Make Progress - Make Progressive History

[pandabead]

Martin Luther king was not a progressive. He was a Republican. Republicanism is the platform by which the individual can govern himself without government interference and tyranny. MR

[Baculus]

Of course he was a progressive. He believed in equality in health care and wages. That is why right-wingers have demonized him for four decades,

[smokin345]

@pandabead

and you are a dumbass. Martin Luther King was opposed to the Vietnam and was killed after giving a speech on behalf of janitors on strike. He was a pro-labor, pro-peace, pro-equality, progressive. You rely too much on party labels, remember that the Teddy Roosevelt (R) was the founder of the modern day progressive movement.

[MassLiberal1]

MLK was a socialist who was registered Republican, like most African Americans at the time (today they're majority Democrat). He was organizing another march on Washington before he died, this one for the poor. Also he supported LBJ's Great Society programs. Revisionist history, lol.

[frellthat]

How can you even say that? MLK was hounded his whole life by reactionaries on the far right who labeled him a Communist, Marxist, etc.  Learn your history, please, instead of helping others rewrite it.

[pandabead]

These progressives are declaring war on Americans and their ignorance. STOP PROGRESSIVISM NOW. ABE LINCOLN AND MARTIN LUTHER KING WERE REPUBLICANS. THE PROGRESSIVES DECLARED WAR ON MINORITIES BY IMPLEMENTING THE EUGENICS MOVEMENT.

[Baculus]

Republicans WERE THE PROGRESSIVES AT THAT TIME. They were the leftists of the day. The GOP absorbed all the Southern right-wing reactionaries who were southern Democrats.

It's a historical irony.

[pandabead]

@Baculus

No they were not. I have a factual USA history book and have read the research. The Republicans evolved from the Whig party and were a liberatarian not liberal party not progressive either. Liberals and democrats were on the side of oppression including upholding slavery, big national not federal government not giving rights to the states or the people. You really need to read a real history book not the high school propagand books.

[Baculus]

@pandabead If your post is an example of your research, you better try again. Libertarianism IS CLASSICAL LIBERALISM. And "libertarians," as the phrase was used, were also European in nature before some American "classical liberals" started to use the phrase, "libertarian." Liberals certainly were not "on the side of oppression including upholding slavery": those were the conservatives, especially the slave holders or pro-state rightists. You have no idea what "liberalism" even means.

[Baculus]

@pandabead I mean, really, it's a fair bit of propaganda to blame a pro-freedom philosophy, liberalism, for slavery. It's a complete Orwellian distortion of the word by the right-wing. Here is a basic definition of liberalism: It is the belief in the importance of liberty and equality. It was the LIBERALS who were the abolitionists, and who were ANTI-SLAVERY. It was the LIBERALS who went to the South during the 50s/60s to march with blacks against segregation.

[pandabead]

@Baculus i HAVE READ YOU PLANKS IT IS COMMUNISTIC. THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A TIME IN THE HISTORY WHERE A COMMUNIST PARTY CHANGE THE NAME TO PROGRESSIVISM. READ THE HISTORY OUT OF BOOK FROM SCHOLARS NOT HIGH SCHOOL. AND STOP READING HISTORY FROM SOROS AND PADESTA FOUNDATIONS. SOROS WAS A NAZI SYMPATHIZER. HE IS GOOD AND ERASING THE TRUE HISTORY.

[Baculus]

@pandabead BTW, you complete and utter fool, George Soros, whose real family name is Schwartz, is a Hungarian JEW. He was thirteen when the Germans invade Hungary: to suggest he was a Nazi sympathizer is the sort of right-wing tripe that people like you believe, even though it is totally ridiculous. Soros has spent millions in helping ANTI-COMMUNIST Eastern Europe, and has helped many other pro-democracy groups around the world. The hatred that people like you have for Soros is pathetic.

[Baculus]

@pandabead You have the nerve to talk about "brainwashing" when all of your points are either fabricated, exaggerated, or nothing close to the truth. You rail about progressives, without showing any indicated that you understand progressive history. You talk about early Republicans, without realizing that some of them were socialists. You talk about George Soros, a Jew, being a Nazi sympathizer, and all the while, mashing your caps-locked keyboard. You represent the uninformed right-wing.

[pandabead]

@Baculus The dixiecrates leaped to the GOP after Johson signed the civil rights act constructed by a Republican. Progresives like Wilson were for stripping blacks of their rights including segregation with was inacted by progressive liberals.

[Baculus]

@pandabead The civil rights act was NOT constructed by Republicans. It was the President Kennedy, a DEMOCRAT, who proposed the bill in the first place. If you look at the votes for the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the votes were along sectarian lines: Northerners were for it, and Southerners were against it, no matter their party. And Progressives, LONG before this time, were in support of both black and women's civil rights. That is why blacks supported progressives such as Robert Lafollette.

[pandabead]

@Baculus YES IT WAS. LOOK IT UP. A REPUBLICAN DEVELOPED THE LEGISLATION. THE FIRST CIVIL RIGHTS BILL WAS CONSTRUCTED BY THE BLACK CAUCUS IN THE 1860'S BOY SOROS SURE KNOWS HOW TO BRAINWASH PEOPLE.

[Baculus]

@pandabead That was NOT the legislation that was passed in 1964. Also, the Republican party of the 1860s is NOT the same party as today. After all, the GOP, in its right-ward tilt, is rejecting many of the progressive roots of the Republican party, especially when you considered that LEFTISTS made up many of the early Republicans. Read this book called "Red Republicans" which talks about that. With this in mind, I have no idea why you are championing the 19th century Republican party.

[Baculus]

@pandabead You don't seem to understand that progressivism has been a REFORM movement, especially towards government waste and corruption. Read about Robert Lafollette, who was a Republican. After all, the core progressives at the turn of the 19th/20th century were Republican as well. Even before that, the early party had a more progressive character, including the black caucus that you mentioned in another post. It's funny, but you are supporting progressives while condemning them!

[Baculus]

@pandabead You need to quit watching Glenn Beck, because don't have a grasp on the nuances of late 19th/early 20th century history. Just because Wilson supported some progressive urban initiatives does not mean everything he did was progressive. Stripping rights from blacks is REgressive, not Progressive. (Which, BTW, it is the GOP who are now suggesting to strip citizenship from the children of illegals: That is REgressive as well.) Also, MANY progressives opposed our involvement in WW1.

[pandabead]

@Baculus YOU MEAN LIKE THE EUGENICS, MARGARET SANGER AND YOU ILK. STOP USING MARTIN LUTHER KING AND LINCOLN TO PROMOTE YOU DELUTED IDEOLOGY. AMERICANS ARE CATCHING ON TO THE PROGRESSIVES. YOU IMPLEMENTED EUGENICS, YOU DENIED CIVIL RIGHTS, YOU ARE THE COMMUNISTS. GET REAL. I DID NOT LEARN THIS FROM GLENN BECK. I LEARN IT IN MY HISTORY OF SCIENCE CLASS AT A PROMINENT UNIVERSITY. SHUT UP I AM NOT DUMB. BUT YOU ARE FOR BELIEVING THIS SHIT.

[Baculus]

@pandabead You don't realize you are falling into the same mental trap as Glenn Beck. Eugenics, which was a "parlor" issue of so-called "upper society," was adhered by progressives AND industrialists. But eugenics was most certainly NOT adhered by the populist progressives who championed the poor and the lower class, which were often the targets of Eugenics. There is nothing "progressive" about Eugenics, and it is antithesis to the philosophy and wholly rejected by the greater movement.

[Baculus]

@pandabead Your problem is that you are incapable of making any sort of distinctions between groups. Some conservatives are in the KKK -- are ALL conservatives in the Klan? Are all conservatives racist because some conservatives are racist? What about the fact that some British and American business conservatives believed in Eugenics (which is ignored fact). Does that mean YOU do? And no, Americans are not "catching" on the progressives, because Americans APPRECIATE progressive reforms.

[Baculus]

@pandabead Progressive reforms such as the forty hour work week/8-hour day, child labor reforms, woman's suffrage, health and food inspection, safety standards for workers, direct elections, urban reforms in civil government, on and on. Do you think Americans DON'T want these?! No, progressives PUSHED for civil rights. And you don't know ANYTHING about communism if you think progressives are "communists," because progressives are not "revolutionary and have different aims. CAPS LOCK MAN!

[cm2dude]

Abe Lincoln was Republican.

[archagent]

one more quick point... the pro v con was a very powerful use from previous spots, you can't just drop that and expect it'll have an impact. You need about a billion more impressions before it is remembered.

[archagent]

I am 100% "in the tank" for CAP, but as a media piece this is far inferior to the previous spots in this promotional series. The overall effort to assert the American roots of progressivism is long, long, long overdue.

In this piece, the quotes are great, but the music needs a rework. The uneven tone is distracting. Also, what's my call to action? A for effort, but needs a redo.