Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
|
It's refreshing to see a progressive admit that their ideology isn't liberal, isn't about tolerance or trying to build the best life for the most people, but about achieving an artificial level of equality, regardless of the consequences.
This is opposed to the liberal values of tolerance, fairness, individualism, and social support based on individual need.
The progressive movement as described in the first paragraphs is a movement that primarily helps middle class people feel better about themselves without actually having to solve the underlying issues around poverty, class segregation, early childcare, and culture. I'll take the liberals that are building schools in poor neighborhoods, helping poor families and single mothers, etc with the express purpose of solving some of these underlying issues (which disproportionately affect minorities) through innovative, tailor made programs 10/10 times over the divisive ideology described in that article.
The rest of the article goes up and down, making some good points that are widely agreed on like not all worldviews being equal, not all presidents are equally worth outrage, conservative blind spots, etc while overstating (and IMO, misunderstanding) the challenges and attempting to back up his article with misapplied math.
The strongest part, and an argument I like to use on occastion, is that conservative morality is too often relativism masquerading as objective morality.