<As opposed to medieval fuedal culture it does not promote concentration of wealth in the hands of a few. Strange how supposed champions of freedom and democracy don't see any harm in that.
Sure sounds a lot more palatable than "looting the wealthy."
Well, as the bank robber said, that's where the money is.
Redistribution of wealth by force is basically legalized robbery. The moral underpinnings are exactly the same.
"He's got it, I don't, I need it more than he does, I get to take it from him."
Socialist, or mugger. Same difference.
But of course it would be impossible for a "progressive" to admit this, as it puts them in a very difficult position. They can, however, make the looting a lot more palatable by putting forth various scenarios that give the impression that nobody who is wealthy could possible have "earned" it, or that all wealth has to have been made by underhanded methods.
BTW, you might want to recall how wealth was accumulated in feudal times. We don't live there any more.
Current Events » in reply to It's Called Progressive Because
Re: It's Called Progressive because Socialist doesn't sell well any more.
The whole thread (54 posts)
- Vast Right Wing Media Conspiracy blamed for liberal media failure
- Bill O'Reilly's ratings in the toilet
- Wow!
- Let them eat steak!
- Of course, they use 'fairness doctrine' to hide its blatant unfairness
- That's Not The Point Tom
- Yawn. Tom was up too late again last night. (NT) (n/t)
- Re: "It couldn't be that most audiences just aren't interested in what the Left has to say?"
