I’m sorry, but no. To progress literally means to “progress”, to change, to go from one thing to another, which can be a good but also bad thing. You do not change the definition of words just because you don’t like how they’ve evolved (how they’ve progressed) over the years. In short, progress doesn’t mean things becoming better but simply to change something for the sake of changing with a far-left purpose.
As per Merriam Webster, which offers the following definitions of “progress”: “a forward or onward movement (as to an objective or to a goal)”, “gradual betterment”, “the progressive development of humankind”, “to move forward”, “to develop to a higher, better, or more advanced stage”.
The only thing it does is confirm my assertion that the words “progress” (a far left objective of changing things for the sake of it) and “gradual change” (to move from one thing to another) are conflated together to confuse people and give more legitimacy to the former.
Of course, you will probably dismiss my argument, which fine, you don’t have to agree with me, but you can’t dismiss the natural consequences of the progressive ideology movement by stating “it’s not real progressivism.” Own up to it and use a more accurate word.
"In short, progress doesn’t mean things becoming better but simply to change something for the sake of changing with a far-left purpose"
The reason you are confused is that you think a far-left purpose is a good purpose, but it's the opposite. Socialism is evil, and movement towards it is not progress.
Too much of the shit that comes out their mouths comes straight from Soviet Era Socialism and I’m believing what they are telling me and what they are telling me is something I will not vote for at all. We refuse to see what is in front of our eyes, this is a dangerous ideology.
You make an astute point. “The actual platforms articulated by the incumbents and the up-and-comers who just trounced them are…not all that different.” That should give every Bernie progressive pause. There is a straight line from Bernie to AOC to Mamdani to Chevalier.
Every progressive believes the US can be like the Nordic countries. They have a more successful “safety net”.
But the Nordic countries don’t point to oligarchs as the cause of all their problems. They don’t insist that the rich are the reason a safety net is necessary. They behave more like a giant mutual aid society, where each member knows that they may someday need help due to unfortunate circumstances. But they also understand their obligation to provide for themselves and their families.
I’ve certainly given some thought to why these candidates won. Candidates who uniformly have zero life/work experience aside from campus “activism.” Why are normie Dems signing on for that?
The social attitudes of the types who are engaged in politics enough to vote in a primary in which the Dem candidate is guaranteed to win are pretty much those found on Bluesky. Aside from frothing at the mouth anger about the Orange Hitler, these are fetishization of “BIPOC” and the LBGT+ cult, outrage directed at cartoon villains like “oligarchs” “white supremacy” and “affordability” — slogans that they would be unable to articulate in any coherent way — and allegiance to whatever the cause of the moment is.
So when some attractive lady candidates “of color” show up and promise full on Maoism and guillotines for the MAGA crowd, what AWFL wouldn’t get a tingle in her leg? These newly minted DSA members won’t accomplish anything more than gaining massive social media profiles, a la AOC and the original squad. But they will be loud and obnoxious and their performances in committee will be reliably featured on MSNOW. And the other Dems will see this trend and sign on…and I am here to tell you the 2028 DNC platform will be worse than the craziest DSA wet dream.
“If the Democratic Party’s takeaway from this primary season is that they need to double down on all that nonsense lest they be outflanked from the left again, they’re over. Bull Moose over. Whigs over. My money is on exactly that happening.”
If you're wrong, we are witnessing an existential communist threat to the republic, a very gauche 250th birthday present.
It just increasingly feels like the Democrats learned absolutely zero lessons from the 2020 Presidential primary. The new “should we have open borders” will be “do you want Israel to exist?” And then 70% of the country will be sitting there wondering what this has to do with them.
Taibbi nails it. This is not people's revolt, its the revenge of the university professors. The supporters of this are not backing these candidates despite their now deleted texts. They are backing them because they believe those texts. They came straight out of the syllabus.
The nitwits, as Matt say, believe they are insulated from the results. (White people who hate white people. How could that possibly turn out bad for them?) The revolution will "dismantle" the system but they will still be able to hang out with Mom in Florida when things get nasty.
Here's the thing.If a Democrat can vote for someone who said she ran out of napkins so she wiped her hands on the American flag, we aren't looking at the same kind of extreme and if people who vote decide based on someone's party platform without doing 10 seconds of research to see if they seem believable, we are truly looking at some future trouble. Even the Nordic governments have tried to make it clear they do not see themselves as socialist or certainly not the rent freezing Mamdani types. When people start moving towards co-opting private property, I have to take them seriously. However, I hope you are right and I am wrong.
Frankly, the longer Zohran Mamdani sits in office (my knowledge of New York politics is predominantly against my will), the more I respect him. Whatever his general political beliefs, he’s actually trying to be a mayor. He’s serious.
I live in Congressman Espaillat's district (NY-13), specifically, in the section of Washington Heights north of the George Washington Bridge and west of Broadway. The congressional district includes Morningside Heights (home of Columbia University), Harlem, Washington Heights (Espaillat's base -- parts of it are called Little Dominican Republic), Inwood (also heavily Dominican), and a section of the Bronx just across the Harlem River from Washington Heights (becoming more Dominican, as Dominicans leave the Heights for cheaper rents in the Bronx). It shocked me that Espaiilat lost to Chevalier (though by only a few percentage points), especially since our mailboxes were stuffed with fliers in the weeks before the election laying out all of the radical positions espoused by Chevalier in her social media posts from the past six years or so. Here are some factors that helped me to understand, although I have no idea what Hispanics were learning who rely exclusively on Spanish language media.
1. Only 17% of the registered Democrats in the district voted in the primary. Chevalier received about 8% of the registered Democratic vote -- that was enough to win the primary.
2. If more of the Hispanics in Washington Heights had come out to vote (and fewer of the elite Morningside Heights Democrats around Columbia), Espaillat would almost certainly have been on top. He chairs the Hispanic Caucus in Congress, shows up for every major event in the Heights, and brings home the bacon for the district. He was also a NY State representative in the Senate and Assembly for years.)
3. In my opinion, if Chevalier had been Puerto Rican or Salvadoran or anything other than Dominican, more Dominicans would have come out to vote for Espaillat. In a recent election, for example, a Cuban woman ran against the incumbent Dominican City Council member. There were signs in the neighborhood not to vote for La Cubana. The incumbent won easily.
4. Espaillat usually wins the general election with numbers like 91% of the vote, although this declined in the last election. Recent votes have shown that his support in Harlem has declined. There are probably many reasons for this. One is that he sponsored a bill (which passed) to declare sections of Harlem and Washington Heights a Dominican heritage site, although some of the neighborhoods (like the neighborhood including Sylvan Terrace) had special historical significance for blacks, who lived there long before the Dominicans arrived.
5. Some idiots aligned with Espaillat (but not Espaillat himself) began circulating rumors a few weeks before the election that Chevalier was actually not Dominican, but Haitian. Chevalier used this to play the race card, which probably helped her in the election. The idiots may not have been thinking of race, but simply of the animosity between Haitians and Dominicans, who share the island of Hispaniola, along with Chevalier's professed lack of enthusiasm for the DR.
I was a Bernie Bro and now an “everyone” skeptic. I have this outdated habit of looking at history, the present and a consideration of the future. At present I feel like Alice in wonderland. The Red Queen scares me and the Cheshire Cat alternately enrages or confuses me. I would really like to wake up and go back home, but my maps are all written by red or blue pawns.
Progress is things becoming better. Change is things becoming different - and usually worse.
The socialists are Changists, not Progressives.
I’m sorry, but no. To progress literally means to “progress”, to change, to go from one thing to another, which can be a good but also bad thing. You do not change the definition of words just because you don’t like how they’ve evolved (how they’ve progressed) over the years. In short, progress doesn’t mean things becoming better but simply to change something for the sake of changing with a far-left purpose.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/progress
As per Merriam Webster, which offers the following definitions of “progress”: “a forward or onward movement (as to an objective or to a goal)”, “gradual betterment”, “the progressive development of humankind”, “to move forward”, “to develop to a higher, better, or more advanced stage”.
The only thing it does is confirm my assertion that the words “progress” (a far left objective of changing things for the sake of it) and “gradual change” (to move from one thing to another) are conflated together to confuse people and give more legitimacy to the former.
Of course, you will probably dismiss my argument, which fine, you don’t have to agree with me, but you can’t dismiss the natural consequences of the progressive ideology movement by stating “it’s not real progressivism.” Own up to it and use a more accurate word.
"In short, progress doesn’t mean things becoming better but simply to change something for the sake of changing with a far-left purpose"
The reason you are confused is that you think a far-left purpose is a good purpose, but it's the opposite. Socialism is evil, and movement towards it is not progress.
For all the disagreement about meaning, my read is that your are both in rabid agreement about progressivism... am I wrong?
Too much of the shit that comes out their mouths comes straight from Soviet Era Socialism and I’m believing what they are telling me and what they are telling me is something I will not vote for at all. We refuse to see what is in front of our eyes, this is a dangerous ideology.
You make an astute point. “The actual platforms articulated by the incumbents and the up-and-comers who just trounced them are…not all that different.” That should give every Bernie progressive pause. There is a straight line from Bernie to AOC to Mamdani to Chevalier.
Every progressive believes the US can be like the Nordic countries. They have a more successful “safety net”.
But the Nordic countries don’t point to oligarchs as the cause of all their problems. They don’t insist that the rich are the reason a safety net is necessary. They behave more like a giant mutual aid society, where each member knows that they may someday need help due to unfortunate circumstances. But they also understand their obligation to provide for themselves and their families.
I’ve certainly given some thought to why these candidates won. Candidates who uniformly have zero life/work experience aside from campus “activism.” Why are normie Dems signing on for that?
The social attitudes of the types who are engaged in politics enough to vote in a primary in which the Dem candidate is guaranteed to win are pretty much those found on Bluesky. Aside from frothing at the mouth anger about the Orange Hitler, these are fetishization of “BIPOC” and the LBGT+ cult, outrage directed at cartoon villains like “oligarchs” “white supremacy” and “affordability” — slogans that they would be unable to articulate in any coherent way — and allegiance to whatever the cause of the moment is.
So when some attractive lady candidates “of color” show up and promise full on Maoism and guillotines for the MAGA crowd, what AWFL wouldn’t get a tingle in her leg? These newly minted DSA members won’t accomplish anything more than gaining massive social media profiles, a la AOC and the original squad. But they will be loud and obnoxious and their performances in committee will be reliably featured on MSNOW. And the other Dems will see this trend and sign on…and I am here to tell you the 2028 DNC platform will be worse than the craziest DSA wet dream.
"what AWFL wouldn’t get a tingle in her leg?"
the tingle is a little higher up.
I hope you are right about this:
“If the Democratic Party’s takeaway from this primary season is that they need to double down on all that nonsense lest they be outflanked from the left again, they’re over. Bull Moose over. Whigs over. My money is on exactly that happening.”
If you're wrong, we are witnessing an existential communist threat to the republic, a very gauche 250th birthday present.
It just increasingly feels like the Democrats learned absolutely zero lessons from the 2020 Presidential primary. The new “should we have open borders” will be “do you want Israel to exist?” And then 70% of the country will be sitting there wondering what this has to do with them.
Taibbi nails it. This is not people's revolt, its the revenge of the university professors. The supporters of this are not backing these candidates despite their now deleted texts. They are backing them because they believe those texts. They came straight out of the syllabus.
The nitwits, as Matt say, believe they are insulated from the results. (White people who hate white people. How could that possibly turn out bad for them?) The revolution will "dismantle" the system but they will still be able to hang out with Mom in Florida when things get nasty.
Here's the thing.If a Democrat can vote for someone who said she ran out of napkins so she wiped her hands on the American flag, we aren't looking at the same kind of extreme and if people who vote decide based on someone's party platform without doing 10 seconds of research to see if they seem believable, we are truly looking at some future trouble. Even the Nordic governments have tried to make it clear they do not see themselves as socialist or certainly not the rent freezing Mamdani types. When people start moving towards co-opting private property, I have to take them seriously. However, I hope you are right and I am wrong.
Both are first generation communist witches who hate America. Instead of running for congress they should running from lions in Africa.
What should Israel have done except to "fearsomely respond" to October 7th?
When somebody says they hate you and want you dead, you should believe them.
Frankly, the longer Zohran Mamdani sits in office (my knowledge of New York politics is predominantly against my will), the more I respect him. Whatever his general political beliefs, he’s actually trying to be a mayor. He’s serious.
That’s an improvement imo
Following ...
The Borg has done yeoman's work memory holing the record of Communism.
How many movies have been made about Hitler and the Nazis? Thousands.
How many movies have been made about Stalin or Mao? Any?
If Stalin or Mao are mentioned at all, Communism gets a pass because it wasn't "real" communism. I call that the Marx Mulligan.
Is Red China or the USSR mentioned in schools anymore? Or are the only evil people in the world European colonizers and Nazis?
I live in Congressman Espaillat's district (NY-13), specifically, in the section of Washington Heights north of the George Washington Bridge and west of Broadway. The congressional district includes Morningside Heights (home of Columbia University), Harlem, Washington Heights (Espaillat's base -- parts of it are called Little Dominican Republic), Inwood (also heavily Dominican), and a section of the Bronx just across the Harlem River from Washington Heights (becoming more Dominican, as Dominicans leave the Heights for cheaper rents in the Bronx). It shocked me that Espaiilat lost to Chevalier (though by only a few percentage points), especially since our mailboxes were stuffed with fliers in the weeks before the election laying out all of the radical positions espoused by Chevalier in her social media posts from the past six years or so. Here are some factors that helped me to understand, although I have no idea what Hispanics were learning who rely exclusively on Spanish language media.
1. Only 17% of the registered Democrats in the district voted in the primary. Chevalier received about 8% of the registered Democratic vote -- that was enough to win the primary.
2. If more of the Hispanics in Washington Heights had come out to vote (and fewer of the elite Morningside Heights Democrats around Columbia), Espaillat would almost certainly have been on top. He chairs the Hispanic Caucus in Congress, shows up for every major event in the Heights, and brings home the bacon for the district. He was also a NY State representative in the Senate and Assembly for years.)
3. In my opinion, if Chevalier had been Puerto Rican or Salvadoran or anything other than Dominican, more Dominicans would have come out to vote for Espaillat. In a recent election, for example, a Cuban woman ran against the incumbent Dominican City Council member. There were signs in the neighborhood not to vote for La Cubana. The incumbent won easily.
4. Espaillat usually wins the general election with numbers like 91% of the vote, although this declined in the last election. Recent votes have shown that his support in Harlem has declined. There are probably many reasons for this. One is that he sponsored a bill (which passed) to declare sections of Harlem and Washington Heights a Dominican heritage site, although some of the neighborhoods (like the neighborhood including Sylvan Terrace) had special historical significance for blacks, who lived there long before the Dominicans arrived.
5. Some idiots aligned with Espaillat (but not Espaillat himself) began circulating rumors a few weeks before the election that Chevalier was actually not Dominican, but Haitian. Chevalier used this to play the race card, which probably helped her in the election. The idiots may not have been thinking of race, but simply of the animosity between Haitians and Dominicans, who share the island of Hispaniola, along with Chevalier's professed lack of enthusiasm for the DR.
I was a Bernie Bro and now an “everyone” skeptic. I have this outdated habit of looking at history, the present and a consideration of the future. At present I feel like Alice in wonderland. The Red Queen scares me and the Cheshire Cat alternately enrages or confuses me. I would really like to wake up and go back home, but my maps are all written by red or blue pawns.
Bernie went to the USSR on his honeymoon.