PROGRESSIVE AUTHORITARIANISM AT ITS BEST

[Gadianton]

The video is about vaccine mandates and equates them to Communism. Do you believe that a vaccine mandate is Communism as the video outrage mouth spouted?

If a vaccine mandate is the worst case scenario of authoritarianism then excuse me while I have a laugh attack.

And when are these unhinged right wingers going to learn anything about economics? Here's something from their own guy, Thomas Sowell

It appears this is a mere summary of Sowell's famous mud-flap example, I don't have time to hunt down a better source right now though:

Another example is if people buy mud flaps for their cars, which prevents mud and water from being thrown on the windshield of a car behind them. In this case, the person behind is benefiting from the purchase, even though they didn’t pay the cost. These costs and benefits are external, in which case it is easier for the government can simply mandate all cars to have mud flaps than for a market to judge.

Not getting vaccinated becomes an external cost on those whose faces the infected breathe in. In principle, it's the same thing as the mud flap example.

That today's right-winger is too stupid to learn basic economics from their fellow own conservative economists is a real shame.

[Gunnar]

Can we all at least agree that vandalism and threats of violence and even death against the lives and/or property of school board members and medical personnel merely for advocating vaccine mandates out of genuine concern for the health and well being of our school children and their families is totally uncalled for and despicable? Sure, people have the first amendment right to express their opinions about vaccination and masking but they don't have the right to threaten physical violence or death or property destruction against those with whom they disagree! Some of these moral reprobates are even terrorizing the children of those exercising what they sincerely believe is their responsibility to encourage everyone to get vaccinated! There is no way that this is moral or acceptable!

[Kishkumen]

I agree that progressivism does have some authoritarian tendencies, but I think these tendencies are manifested in extreme political correctness and so forth, not vaccine mandates. I don’t think anyone has a right to put the lives of others at risk by voluntarily being a disease vector. Is it an infringement on freedom to mandate vaccines? Yes, it is. But so are many other reasonable things, and there are also some far more unreasonable infringements on freedom that most people don’t bat an eye at, such as, say, eminent domain. Freedom is not an absolute. Americans are relatively freer in comparison with some other societies. They are also comparatively less free in some areas than others. Most people who have these discussions really aren’t speaking of things as they are so much as speaking from behind the lens of an ideology someone else has handed them. This goes for people across the ideological spectrum. I find crazy and doctrinaire progressives to be just as repugnant as crazy people on the Right. I can’t bring myself to call the latter conservatives because their views are so extreme.

[Chap]

I agree that progressivism does have some authoritarian tendencies

OK. It's Kishkumen. So if I ask him the meaning of a word he uses, he will tell me (unlike other people I have asked in this forum).

So please Kishkumen:

1. Is "progressive" and its cognates such as "progressivist", "progressivism" a recognised term in US political discourse, on the usage of which most people agree?

2. If the answer to (1) is "yes", what do people generally take it to mean?

[Some Schmo]

Most people who have these discussions really aren’t speaking of things as they are so much as speaking from behind the lens of an ideology someone else has handed them.

Ain't that the truth.

[Kishkumen]

OK. It's Kishkumen. So if I ask him the meaning of a word he uses, he will tell me (unlike other people I have asked in this forum).

So please Kishkumen:

1. Is "progressive" and its cognates such as "progressivist", "progressivism" a recognised term in US political discourse, on the usage of which most people agree?

2. If the answer to (1) is "yes", what do people generally take it to mean?

That is a great question, Chap. The word means different things to different people. I am using it very loosely to mean those on the left who feel like we would benefit from being a lot more leftward leaning than we are now in order to get on a salutary and just track. Like the word "liberal," "progressive" is increasingly used as a kind of slur by people on the political right. As of now there seems to be a kind of cluster that defines the bogeyman of progressivism:

1. socialism
2. environmentalism
3. social justice
4. attention to freedom and protection of gender identity folded into #3

That is what I am imagining counts as kind of the core stuff that "conservatives" dislike and are worried about.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

I agree that progressivism does have some authoritarian tendencies

OK. It's Kishkumen. So if I ask him the meaning of a word he uses, he will tell me (unlike other people I have asked in this forum).

So please Kishkumen:

1. Is "progressive" and its cognates such as "progressivist", "progressivism" a recognised term in US political discourse, on the usage of which most people agree?

2. If the answer to (1) is "yes", what do people generally take it to mean?

I’m actually interested in Kish’s response if he cares to indulge Chap.

- Doc

[Some Schmo]

It's been my experience that a large number of right-leaning people don't know what certain words mean. Progressive, communism, socialism, liberal, conservative and patriotism are a handful that come to mind.

They don't seem to represent concepts to these people, but rather, emotional states. I think that's why it's impossible to have a meaningful political conversation with them. They aren't coming from a place of rational thought. It's mostly irrational reaction.

[Kishkumen]

It's been my experience that a large number of right-leaning people don't know what certain words mean. Progressive, communism, socialism, liberal, conservative and patriotism are a handful that come to mind.

They don't seem to represent concepts to these people, but rather, emotional states. I think that's why it's impossible to have a meaningful political conversation with them. They aren't coming from a place of rational thought. It's mostly irrational reaction.

So, I think they often justify their exaggerated reaction to progressivism by a kind of slippery slope principle. If the freedoms they care about are inhibited or impinged upon in any way, then they see this as incipient Marxist tyranny or some such. Regulating guns is removing gun rights altogether. Social safety net is communism. Of course, all of this is nonsense.

[Some Schmo]

So, I think they often justify their exaggerated reaction to progressivism by a kind of slippery slope principle. If the freedoms they care about are inhibited or impinged upon in any way, then they see this as incipient Marxist tyranny or some such. Regulating guns is removing gun rights altogether. Social safety net is communism. Of course, all of this is nonsense.

Yep. A few other examples:

- Abortion = murder
- Planned Parenthood = abortion clinic
- Kneeling in protest = disrespecting the flag
- The possibility of a naturalized immigrant = open borders
- Vaccine mandates = authoritarianism
- Single payer healthcare = Venezuelan socialism
- Gun control = government tyranny
- Defund the police = anarchy (although in their defense, "Defund the police" is a terrible slogan)
- Getting fired = cancel culture
- Trump = god

If life has taught me anything, it's that if you're looking to be wrong about something, forget balance and be an extremist.