Progressive values vs traditional liberal values

Sending out an invite to @anon38216271 and @Poagao.

I started this in the open forum, I expect to be moderated in just the same way anyone else would be and I’ll make it clear, I am not going to step in as a mod in this thread in any shape or form.

The starting point is I think, when I stated a long held traditional liberal belief that people should not be discriminated on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation or religion. It’s also law in most places.

I got some push back at the idea people should be treated equal, because as it was noted (quite true) people are not equal.

Which led me to ask, if in fact the belief of the more progressives is we should be discriminating on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation and so on. To balance the field so to speak.


Is this a discussion between the three of you?


In as much as Mick says he doesn’t want to mod it, no, anyone can join in.


Without the original posts it’s difficult to comment. Poagoa hardly ever makes a post, and I’ve not noticed any positive discrimination type posts from Namahottie.

I’m assuming that’s the issue here?

I’ve listened to enough Joe Roman and Jordan Peterson to know those dogs don’t hunt. Seriously though, I’d keep an open mind.

I’m not sure what “positive discrimination” is, there is discrimination and I don’t think anything about it is positive. Maybe like one of those terms “reverse racism” which makes no sense, there is racism plain and simple.

As for Namahottie she kind of got dragged into this, Poagao on the other hand has been taking pot shots for years calling everyone racists everyone posting on this site, all the moderators, and deserves to be called out. I will be polite about it too, which as it was pointed out to me I was not doing.

1 Like

There’s a big issue with the definition of liberalism. It used to be clear, but now it’s all over the place.


Is pitting progressives vs liberal values in the title what the discussion was about? I dont think that’s what the message was.

Don’t leave us hanging in suspense @anon58655674. Please go ahead and explain.

Isnt it from the Black Man Killled While Jogging temp discussion? I recall a lot of ideas being discussed but progressive vs liberal divisiveness wasn’t what @Poagao or @anon38216271 were talking about.

If they’re ok with it I’m ok. I don’t believe that was the scope of their discussion


Completely unrelated but I do miss his posts in the daily photo thread. He had a knack for street photography and making the mundane seem interesting.


I’m not aware of any of my posts or any of the replies going to temp, but i moved it here to not disrupt that thread.
Some posts did go to temp, I am aware of that.

My position has been consistent. Being poor is a really bad state for anyone. It’s exacerbated if you happen to be in a less privileged group, but the poverty trumps the identity.

The identity has taken precedent over the poverty in the past twenty years or so. I consider this counterproductive.


I’m in favour of affirmative action in some cases, for people who suffered officially or heavily socially sanctioned discrimination.
Here in Taiwan I support it for some aborigines; mostly the ones who are still isolated back in the hills. In Canada I’d pretty well limit it to members of First Nations; I doubt if you could pick out now Chinese who suffered under the Exclusion Acts. Same with the Japanese who suffered under the Internment Orders. Apologies, monuments, sure.

Same in the States- African-Americans, yes, American Indians, yes, Latinos in the Southwest.

Romani, Australian Aborigines, Maoris, Ksan, Ainu - I don’t know enough about their specific situations to say, but roughly, and from what I hear, yeah.

Women- special issue. They make less than men and are further behind, a lot due to maternity . Society should make up that difference, as we all benefit. There is some outright historical (and present!) discrimination against women, so there should be special considerations to make up.
Where society has screwed up, society should make up.


Let’s help poor people is less complicated and probably way more effective.


So is this the idpol thread or something? I’m not familiar with Paogao’s posts. And how are we supposed to differentiate between so-called liberal and progressive values? In their current iteration, liberals don’t really have any legitimate values to speak of.


This one I struggle with in the west. As long as both genders have full legal rights and opportunities afforded to them, I don’t see this as necessary. I personally find it unfair, my female peers and I have lived in a time of equality. None of them were under some oppressive society, no more than society is oppressive to men.

I recently applied for scholarship, and the scholarship titled leadership without gender…was only offered to women. There were many female only scholarships, and many women only programs for helping women advance. None for men. I did end up receiving a scholarship, but it seems unfair women had far more options.


Another issue we have seen from “positive discrimination” is that deciding who to positively discriminate against. So you end up with actual discrimination of a minority group, like Asian Americans, for other minority groups in college admissions. It doesn’t seem right.

Yeah who needs all that liberte egalite franternite shit or the constituion rule of law all that yadda yadda

The bottom line is if you keep telling a poor identity group they are privileged, why be surprised if they vote against you?