Progressive Vs Pragmatism

If one were to presume that the ideology in question is an accurate description of reality
Nobody presumed that. "part of" != "accurate description of".

If you're going to resurrect a quote from freaking March to try and gotcha another poster, at least try to not misquote them while you're at it. Ta.
 
Slight update.

They've ruled out tax rises and dumped some unpopular policies.
They're getting wrecked on crime (to soft), ministerial scandals (to incompetent) and policies such as 3 waters.

Currently trailing in most reputable polls. I think they'll still win but it's not looking good with NACT in polling have enough support to form a government.

After ACT came out and outright said current inequality levels are fine.
 
Nobody presumed that. "part of" != "accurate description of".

If you're going to resurrect a quote from freaking March to try and gotcha another poster, at least try to not misquote them while you're at it. Ta.

Well even if we assume that, progressivism is not a part of reality.
 
Well even if we assume that, progressivism is not a part of reality.

It's real in terns of alot if people believe in it broadly.

It's a sliding scale though if you're talking about hard core progressives they're a reasonably small minority everywhere.

In USA they're outnumbered by the hard right but they're outnumbered by the progressives overall.
 
It's real in terns of alot if people believe in it broadly.

It's a sliding scale though if you're talking about hard core progressives they're a reasonably small minority everywhere.

In USA they're outnumbered by the hard right but they're outnumbered by the progressives overall.

That's true except I'm not sure why you slit the progressives into two categories?

There's usually progressives who are social democrats and leftists who are genuinely socialist.
So a hardcore progressive sounds like a socialist, possibly someone like Bernie Sanders who even claims they are socialist but are in fact rejected by the actual socialists and condemned as a social democrat. Could also be a closeted socialist who masquerades in the clothing of Obama.
 
Left is big t
That's true except I'm not sure why you slit the progressives into two categories?

There's usually progressives who are social democrats and leftists who are genuinely socialist.
So a hardcore progressive sounds like a socialist, possibly someone like Bernie Sanders who even claims they are socialist but are in fact rejected by the actual socialists and condemned as a social democrat. Could also be a closeted socialist who masquerades in the clothing of Obama.
That's true except I'm not sure why you slit the progressives into two categories?

There's usually progressives who are social democrats and leftists who are genuinely socialist.
So a hardcore progressive sounds like a socialist, possibly someone like Bernie Sanders who even claims they are socialist but are in fact rejected by the actual socialists and condemned as a social democrat. Could also be a closeted socialist who masquerades in the clothing of Obama.
Left is bug tent with various factions in the USA traditionally 4 iirc. Along with centrists that like sone Left ideas or these days repulsed by the right.

Depends on what our count as progressive I suppose. Social, economic both etc.

Both sides kind of have purity tests, like ignoring inconvenient facts or data, and tend to pigeonhole things
 
Well even if we assume that, progressivism is not a part of reality.
Sure it is. Kinda weird to insist it isn't when we have a word for it that describes real-world beliefs that translate into literal action. It's not a theoretical concept. It's described (loosely) as a political movement.
 
Sure it is. Kinda weird to insist it isn't when we have a word for it that describes real-world beliefs that translate into literal action. It's not a theoretical concept. It's described (loosely) as a political movement.

Then so would any other political ideology.

But I think what Zard is trying to say is not everything a political ideology implements via literal action is pragmatic.
 
Then so would any other political ideology.

But I think what Zard is trying to say is not everything a political ideology implements via literal action is pragmatic.
I don't really care, because anybody can say that about anything. This is from March.

If you have your own argument, make it, instead of aping what you think others are arguing.
 
Then so would any other political ideology.

But I think what Zard is trying to say is not everything a political ideology implements via literal action is pragmatic.

Pretty much. Labour here had to rule out tax roses for example as they're beh8nd in the polls.

No more tax rises means pretty much means coalition partner like the Greens can't really afford any of their policies.
 
Top Bottom