Sure, Wondernine...I could read it....
************************************************************
"Oh poo poo, you couldn't be bothered to read that.
Too bad."
************************************************************
but then I still don't know what w4rma has to say.
We want to encourage w4rma to formulate original thoughts and discuss them, not just subject us to cut-and-pastes from every "progressive" publication out there.
************************************************************
"Imho, a progressive is trying to progress towards more democracy, more balance between public and private interestes, more scientific advancement with more accessability for that technology to more people, more education, knowledge and understanding and more power to more individuals."
************************************************************
Thank you, w4rma. We can discuss that with some level of interaction.
Your opinion' list of "progressive" goals reads like the left's vague shopping list for the 'good of humanity'.
"More democracy"?
Is this to be with or without protection for minority rights?
"More balance between public and private interests"?
Could this mean bringing private assets into 'public' domain?
"More scientific advancement"?
The better to control those who do not conform?
"More education"
Quality of education is important; quantity without it is redundancy.
"More power to more individuals."
It would be helpful to know if this refers to individual freedom, or merely more "progressive" bureaucrats.
The goals are subject to interpretation, but just HOW the "progressive" proposes to attain them is fairly predictable.
Dollars to donuts the "progressive" approach involves taking wealth from those who have and 'giving' it to those deemed to be without.
Including lots of "progressives" along the path.
History has not demonstrated much success with that approach, and often an awful lot of folks who don't agree with the "progressives" lose their wealth, and even their lives.
(Stalin considered himself a "progressive")
Co-opting a name is easy. Changing hard-wired ideology is not.
Today's "progressives" are suspiciously similar in character to the socialists of not so long ago.