some kid up over.

But ohhhhh, how little those people have learned.

Because what was Cavaricci in 1988 is now "LuLuLemon" in 2017.
What was FrancoisMirthBiguard jeans in 1990 is now Jimmy Choo in 2017.
And what was Guess Jeans in 1989 is now DKNY in 2017.

Full grown adults are blowing money not on the clothes or the materials the clothes are made out of.  They are blowing money on the stamp, patch, or label that comes with it.

Still, to lesser minds (leftist or not in this case), they cannot help but be envious of somebody with Gucci shoes or Armani shirts when a $10 pair of either from Wal-Mart (or Goodwill) will do the same.  Yet, it's only leftists that I see going the complete OPPOSITE/full-retard extreme by wearing hideous clothing, piercing their noses, and tatting up their bodies as if they're protesting beauty as presented to them by richer people.  All they're doing is cutting their noses off to spite their face, and their green is all to easy to see.

5.  Food

I've told the story before, but I'll tell it again, I was ecstatic when Subway came out with their $5 footlongs.  It was in the depths of the recession and every one of my revenue streams was hurting.  In college it was bagels and 25 cent "day old bread" from the local subshop that kept me fueled, but as I no longer had to pay tuition and started making my own money "luxuries" like Davini's and Perkins were now within my budget.  To this day my friends mock and ridicule me for liking Perkins or the local all you can eat Chinese buffet, but there is nothing wrong with the food a poor or lower-middle income class person can afford to eat.

But again, does the left see what was once the SINGLE LARGEST PROBLEM facing humans for 99.99999% of its 2 million year existence being solved? (that would be hunger by the way).  Does the left cheer that OBESITY is now a "bigger" problem than malnutrition or starvation?

Nope.

Once again, all they can see as they're horking down their "lousy" Applebee's shrimp scampi is those rich bourgeoisie bastards eating at high end steak houses and seafood restaurants.  All they can see is the 21 year old scotches rich people are drinking as they drink that Cutty Sark "swill."  You know what?  Those rich people probably have left over mahi tuna steak in their fridges while you have to walk ALL THE WAY DOWN THE STREET to Wal-Mart if you want to eat something at 3AM.

Once again, being envious of somebody who can afford sushi, while all you can afford is Perkins, to the point you're going to "stick it to the man and tax them more," ESPECIALLY in light of humanity's history with hunger, is petty, pathetic, and sad.

and finally...

6.  Cell Phones

Oh is the pettiness rich in this one.

Much like petulant little 13 year old girls complain about not having the latest iPhone or android, leftists get their communal tits in the bundle when all they can afford is a previous generation phone or have to resort to a FREAKING PAYMENT PLAN to get the cell phone they want.  Never mind there REALLY IS NO DIFFERENCE between the iPhone 943Z and the iPhone 944A. Never mind a Samsung 9 does nothing more than the Samsung 8.  Nope, I gotta get me some of datz because rich people have the most recent and up to date phone and "I gotta show them I'm a baller too!"  Even if you get a free Obama phone, no doubt you are complaining that those rich, 1%, elitist bastards have nicer phones than you.

You can't even say the technological difference between one generation of phone to the next is a 1% difference.  But damnit if the left doesn't get their green thongs in a bundle over it.  And the fact that Chip has a nicer phone than Jose is reason enough to vote Sanders and completely revamp the economy into a socialist one.

I could go on highlighting different consumer items both the rich and the poor consume today and the barely perceptible difference in quality between them, but the point is how the left obsesses and hinges its entire confiscatory and parasitic ideology on these petty differences.  Thadeus drives a Lexus while Bob drives a Chevy - let's tax Thadeus at 75%.  Felix owns a boat while Jim occasionally rents one - let's tax Felix at 80% AND hate him at the same time.  And Chip owns a Rolex, while Jerome owns a Quartz.  Chip is a 1% bastard, probably racist, AND let's tax him at 90%.  But worse than the jealousy is how nearly every leftist lets the fact that other people have more ruin their lives.  Certainly there are some leftist and democrats who do no begrudge those that have more.  But the majority of them stew in their jealousy which turns into hatred, forcing them to live lives where all they do is obsess about the rich instead of appreciating what they have and getting lives of their own.

Social justice warriors.
Feminists.
Professional activists.
Professors.
Unpaid leftist online journalists.
Nearly every liberal arts major.

How many leftist lives that are wasted envying what others have instead of saying, "WOW!  I'm driving a car ACROSS THE ENTIRE COUNTRY at 80MPH to see the GRAND CANYON while eating food conveniently located EVERY 20 MILES at gas stations!"?  How many leftists are pissed because the government won't pay for their birth control, instead of focusing on the fact that affordable birth control exists?  How many leftists live angry, hate-filled lives because somebody has a 10 bedroom, 4 bathroom McMansion, ignoring the fact their modest 2 bedroom, 2 bathroom house will more than adequately house them for the rest of their lives?

I always like to look on the bright side of things.  And the fact that leftists cannot be happy with the amazing advances and innovations capitalism has put in their green little hands, and choose instead to obsess over the petty and microscopically "better" things the "rich" have to the point it ruins their lives is justice and revenge enough for me.  Understand this and understand this well about leftists.  They are miserable people who will waste their entire, precious lives being envious of what others have instead of appreciating what they have. And when the day comes that they're on their death bed, all they will have to point to is a life of whining, complaining, hatred, and jealousy.

A worse punishment does not exist.

 

[Lumber]

No worse punishment for Progressives indeed:

http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.ca/2017/08/the-pettiness-of-left.html

1. This article assumes that every middle and lower class person is a leftist, and that every rich person is a right-wing conservative (except for the author of the article, apparently).

2.  I feel like he's describing these whiny babies as Marxists rather than leftists, but I also feel like perhaps to be considered a Marxist there has to be some level of awareness that you are a Marxist (and what a Marxist is), where as the people he's describing are just ignorantly vain.

3. I agree more or less with the article that people should be happy with their lot, but it's a primary tenant of capitalism
that we build our economy by trying to increase our lot. If we weren't a little envious and desiring of having more, we won't try to get more, and our economy wouldn't grow. I believe it's fine to want more, but you shouldn't begrudge others for what they have, so I agree with the article on that principle.

4. He kind of lost me at this part due to his absolutism - my comments in yellow:

Social justice warriors. Agreed.
Feminists. There are both left and right wing feminists.
Professional activists. There are both left and right wing professional activists fighting for their desired causes.
Professors. Seriously?
Unpaid leftist online journalists. So, "Paid" leftist online journalists aren't a problem?
Nearly every liberal arts major. There are plenty of right-wing, uber rich, conservative, capitalist students at liberal arts colleges.

4. Finally,  this is in the "deconstructing progressive thought", but I feel like what he's describing as a "leftist" is not a "progressive". Progressives aren't whiny babies, they are just those who believe that "that the way we've always done things" isn't always the best way to go about running society.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

No worse punishment for Progressives indeed:

http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.ca/2017/08/the-pettiness-of-left.html

Any chance of posting things that aren't personal opinion blogs that serve as unsubstantiated hit pieces?

 

[CEDE NULLIS]

"And when the day comes that they're on their death bed, all they will have to point to is a life of whining, complaining, hatred, and jealousy."

I would say he has described his own life perfectly...

 

[Good2Golf]

Any chance of posting things that aren't personal opinion blogs that serve as unsubstantiated hit pieces?

Army.ca Forums » The Mess » Radio Chatter » Topic: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought

???

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

Army.ca Forums » The Mess » Radio Chatter » Topic: Deconstructing "Progressive " thought

???

I don't think it's all that confusing. Some threads/posters get "only facts" type comments comments whereas others are permitted to paste clag like above that offers no intellectual stimulation or insight.

So,, on that note, here's a contrarian blog.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/stupid-stupid-votes/

 

[The Bread Guy]

Flyer @ U.S. university -- U.S. veterans:  good enough for trade school, but not for universities?  :facepalm:

A newsletter posted on the University of Colorado Colorado Springs (UCCS) campus started to make the rounds on social media Thursday. It states veterans should be banned from four-year universities. Several viewers asked 11 News to look into the origin of the newsletter.

The letter states military veterans should be banned from classes and compares the military culture to white supremacist groups.

The newsletter is titled "Social Justice Collective Weekly" and says it is the first issue. A spokesperson for UCCS said the newsletter has nothing to do with the school and does not represent the institution's views. However, it was reportedly approved by the university and posted on a bulletin board. The school says anyone is allowed to post items on the board ...

Scan of newsletter attached - here's what the university Chancellor had to say ...

I write this morning in response to a flyer posted yesterday on the UCCS campus by a non-UCCS group. The flyer references veterans studying at institutions of higher education.  UCCS does not endorse and vigorously rejects the offensive viewpoints expressed in the flyer.

This flyer stands at the intersection of two core values for UCCS and higher education.

On the one hand, we recognize the right of people to express their viewpoints, even when those viewpoints are offensive to many in our community. The University of Colorado system adheres to the freedoms embodied in the United States Constitution, which include the freedom of speech contained in the First Amendment.

In doing so, we draw guidance from the words of the United States Supreme Court, which recently reaffirmed that speech touching on social and political matters is within the bounds of constitutional protection. When speech is a matter of public concern, even though it is racist or sexist, it “cannot be restricted simply because it is upsetting or arouses contempt” and we “must tolerate insulting, and even outrageous, speech in order to provide adequate ‘breathing space’ to the freedoms protected by the First Amendment.” I reject the notion that we should censor those who denigrate others, as censorship would have silenced many voices over the decades who needed to be heard.

On the other hand, respect for the right of someone to speak should never be taken as endorsing the viewpoints that someone has expressed. The viewpoints that the authors express are against the law. UCCS does not discriminate against veterans. But even more fundamentally, UCCS does not discriminate on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, disability, religion, creed, veteran status, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, political affiliation, or political philosophy. People earn the right to study at UCCS by virtue of hard work and individual effort, and we do not bar the door.

Beyond the fact that the authors’ position is illegal, it is also wrong. We ascribe to The Board of Regents’ Guiding Principle that the University of Colorado shall always strive to “provide an outstanding, respectful, and responsive living, learning, teaching, and working environment.” Veterans are positive and valued members of our academic and campus community. They bring experience and viewpoints that enrich our discussions.

So do many others. We have learned over time that higher education thrives when many voices join in the conversation. Just as I disagree with anyone who says that we should refuse a UCCS education to someone who ascribes to a religious faith, I disagree with anyone who says that we should refuse veterans a UCCS education.

We recognize the pain caused to many in our community. Consequently, I call upon the UCCS community to recognize the value of free and open discourse, while simultaneously standing firm in the inclusive values of our diverse community. If concerns exist about safe expression of ideas, our faculty and staff work diligently and are available to bridge gaps between disparate viewpoints.

We know our student veterans to be high achieving individuals with diverse viewpoints and values, and all of us are enriched by and fortunate to have the military community represented in our classrooms and campus spaces.

Respectfully,

Venkat Reddy, Chancellor

Yeah, it's the vets who are intolerant ... #AnyIdiotWithAFlyer

 

[c_canuk]

lol, smells of satire to me...

 

[Lumber]

lol.

So, the the Tea Party and the NRA are "extremist" right-wing groups now? What does that make the KKK or the Nazis? Uber-Extreme Right Wing?