Communists and fascists don’t rate on the American ideological scale. They just don’t.
I thought of another example where conservatives turned out to be right: the popular progressive view in the early 20th century that science would make it possible for extremely smart men to run the country and plan society.
Do you dispute it?
[People’s Republic of China, 1949-87: 76,702,000
U.S.S.R., 1917-1987: 61,911,000](20th Century Democide)
Like it or not, communism is a progressive movement. It’s an illiberal movement, but it is progressive.
If you discount them as being progressive, then you effectively make this debate pointless.
(actually, I am prepared to say that already!)
Progressives != Communists.
From the website of the CPUSA:
Emphasis added.
Republicans are Communists. My proof?
The People’s Republic of China.
Get back to me when you have something to offer besides lame sarcasm.
Get back to me when you have anything to offer, period. Communists claim to be active in the Progressive movement, therefore Progressives are Communists?
Give me a break.
Total ignorance of everything on planet Earth, and entirely suported.
Otherwise fine.
I did not say that. Lke it or not, the Communists are part of the progressive movement. When progressives like Der Trihs and others of his ilk start snarling about the excesses of the radical right, it is entirely appropriate to remind them that the radical left has been by far the bloodiest bunch of butchers in world history.
So, tell us about the bloody butchers of the American Communist Party. What massacres are they personally responsible for?
So now the entire progressive movement is responsible for every claim made by its fringe elements? Does that apply to conservatives as well?
I love it when others post what I’m about to say.
Pinch, Poke, You Owe Me a Coke!
Off topic…but I’ve never heard that one before.
He’s not saying that at all. Read his post again.
The point of this thread is the argument that the progressive movement (of which communism is a part - an unmentioned but undeniable point), tends to be in the right, in the long run. The very fact that a part of the progressive movement - the communists - got it dead wrong brings that claim into question.
In no way did he therefore say that all progressives are as bad as Stalin’s communists. You’re putting words in his mouth.
As much as you can criticise fundamentalist right-wing Christians as being in the wrong, then it is fair to criticise communists.
Sorry but in this case as the communists had it wrong they also have the definitions wrong, by definition a progressive is a person who favors change progress or reform, especially in political matters.
Sure they do want to change others, but after more than 100 years what we had is clearly the ironic result that most progressives **did **demand that Russia (up to the 80’s) and now that China change and get going with reform and to change their now old ways.
My working definition of conservatives and progressives is that conservatives are generally for the status quo, progressives are generally for change. Human society has (IMO) slowly evolved over time to become better, indicating that progressives are slightly more “correct” than conservatives.
In that context, there are plenty of progressive ideas that have turned out to be wrong. As already mentioned, Communism is an easy example. Eugenics is a controversial example but fits as a progressive idea (it was, after all, based on Darwin’s theories) gone bad.
Gun control seems to be losing out, at least in the US. IMO the War on Poverty was mostly wrong. Forced busing looks like a bad idea in hind-site. On a more light-hearted note, Brutalist architecture was very very wrong.
That’s absurd. To somehow pose Cold War Communist despots in Russia and China as the progressive equivalent of American evangelicals is nothing more than hyperbole. If we get pinned with Stalin, you get pinned with Hitler. That is just the way it is.
And that makes Stalin a progressive? :dubious:
I doubt Hiram Johnson, Robert La Follette, or Henry Wallace considered him such.