Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 28 Nov '11 19:54
    http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_12640.cfm

    "Organic consumers association, campaigning for health, justice, sustainability,peace and democracy"

    So who is a progressive? You might be one if

    • You think health care is a basic human right, and that single-payer national health insurance is a worthwhile reform on our way toward creating a non-profit national health care service.

    • You think that human rights ought always to trump property rights.

    • You think U.S. military spending is an obscene waste of resources, and that the only freedom this spending protects is the freedom of economic elites to exploit working people all around the planet.

    • You think U.S. troops should be brought home not only from Afghanistan and Iraq, but from all 130 countries in which the U.S. has military bases.

    • You think political leaders who engage in "preemptive war" and invasions should be brought to trial for crimes against humanity and judged against the standards of international law established at Nuremberg after World War Two.

    • You think public education should be free, not just from kindergarten through high school, but as far as a person is willing and able to go.

    • You think that electoral reform should include instant run-off voting, publicly-financed elections, easy ballot access for all parties, and proportional representation.

    • You think that electoral democracy is not enough, and that democracy must also be participatory and extend to workplaces.

    • You think that strengthening the rights of all workers to unionize and bargain collectively is a useful step toward full economic democracy.

    • You think that as a society we have a collective obligation to provide everyone who is willing and able to work with a job that pays a living wage and offers dignity.

    • You think that a class system which forces some people to do dirty, dangerous, boring work all the time, while others get to do clean, safe, interesting work all the time, can never deliver social justice.

    • You think that regulating big corporations isn't enough, and that such corporations, if they are allowed to exist at all, must either serve the common good or be put into public receivership.

    • You think that the legal doctrine granting corporations the same constitutional rights as natural persons is absurd and must be overturned.

    • You think it's wrong to allow individuals to accumulate wealth without limits, and that the highest incomes should be capped well before they begin to threaten community and democracy.

    • You think that wealth, not just income, should be taxed.

    • You think it's crazy to use the Old Testament as a policy guide for the 21st century.

    • You believe in celebrating diversity, while also recognizing that having women and people of color proportionately represented among the class of oppressors is not the goal we should be aiming for.

    • You think that the state has no right to kill, and that putting people to death to show that killing is wrong will always be a self-defeating policy.

    • You think that anyone who desires the reins of power that come with high political office should, by reason of that desire, be seen as unfit for the job.

    • You think that instead of more leaders, we need fewer followers.

    • You think that national borders, while sometimes establishing territories of safety, more often establish territories of exploitation, much like gang turf.

    • You are open to considering how the privileges you enjoy because of race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and/or physical ability might come at the expense of others.

    • You believe that voting every few years is a weak form of political participation, and that achieving social justice requires concerted effort before, during, and after elections.

    • You think that, ideally, no one would have more wealth more than they need until everyone has at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life.

    • You recognize that an economic system which requires continuous expansion, destroys the environment, relies on rapidly-depleting fossil fuels, exacerbates inequality, and leads to war after war is unsustainable and must be replaced. Score a bonus point if you understand that sticking to the existing system is what's unrealistic.
  2. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    28 Nov '11 19:58
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_12640.cfm

    [b]"Organic consumers association, campaigning for health, justice, sustainability,peace and democracy"


    So who is a progressive? You might be one if

    • You think health care is a basic human right, and that single-payer national health insurance is a worthwhile reform on our way ...[text shortened]... onus point if you understand that sticking to the existing system is what's unrealistic.[/b]
    They all make sense to me. I'm sure the Framers wouldn't have had any problem with hardly any of them either.
  3. 28 Nov '11 20:10
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    They all make sense to me. I'm sure the Framers wouldn't have had any problem with hardly any of them either.
    LMAO ! I am sure they all do make sense to you no1marauder ! I am sure they do !
  4. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    28 Nov '11 20:12
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    LMAO ! I am sure they all do make sense to you no1marauder ! I am sure they do !
    What ones do you have a problem with?
  5. Donation rwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    28 Nov '11 20:26
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    LMAO ! I am sure they all do make sense to you no1marauder ! I am sure they do !
    They all look good to me as well. I fail to see how they could possibly be argued against.
  6. Standard member skipper2666
    Why so serious ????
    28 Nov '11 20:37
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_12640.cfm

    [b]"Organic consumers association, campaigning for health, justice, sustainability,peace and democracy"


    So who is a progressive? You might be one if

    • You think health care is a basic human right, and that single-payer national health insurance is a worthwhile reform on our way ...[text shortened]... onus point if you understand that sticking to the existing system is what's unrealistic.[/b]
    The list of questions are designed in a certain way and worded in a loaded way.

    POINTLESS.
  7. 28 Nov '11 20:41
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_12640.cfm

    [b]"Organic consumers association, campaigning for health, justice, sustainability,peace and democracy"


    So who is a progressive? You might be one if

    • You think health care is a basic human right, and that single-payer national health insurance is a worthwhile reform on our way ...[text shortened]... onus point if you understand that sticking to the existing system is what's unrealistic.[/b]
    A vast majority of these are common sense and purely rational (only a religious fundamentalist on crack would want to consult the Old Testament when formulating public policy, for example), and despite my reservations about a few things (democracy in the workplace, diversity, and capital punishment come to mind), I tend to agree wholeheartedly with most of this.
  8. 28 Nov '11 20:42 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    What ones do you have a problem with?
    Hmmm... let me take a a quick glance at this.
    And keeping in mind your previous statement
    -"I'm sure the Framers wouldn't have had any problem with hardly any of them either." -no1marauder

    1. You think health care is a basic human right, and that single-payer national health insurance is a worthwhile reform on our way toward creating a non-profit national health care service.

    2.You think that human rights ought always to trump property rights. (far to vague)

    3.You think U.S. military spending is an obscene waste of resources, and that the only freedom this spending protects is the freedom of economic elites to exploit working people all around the planet.

    4.You think political leaders who engage in "preemptive war" and invasions should be brought to trial for crimes against humanity and judged against the standards of international law established at Nuremberg after World War Two.

    5.You think public education should be free, not just from kindergarten through high school, but as far as a person is willing and able to go.

    6. You think that as a society we have a collective obligation to provide everyone who is willing and able to work with a job that pays a living wage and offers dignity.

    7.You think that a class system which forces some people to do dirty, dangerous, boring work all the time, while others get to do clean, safe, interesting work all the time, can never deliver social justice.

    8.You think that regulating big corporations isn't enough, and that such corporations, if they are allowed to exist at all, must either serve the common good or be put into public receivership.

    9.You think it's wrong to allow individuals to accumulate wealth without limits, and that the highest incomes should be capped well before they begin to threaten community and democracy.

    10. You think that wealth, not just income, should be taxed.

    11.You believe in celebrating diversity, while also recognizing that having women and people of color proportionately represented among the class of oppressors is not the goal we should be aiming for. ????????!!!!! I dont even understand this race baiting and sexist mumbo jumbo

    12.You think that the state has no right to kill, and that putting people to death to show that killing is wrong will always be a self-defeating policy. (would that include abortion ? No ? I didn't think so)

    13. You are open to considering how the privileges you enjoy because of race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and/or physical ability might come at the expense of others. (liberal white guilt syndrome)

    14.You think that, ideally, no one would have more wealth more than they need until everyone has at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life.(communisim)
  9. 28 Nov '11 20:50
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    [b]Hmmm... let me take a a quick glance at this.
    And keeping in mind your previous statement
    -"I'm sure the Framers wouldn't have had any problem with hardly any of them either." -no1marauder

    1. You think health care is a basic human right, and that single-payer national health insurance is a worthwhile reform on our way toward creati ...[text shortened]... as at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life.(communisim)[/b]
    14.You think that, ideally, no one would have more wealth more than they need until everyone has at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life.(communisim)

    LOL, this obviously comes from somebody whose knowledge of Communism is limited to a few platitudes straight out of a Glenn Beck rant.
  10. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    28 Nov '11 20:55
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    [b]Hmmm... let me take a a quick glance at this.
    And keeping in mind your previous statement
    -"I'm sure the Framers wouldn't have had any problem with hardly any of them either." -no1marauder

    1. You think health care is a basic human right, and that single-payer national health insurance is a worthwhile reform on our way toward creati ...[text shortened]... as at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life.(communisim)[/b]
    Who exactly does the State "kill" during an abortion?

    14 sounds like the Lockean corollary. What exactly do you have against everyone having the minimum they need to live a "safe, happy, decent life"? Do you favor people being required to lead an unsafe, miserable, degrading life?
  11. 28 Nov '11 20:58
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    [b]14.You think that, ideally, no one would have more wealth more than they need until everyone has at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life.(communisim)

    LOL, this obviously comes from somebody whose knowledge of Communism is limited to a few platitudes straight out of a Glenn Beck rant.[/b]
    What is your obsession with Glen Beck ? Is that your standard come back now ?! You have been using that line for about 2 years now.

    Thats besides the point. Explain to me ( someone 3 times your age) how #14 does not fit into the ideals of communism.
  12. 28 Nov '11 21:05 / 5 edits
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Who exactly does the State "kill" during an abortion?

    14 sounds like the Lockean corollary. What exactly do you have against everyone having the minimum they need to live a "safe, happy, decent life"? Do you favor people being required to lead an unsafe, miserable, degrading life?
    1. abortion. Who does most if not all of the abortions in the U.S. ? Who funds them ?

    2. You have a problem with my opposition to #14 "no one would have more wealth more than they need until everyone has at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life."

    Explain this to me no1marauder. ( #14) "no one would have more wealth than they need." Who determines that ?

    "Until EVERYONE has ATLEAST as much as they need..."

    Please explain this to me. explain the process.
  13. 28 Nov '11 21:10 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    What is your obsession with Glen Beck ? Is that your standard come back now ?! You have been using that line for about 2 years now.

    Thats besides the point. Explain to me ( someone 3 times your age) how #14 does not fit into the ideals of communism.
    Instead of asking me that question you should be wondering why it is that you persistently propagate such crude and simplistic remarks, which are characteristic of the kind of politically ignorant vitriol you hear from Glenn Beck and others like him.

    Im once again fascinated by your omniscience, given you seem to know my age despite never meeting me in person, but anyway, #14 is not an exclusively Communist or a Marxist ideal, it is a universal ideal that we should aspire towards an equitable and dignified life for everyone- all political philosophies in one way or another pursue the good life. Communism involves a very specific socio-economic state of affairs, one that #14 doesn't necessarily require, it says nothing about class struggle, it says nothing about the dictatorship of the proletariat, it says nothing about historical materialism, it says nothing about a classless and stateless society, etc, etc.

    There's no obvious reason why you should associate #14 with the tainted ideological label of Communism, unless of course you were trying to belittle and misrepresent progressivism, which you routinely do.
  14. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    28 Nov '11 21:11
    Sect. 27. Though the earth, and all inferior creatures, be common to all men, yet every man has a property in his own person: this no body has any right to but himself. The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his. Whatsoever then he removes out of the state that nature hath provided, and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property. It being by him removed from the common state nature hath placed it in, it hath by this labour something annexed to it, that excludes the common right of other men: for this labour being the unquestionable property of the labourer, no man but he can have a right to what that is once joined to, at least where there is enough, and as good, left in common for others.

    John Locke, Second Treatise on Government
  15. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    28 Nov '11 21:14 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    1. abortion. Who does most if not all of the abortions in the U.S. ? Who funds them ?

    2. You have a problem with my opposition to #14 "no one would have more wealth more than they need until everyone has at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life."

    Explain this to me no1marauder. ( #14) "no one would have more wealth than t NE has ATLEAST as much as they need..."

    Please explain this to me. explain the process.
    1. Doctors?

    People. Federal funds are banned from being used for abortions and few States pay for them as part of care provided to the poor.

    2. It's a standard egalitarian position. See Locke's quote above.

    I suppose the process would involve making sure everyone has a decent job or if that cannot be provided or if the person is incapable of working enough to live a safe and decent life. Not sure why anybody would be opposed to that.