Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

In reply to the discussion: Liberal or progressive? [View all]
 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
24. I don't think you have a firm grasp of the concepts you're talking about.
Tue May 7, 2013, 05:10 AM
May 2013
So i stand behind capitalism, lord knows at the very least in numbers we have never slaughtered people in the numbers of the other beliefs.


No, in fact capitalism has vastly more dead people. The difference is that there is no "Army of the Invisible Hand" running around butchering people for the word of Adam Smith. Nothing so flashy or loud. Oh, there were cases where that was effectively the case, in the US's proxy wars during the cold war, and the US / West Europe's support for anti-left genocides in the southern nations during that whole period... But most of the carnage is simply a result of things that capitalists don't regard as anything the least bit unusual. For-profit medical systems and pharmaceuticals, patent protecting on agriculture, rampant pollution, austerity measures, "Structural Adjustment programs," Wage / benefit / labor cuts, embargos and military / covert actions against states that are non-compliant with the wishes of Wall Street.

Hell, all this piles together in Africa; we supported the armed juntas of anti-soviet regimes and turned a blind eye to their bloodshed so long as they agreed to not talk to Russia. We sold them military machinery and resources that they mostly used against their own people, and sometimes their neighboring juntas (also armed by us.) Actually it's more like we gave these weapons to them, as it was all done on credit.

When they dropped from power we decided the people they abused and robbed still had to pay the debts. Debt relief came from the IMF and World Bank, and was paired with structural readjustments; the privatization of state companies, upper limits to employment, the cessation of domestic manufacture, union-busting, an end to public education and health programmes, and "opening the markets" to established international corporations, who faced no domestic competition in these emergent markets and so pillaged and polluted to their heart's content. Even the debt relief was treated as loans however and had interest payments; when an African nation falls short, well, it's back to the negotiations with the IMF, to figure out what other structural adjustments could be made.

The slashes to employment, education, and health care leads to spiraling poverty, drug use, and prostitution, which all in turn turns into the world's worst HIV epidemic; an epidemic so bad that the leaders of African nations are speaking in terms of apocalypse for their people's suffering. But because of patent protection for Pfizer and other companies, retrovirals and treatments that could save the lives of millions and prevent infection of millions more, remain hopelessly out of reach for the majority of Africa. That's just HIV. Want to talk polio? Malaria? Tuberculosis? Plain ol' staph infections?

Africa's a fucking rich place, and the nations there could, almost one and all be self-sufficient, if they had the infrastructure and fund to tap those resources. But instead we've shackled them down to the debts of their oppressors, and force economic experiments on them seemingly designed ot keep them in this subjected state in perpetuity. meanwhile our fat asses just love all those diamonds and rare earth menerals and lumber and aluminum and gold and other raw resources being sucked out of the continent, with the money we pay for those resources going right back to our own corporations rather than the people digging the shit out of the middle of a war zone.

That's Africa under capitalism, and that's without even touching on the slave trade, another awesome capitalist venture in "The Dark continent." Would you like to talk about Latin America or Southeast Asia, the Middle East, perhaps? Are you familiar with the Pahlavi Shah? or Suharto?

Don't give me this "capitalism has less blood on its hands" garbage. The US, richest nation on earth, has a infant mortality rate on par with fucking Bosnia because of a capitalist, for-profit medical system that, by design, is less functional for the proles than the elites. Same for our HIV cases; again, if you're Magic Johnson, you're well-treated, but if you're just Tom Johnson, well, hope you already have the hole dug, Tom.

As for your question? I call myself a leftist. Leaves the Birchers gaping like landed carp and I so enjoy their sputterings.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Liberal or progressive? [View all] Riftaxe May 2013 OP
Yes. n/t Lil Missy May 2013 #1
I agree...nt Wounded Bear May 2013 #71
You clearly define the terms very differently from how I do BainsBane May 2013 #2
I see it as a progression from the age of enlightment Riftaxe May 2013 #5
Hitler? BainsBane May 2013 #6
Pinochet's also a great example of "pure" capitalism's brutality deutsey May 2013 #48
yes, and Iraq BainsBane May 2013 #66
I don't think you have a firm grasp of the concepts you're talking about. Scootaloo May 2013 #24
+1 Scuba May 2013 #32
Damn! Starry Messenger May 2013 #45
Well put think May 2013 #59
Excellent points! LeftishBrit May 2013 #116
Tell that to the 600 people dead in the Bangladesh factory collapse alarimer May 2013 #74
Capitalism has never slaughtered large numbers of people? LeftishBrit May 2013 #115
"Capitalism has never slaughtered large numbers of people...".....BAHAHAHAAWWAW...clueless. Katashi_itto May 2013 #124
Interesting ... 1StrongBlackMan May 2013 #104
I understand that BainsBane May 2013 #105
both are nebulous, ill-defined labels. Neither has an agreed-upon objective meaning at this point. Warren DeMontague May 2013 #3
well define them Riftaxe May 2013 #9
Locke argued for the dispossession of the Native Americans because they weren't being "productive" LooseWilly May 2013 #20
Interesting question since Locke Riftaxe May 2013 #22
I can't really help you with your, uh, castigation anxiety. Warren DeMontague May 2013 #70
Yeah, what you said... MADem May 2013 #106
Honestly, you had me at the little animated cat gif. Warren DeMontague May 2013 #107
Social Democrat. Here are the wiki definitions of liberal, progressive and social democrat, FWIW. pampango May 2013 #120
Really. Agree. Safetykitten May 2013 #72
Should be, are you a Nixon Liberal or a Rockefeller Progressive. Safetykitten May 2013 #73
Liberal makes me think of classical liberalism... which is called Libertarianism today. LooseWilly May 2013 #4
Well i will admit most of my wasted time ends "of science" Riftaxe May 2013 #11
Too bad your wasted time, and now mine, can't be summed up with the word "cogent" LooseWilly May 2013 #15
Oh fine, i have more then one degree in science and one in arts Riftaxe May 2013 #23
"I asked you to defined." That would be define sir. HangOnKids May 2013 #76
Yes. Bobbie Jo May 2013 #91
I marked other LostOne4Ever May 2013 #7
Liberal. John V. Lindsay liberal. Jim Florio liberal. LBJ liberal graham4anything May 2013 #8
We finally agree on something! Riftaxe May 2013 #12
Agreed. Also let me add-A Harry Chapin liberal.Allard Lowenstein liberal.A Bob Graham liberal. graham4anything May 2013 #19
Division is a bad thing, fyi. JNelson6563 May 2013 #10
Semantics is a lost art Riftaxe May 2013 #13
Radical leftist provocateur Gravitycollapse May 2013 #14
I love your humor (nt) Riftaxe May 2013 #16
Love Me, I'm a Liberal G_j May 2013 #17
This agnostic says Riftaxe May 2013 #18
Bravo! Riftaxe May 2013 #21
'In every American community you have varying shades of political opinion. johnp3907 May 2013 #92
Socialist from 6 generations of socialists on my mother's side. hobbit709 May 2013 #25
what is this drivel? RedstDem May 2013 #26
You are trying to make Progressive sound as radical and opposite of the right wing liberal N proud May 2013 #27
Hardly, they are more radical then liberals Riftaxe May 2013 #28
How about Senator Sherrod Brown? liberal N proud May 2013 #29
"more radical then liberals" AgingAmerican May 2013 #80
Nixon would be a liberal ozone_man May 2013 #100
Bartender, get this man a thesaurus! Android3.14 May 2013 #30
we need to agree on the definitions before you can make any sense of this. DCBob May 2013 #31
Both are nebulous terms with historical baggage, as is "left" Recursion May 2013 #33
Never thought I'd see such a divisive prejudging Original Pos as this one. Bernardo de La Paz May 2013 #34
+1000. n/t winter is coming May 2013 #35
Yup LondonReign2 May 2013 #57
+ 2000. BlueCaliDem May 2013 #67
Other. LWolf May 2013 #36
Well said deutsey May 2013 #51
I think it's more a matter of focus. Liberals focus on people, progressives are more about policy? reformist2 May 2013 #37
liberal because republicans hate liberals and so that must be me dembotoz May 2013 #38
Sorry bud... 99Forever May 2013 #39
+ 1000 djean111 May 2013 #56
Obama: 'I am a progressive' Ichingcarpenter May 2013 #40
anarcho-syndicalist nt PD Turk May 2013 #41
I thought I was the only one. bluedigger May 2013 #54
Me too PD Turk May 2013 #55
Righties (and some centrists) like to say liberals are "LIBERAL with other people's money". progree May 2013 #42
I'm a Democrat first tabbycat31 May 2013 #43
The problem with blue dogs zipplewrath May 2013 #78
Thank you for reminding me of why I am no longer a progressive tabbycat31 May 2013 #83
A country mile between the two zipplewrath May 2013 #85
There is no 'progressive purity movement' AgingAmerican May 2013 #81
Google "Progressive Democrats of America" tabbycat31 May 2013 #84
We used to call them "Dixiecrats" zipplewrath May 2013 #86
I was not alive in the Dixiecrat era tabbycat31 May 2013 #87
But you avoid the question zipplewrath May 2013 #94
you also have to keep this in mind tabbycat31 May 2013 #96
Winning at all costs zipplewrath May 2013 #118
Dixiecrats aren't blue dogs LeftInTX May 2013 #103
They started out as democrats zipplewrath May 2013 #119
They are anti-corporatist Democrats AgingAmerican May 2013 #88
When they go after a member of the Progressive caucus tabbycat31 May 2013 #90
So you're a conservative zipplewrath May 2013 #95
I'm not a conservative tabbycat31 May 2013 #101
I've read it zipplewrath May 2013 #117
Blue dogs are Republicans - and useless AgingAmerican May 2013 #98
Anyone who pushes for anything Democratic is labled "purist" AgingAmerican May 2013 #99
Neither. I am a left libertarian who is registered as a Democrat MadrasT May 2013 #44
I'm not going to pipi_k May 2013 #46
+10000 (nt) LostOne4Ever May 2013 #108
Tree huggin' hippie liberal, thank you. Myrina May 2013 #47
You want me to participate in a poll that begins with a diatribe? No thankyou. pinboy3niner May 2013 #49
You aren't a liberal. You aren't progressive. You're divisive. kenny blankenship May 2013 #50
I don't really know why, but lately I have been using ZombieHorde May 2013 #52
Independent /nt think May 2013 #53
Progressive ChangeUp106 May 2013 #58
wat? nt Demo_Chris May 2013 #60
Socialist Marrah_G May 2013 #61
I feel I'm a liberal... bamacrat May 2013 #62
which is why I reject labeling myself gejohnston May 2013 #63
I always identified as liberal, never labeled my self as progressive but in present context neither TheKentuckian May 2013 #64
Left Libertarian aka Anarchist Tierra_y_Libertad May 2013 #65
Another liberal vs progressive thread and it's just as illuminating as the 100s that came before it. Gidney N Cloyd May 2013 #68
Leftist revolutionary geckosfeet May 2013 #69
Post removed Post removed May 2013 #75
Social Democrat. ForgoTheConsequence May 2013 #77
I went to school at the UW-Madison, and Wisconsin was Progressive closeupready May 2013 #79
Egalitarian. Fearless May 2013 #82
+1 and look at the choices made available to us. We have a binary system of 0/0. n/t Egalitarian Thug May 2013 #89
Major idiot here KamaAina May 2013 #93
Ermahgerd! Yargle bargle! scarletwoman May 2013 #97
Foucauldian anarchist nt Deep13 May 2013 #102
I'm actually a liberal progressive other, but I like to call myself a liberal because Zorra May 2013 #109
I vote for the most progressive candidate available in the primaries. lovemydog May 2013 #110
Socialist burrowowl May 2013 #111
That other thread had some amazing responses. Lots of really thought provoking comments Number23 May 2013 #112
Is it possible to be a little bit of both? AsahinaKimi May 2013 #113
Other; I am left-wing. In the UK, 'liberal' means centrist, and 'progressive' doesn't have any LeftishBrit May 2013 #114
Different people will interpret the two terms in such a way as to better validate their own opinions LanternWaste May 2013 #121
Liberaltarianish Puzzledtraveller May 2013 #122
Liberal Go Vols May 2013 #123
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Liberal or progressive?»Reply #24