Progressivism

Edit Liberal Paper

By Robert Green Ingersoll [found via Majikthise]

A LIBERAL paper should be edited by a Liberal man. And by the word Liberal I mean, not only free, not only one who thinks for himself, not only one who has escaped from the prisons of customs and creed, but one who is candid, intelligent and kind -- that is to say, Liberal toward others.

This Liberal editor should not forever play upon one string, no matter how wonderful the music. He should not have his attention forever fixed upon one question -- that is to say, he should not look through a reversed telescope and narrow his horizon to that degree that he sees only one thing.

To know that the Bible is the literature of a barbarous people, to know that it is uninspired, to be certain that the supernatural does not and cannot exist -- all this is but the beginning of wisdom. This only lays the foundation for unprejudiced observation. To kill weeds, to fell forests, to drove away or exterminate wild beasts -- this is preparatory to doing something of greater value. Of course the weeds must be killed, the forests must be felled. and the beasts must be destroyed before the building of homes and the cultivation of fields.

A Liberal paper should not discuss theological questions alone. Intelligent people everywhere have given up most of the old superstitions. They have pretty well made up their minds what is false, and they want to know something that is true. For this reason, a Liberal paper should keep abreast of the discoveries of the human mind. No science should be neglected; no fact should be overlooked. Inventions should be described and understood. And not only this, but the beautiful in thought, in form and color, should be preserved. The paper should be filled with things calculated to interest thoughtful, intelligent and serious people. There should be a column for children as well as for men and women.

Arundhati Roy: Non-Violence as a Powerful Weapon

"What we need to discuss urgently is strategies of resistance. We need to aim at real targets, wage real battles and inflict real damage. Gandhi's Salt March was not just political theatre. When, in a simple act of defiance, thousands of Indians marched to the sea and made their own salt, they broke the salt tax laws. It was a direct strike at the economic underpinning of the British Empire. It was real. While our movement has won some important victories, we must not allow non-violent resistance to atrophy into ineffectual, feel-good, political theatre. It is a very precious weapon that needs to be constantly honed and re-imagined. It cannot be allowed to become a mere spectacle, a photo opportunity for the media."

-Arundhati Roy [source text]

Mr. Anderson Confronts the Left-wing Blogosphere Aristocracy

And I say, "god damn straight", Mr. Anderson. Thank you for reminding we Progressives of our collective responsibility to support each other.... As for the rest of you, get you're butts over to ISOU and read his reminder. If you follow the link, all of your wishes -- and I mean all of them -- will come true. But if you don't follow the link, an angel will get set on fire. Don't say I didn't warn you.

Pharisee Nation

By John Dear 

Last September, I spoke to some 2,000 students during their annual lecture at a Baptist college in Pennsylvania. After a short prayer service for peace centered on the Beatitudes, I took the stage and got right to the point. “Now let me get this straight,” I said. “Jesus says, ‘Blessed are the peacemakers,’ which means he does not say, ‘Blessed are the warmakers,’ which means, the warmakers are not blessed, which means warmakers are cursed, which means, if you want to follow the nonviolent Jesus you have to work for peace, which means, we all have to resist this horrific, evil war on the people of Iraq.”

With that, the place exploded, and 500 students stormed out. The rest of them then started chanting, “Bush! Bush! Bush!”

So much for my speech. Not to mention the Beatitudes.

I was not at all surprised that George W. Bush was reelected president. As I travel the country speaking out against war, injustice and nuclear weapons, I see many people consciously siding with the culture of war, choosing the path of violence, supporting corporate greed, rampant militarism, and global domination. I see many others swept up in the raging current of patriotism. Since most of these people, beginning with the president, claim to be Christian, I am ashamed and appalled that they support war and systemic injustice, that they do it in the name of God, and that they feign fidelity to the nonviolent Jesus who gave his life resisting institutionalized injustice.

The Progressive Ideal Expressed 2435 years ago

"We love beauty without extravagance, and wisdom without weakness of will. Wealth we regard not as a means for private display but rather for public service; and poverty we consider no disgrace, although we think it is a disgrace not to try to overcome it. We believe a man should be conerned about public as well as private affairs, for we regard the person who takes no part in politics not as merely uninterested but as useless." -From Funeral Oration, King Pericles (495-427 b.c.e)

The Coming Progressive Uprising

I've just returned from the Progressive Democrats of America summit in Washington D.C. First off, I wanted to thank the 3 other PBA members that helped lead the blogging workshop, Roxanne from Rox Populi, Terrence Heath from Republic of T; and of course the man who made it all possible, Aldon Hynes of Orient-Lodge. It’s become clear that the PBA has come of age; to put it into perspective, the

Time for Progressives to Grow Up

By Frances Moore Lappé

Beyond Lakoff’s strict father vs. nurturant parent, a strong community manifesto

George Lakoff’s new best-seller Don’t Think of an Elephant has been heralded as the “bible” for battered progressives searching for direction in the post-election doldrums. Lakoff himself has become the Left’s answer to Frank Luntz, the focus-group genius behind the branding of Bush’s “death tax,” “Clear Skies” and “Healthy Forests” initiatives.

“Frames,” according to Lakoff, are the key to understanding how political ideas are received. Human beings don’t absorb information as raw material; we sift input through frames of meaning carried in the language we use.

Lakoff’s central idea is that conservatives see the world through a “strict father” frame emphasizing discipline, self-reliance, forceful defense, while progressives see the world through a “nurturant parent” frame—supportive, nourishing, emphasizing mutual responsibility. Lakoff claims that thirty-five to 40 percent of Americans fall into each camp, although most are some sort of mix.

The Right, Lakoff points out, is extremely good at selling their policies in clear, easy to understand “strict father” frames. Progressives, on the other hand, too often seem to offer laundry lists of issues lacking any overarching moral framework.

So, it’s easy to see why progressives are rallying around Lakoff’s call to arms. Since polls show majorities actually agree with the progressive agenda on many key issues, including corporate power, the environment and abortion, focusing on “framing” issues in ways that Americans can understand them seems like the answer they’ve been praying for. Certainly, much of Lakoff’s advice about communicating progressive ideas is powerfully insightful and right on target.

But two big dangers loom.

Jim Moore: Eleven good reasons to become a nonvoter. Be free! Become a non-voter today! Help form the Nonvoter party.

"The nonvoter party is global. Given that we don't vote, we do not need to be sanctioned by current political jurisdictions. We can be active all over the world, without concern for national boundaries and rules. Imagine." -Jim Moore

In Defense of Priorities

Using animals for food and clothing causes suffering, is bad for human health, is bad for the environment and is a huge public safety risk. Protecting other sentient creatures from humans is to protect the weak from the strong and to expand the definition of 'us'. So why isn't animal rights more frequently identified as a core progressive value? Why do so many sites that deal with progressive issues not include an animal rights category? - From Salon Table Talk

The moderator of that discussion proceeded to point her finger at us first, and then about 5 other progressive sites as example of unconcious organizations that do "not have an animal rights category". As a result, II feel warrented to tear her position to shreds. Normally, I would have settled the matter at her forum, but since Salon only allows "premiums" to chat, I'm forced to shout from here. (BTW, see the "add new subject" button to your top left?)

Lets start with suffering: As we speak, our brave soldiers, who've sworn to protect our lives, are getting their hands and legs blown off, only to be herded to some ship in the middle of the person gulf so no one can see what BUSH did to them. As Rumsfeld said, death and disfigurement have a tendency to give war a negative connotation. Sure, "our" president wears his cute little yellow ribbon, and waves a little flag for the cameras; but that is a photo-op. As to the extent our president supports our troops in action, he basically tells our soldiers to fuck off, take their 10 thousand dollars, and wheel themselves to the nearest homeless shelter within 5 years. Forgive me for forgetting about the horrible conditions that our cattle are suffering.

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Progressivism