Progress is inevitable.

It's not constant, but it is relentless.

As one ages, the unmistakable signs of a better future for the nation are auspicious.

Conservatives of their eras opposed US independence, the emancipation of slaves, women's suffrage, gender equality in marriage contracts, etc., etc., etc. but progress, ineluctably, occurred and they begrudgingly have had to swallow it (even if it had to be puréed for them in some cases.)

Amidst the periodic episodes of racial resentment, xenophobia, religious intolerance, science denial, etc, there has been the inexorable advance of the principle of equality that has graced and defined the American experiment.

Even during history's most benighted retrograde epicycles, we make headway, because democratic demographics is destiny.

Onward!

"If you promise to mail my absentee Roy Moore ballot,
I'll have a surprise for you!"​

 

"Listen to the jingle, the rumble, and the roar!
IT"S COMING!"​

 

It’s always refreshing when the left admits they are using demographics to alter the political direction of the country.

California has one of the lowest average IQs in the country, while North Dakota has one of the highest. Why? Because of demographics.

This is not a new idea. Look up the Kalergi plan. This was a politician who ran the prototype European Union for almost 50 years. He wanted a mongrelized Afro-Asian population in Europe ruled over by an intellectual Jewish aristocracy, and liberals like Natty Bumpo want basically the same thing in the US.

 

Social Security, desegregation, Medicare, the social safety net, Civil Liberties,... so many things that they now claim to support, but opposed with every ounze of their might in their early stages...

And you can be sure that the same will happen to issues that are now in early stages: Background checks, limitations to assault weapons, healthcare reform, woman's rights... Once they become every day rights that Americans expect, you will see a new breed on the right who will behave the same way as hypocrites like Paul Ryan does today when he says ".... but all conservatives have ever wanted was to protect Social Security...".... yeah, right....!

 

​

George Orwell wrote a few books about your ideology.

Thank God for the second amendment

 

You cherry pick history for the results you want.
What about the Tuskegee Syphilis experiment and institutionalied segregation and discrimination - who was in charge while those thingsa were going on.
George Wallace, Robert Byrd and all of the rest of the southern democrats were all Klansmen.
What about Sacco and Venzetti -
What about internment camps

The subjects you and I write write about happened more than a half century ago.
At that time:
More than 70% of Congressional Republicans voted for Social Security while more than 80% of Democrats voted.
More than 80% of Congressional Republicans voted for the Civil Rights act while less than 70% of Democrats voted.
The Republicans voted against Medicare with their focus on subsidized private insurance for the same thing.

Right now, the Democrats represent open borders, illegal aliens, homosexual marriage, a third bathroom, global corporations, the breakup of the two parent traditional family, and for all of the new hate groups such as antifa and blm.

Right now there are two Republican Parties
The Establishment Republicans aren't much different than the Democrats in that they are for open borders, cheap labor, global corporations, corporate welfare and very big government.

The Trump Republicans are for closed borders with a big wall, get rid of the illegals, a focus on: American corporations and American jobs; shrink the federal gov't, Traditional American values, the family, Religion back in it's place as social conscience, the melting pot and all of those things with which God blessed America.

Consider that anything the President does draws immediate criticism, no matter how good or mundane his move may have been.

The idiots in the fake news never considered that President Trump congatulating Putin may have been a move to avoid conflict. Those fake news pansy jackoffs never get involved in the shooting end of a conflict that they might start through their own machinations. And then there are the Democrat leaders who should recognize that all of thier negativity and their focus on extermist causes is going to destroy them.

 

In Orwell's dystopia, the State seizing control of wombs would be de rigueur, and its arrogating to itself the power to kill its citizens in cold blood routine.

Of course, whether you deem the quondam conservative hobgoblins of national independence, emancipation, suffrage, etc. Orwellian, you'll just have to resign your self to such progress, whatever you need to label it.

 

Yep, those rascally democrats were the bane of progress. Against racial civil rights, against women sufferage, etc.. Progress for the new dems are transgender bathrooms.

 

Is there an interpreter available - I think the post above is english, but i can't understand a word

 

Sounds like the founding don't it, "discovery" and all. Less genocide though.

 

1) CHANGE is inevitable, progress is not.

2) We are again seeing medieval-esque science denial (see: gender theory and transgenderism), so there's no apparent end to that particular affliction.

Most importantly, though, is that you apparently don't have the slightest appreciation of what PROGRESS actually means. It is not a description of the particular politics of a single ideology, fixed to a particular point in time and place. It is forward momentum resulting in some kind of benefit or pay off for human kind (and the planet, hopefully). THAT could come in any flavour of politics, arising from any point in time and place.

For all we know (today), the best thing for the American human circa 2050, could be the conservative politics of England circa 1860. Or some hybrid of the 1950s and Star Trek. It's profoundly silly to suggest that your very personal and very specific ideas about progress, are somehow the eternal answer. It makes YOU seem like the arch conservative, actually. A genuine progressive does not care where progress comes from, politically - as long as it happens.

 

Some folks will, inevitably, gripe, kvetch, and bellywhinge, but the progress toward inclusiveness will be the determination of younger, better-educated Americans. It'll be their call.

 

Why does your "progress" have to impose on my individual natural rights, liberties, safety, economic freedom and private property?

 

As noted, national independence, emancipation, suffrage, gender equality in marriage law, etc. - all advances got the incorrigibly hidebound in a tizzy, but they all eventually surrendered to your unspeakable "p" word, and, no, we are not going to revert to national dependence, slavery, denying women the vote, and gender discrimination in marriage law. Folks who are pissy about it may as well get used to it.

 

Mine doesn't.

If you feel oppressed, you'll need to take your gripes up with democracy.

I am not in control of it.

 

As long as obama tells illegal aliens to vote the dems may have a chance.....

 

You didn't read, much less understand, a word I wrote ... did you?

 

It's forever 1969, with you Progs, ain't it. Zero actual progress.

Try reading again, my post on the meaning of the word.

 

You don't have to like progress.

 

Throughout the centuries, Western society has steadily progressed toward liberal democratic societies. There are reactionary elements toward this trend but they always fade from the natural order and society moves on.

 

I disagree western states moved consistently in any direction. Germany and Italy were more democratic in 1914 than 1934.

 

Sure, for much of the 20thC we moved in that direction. Then in the 21stC, we started moving away from liberalism, and towards authoritarianism.

To suggest that a particular flavour of progress is inevitable, is patently absurd. We cannot possibly know - today - what flavour of progress will most benefit humanity 100 years from now. It could be that extreme xenophobia becomes essential for reasonable survival for the greatest number. We simply cannot know.

Assuming anything at all about this stuff is simply a reflection of personal ideology. And ideologues are the very least progressive and liberal of us .. so hardly a good source of future-scoping.

 

Exactly.

But apparently you do have to like it. And that was my point.

 

You seem to not have gotten the point.

It would have been relevant if there had aver been a popular progressive movement "demanding" Syphilis experiments on the black population, the way there is a popular conservative movement to keep healthcare away from becoming universal (for example).

This is about policy. Care to try again, or should we just stay with the fact that you didn't get what this thread is about?

The rest of your message has even less to do with the subject of this thread.