I tend to avoid the word “progressive”, b/c - I kid you not - George W. Bush was one.
Progressivism is a political philosophy and movement that seeks to advance the human condition through social reform – primarily based on purported advancements in social organization, science, and technology.
Like, maybe someone doesn’t have to be “good” at it in order to be called one? Also, Biden did one of the largest infrastructure bills that we’ve seen in modern times - would that make him quality? (perhaps not a “social progressive” but a different kind?) I admit, I am very likely over-thinking this and should just use the word:-P.
But anyway, yeah, HRC was pro-war, pro-big business, the rather extensive list goes on, so a perfect example of a Democrat who was decidedly not progressive. And you get what I am saying underneath it all: what the politicians offer does not always perfectly match the desires of their constituents - e.g. neoliberalism.
Yeah, the likes of Bezos have been harping on replacing their human workforce for years, they actually feel like technology is BEHIND in that aspect, b/c they wish they could ditch the meat-bags ASAP (who do things like die when the temperature rises above a certain threshold for a sustained length of time). So while governments with octogenarians don’t even know it is happening, corporations look like they are preparing 3rd-world nations to receive their robot factories. Just like farming today, if all you need is 1-5 humans per huge production location, and especially if you can pay that person in housing & maybe food (“company scrip”), then by ensuring their loyalty in said manner you can maintain absolute control over your profits. Evolution can sometimes be about survival of the most ruthless? Especially when people refuse to work together to stop it.:-(
I guess I don’t see how Bush fits that definition, but I guess it doesn’t matter, I think we’re close enough.
Personally, I wish we could hurry up and replace all human labor with computers and machines. People could still do work, they’ll just be free to pursue work that they find satisfying instead of the bullshit work most people are doing now. We will of course have to have an economic revolution and force the rich to share the wealth created by the machines, otherwise everyone dies in the streets except a few thousand rich people. I’m a strong proponent of UBI tied to inflation and set at a thriving level by “district”… However we want to define district.
otherwise everyone dies in the streets except a few thousand rich people
Which is probably why the revolution would be allowed in the first place. They have their own islands or stay perpetually in the air - they can afford to wait it out.
Yeah…I think they’ll push for a faux revolution, designed to cull the herd more than actually change power structures… Our only hope is for people to realize they need to fight the rich and not each other… So I don’t have high hopes
I tend to avoid the word “progressive”, b/c - I kid you not - George W. Bush was one.
Like, maybe someone doesn’t have to be “good” at it in order to be called one? Also, Biden did one of the largest infrastructure bills that we’ve seen in modern times - would that make him quality? (perhaps not a “social progressive” but a different kind?) I admit, I am very likely over-thinking this and should just use the word:-P.
But anyway, yeah, HRC was pro-war, pro-big business, the rather extensive list goes on, so a perfect example of a Democrat who was decidedly not progressive. And you get what I am saying underneath it all: what the politicians offer does not always perfectly match the desires of their constituents - e.g. neoliberalism.
Literally all across the globe!
Yeah, the likes of Bezos have been harping on replacing their human workforce for years, they actually feel like technology is BEHIND in that aspect, b/c they wish they could ditch the meat-bags ASAP (who do things like die when the temperature rises above a certain threshold for a sustained length of time). So while governments with octogenarians don’t even know it is happening, corporations look like they are preparing 3rd-world nations to receive their robot factories. Just like farming today, if all you need is 1-5 humans per huge production location, and especially if you can pay that person in housing & maybe food (“company scrip”), then by ensuring their loyalty in said manner you can maintain absolute control over your profits. Evolution can sometimes be about survival of the most ruthless? Especially when people refuse to work together to stop it.:-(
I guess I don’t see how Bush fits that definition, but I guess it doesn’t matter, I think we’re close enough.
Personally, I wish we could hurry up and replace all human labor with computers and machines. People could still do work, they’ll just be free to pursue work that they find satisfying instead of the bullshit work most people are doing now. We will of course have to have an economic revolution and force the rich to share the wealth created by the machines, otherwise everyone dies in the streets except a few thousand rich people. I’m a strong proponent of UBI tied to inflation and set at a thriving level by “district”… However we want to define district.
Which is probably why the revolution would be allowed in the first place. They have their own islands or stay perpetually in the air - they can afford to wait it out.
Yeah…I think they’ll push for a faux revolution, designed to cull the herd more than actually change power structures… Our only hope is for people to realize they need to fight the rich and not each other… So I don’t have high hopes