How Progressive are you? (poll)

[Politesse]

I voted for the "equality of outcomes" one, but interpreted it differently I guess than some are here; I meant this more in the sense that equal work should receive equal pay, an equal qualification should correspond to an equal position/honor, an equal tax should apply to everyone who is in a given bracket, etc, without respect to factors like race or gender that often result in disproportionate rewards to a privileged few. I don't think we should reward laziness, just fairly reward labor.

 

[YmirGF]

I voted for the "equality of outcomes" one, but interpreted it differently I guess than some are here; I meant this more in the sense that equal work should receive equal pay, an equal qualification should correspond to an equal position/honor, an equal tax should apply to everyone who is in a given bracket, etc, without respect to factors like race or gender that often result in disproportionate rewards to a privileged few. I don't think we should reward laziness, just fairly reward labor.

Oddly, this is the first instance I have ever seen of this nuanced view of "equality of outcomes". In normal parlance, it is more about penalizing the perceived privileged in order to give exaggerated favor to the oppressed that is directly proportional to their intersectional oppressions. It is very far from equality.

 

[Politesse]

Oddly, this is the first instance I have ever seen of this nuanced view of "equality of outcomes". In normal parlance, it is more about penalizing the perceived privileged in order to give exaggerated favor to the oppressed that is directly proportional to their intersectional oppressions. It is very far from equality.

Well, I don't read conservative sites, I was just going by the meaning of the words as I understood them.

I note that your definition of intersectionality is seemingly very different from the one we use in the social sciences, also.

 

[YmirGF]

Well, I don't read conservative sites, I was just going by the meaning of the words as I understood them.

I note that your definition of intersectionality is seemingly very different from the one we use in the social sciences, also.

I have got my "definitions" directly from EDU sites. I have not read a thing about it on so-called conservative sites.

 

[chickenranch]

I suspect mischief in the OP.
I have thoughts!
But I won't spoil his fun any further....yet.

I suspect the same thing ;D

 

[icehorse]

I don't understand what you mean by progressive.
I only know that in Europe being progressive means to promote secular, egalitarian societies where all cultures coexist pacifically, and all people identify with the same values based upon the respect of fundamental human rights.
Juridic relativism is medieval stuff.

I think we should NOT bundle secular and egalitarian together. IMO, one is a good idea and the other is a horrible idea.

 

[icehorse]

In response (more or less) to: @Revoltingest @Quintessence @Nakosis @chickenranch @YmirGF @Kuzcotopia and others:

I agree that the ideas I polled on do not represent the total breadth of progressive ideas. I thought I implied that in the OP but I suppose I could have been clearer. I also agree with those who said my list seemed to be heavy on social justice ideas - that was as intended.

To me, all of the ideas in the poll are controversial, and I'm just trying to get a sense of whether any of them are debate-worthy. So for example, if no one thought that speech codes were a good idea, then it would seem pointless to start a debate concerning speech codes.

But it would seem from the polling results so far, that each and every one of the these ideas has enough support, that a good debate on the topic could be created.

 

[Revoltingest]

In response (more or less) to: @Revoltingest @Quintessence @Nakosis @chickenranch @YmirGF @Kuzcotopia and others:

I agree that the ideas I polled on do not represent the total breadth of progressive ideas. I thought I implied that in the OP but I suppose I could have been clearer. I also agree with those who said my list seemed to be heavy on social justice ideas - that was as intended.

To me, all of the ideas in the poll are controversial, and I'm just trying to get a sense of whether any of them are debate-worthy. So for example, if no one thought that speech codes were a good idea, then it would seem pointless to start a debate concerning speech codes.

But it would seem from the polling results so far, that each and every one of the these ideas has enough support, that a good debate on the topic could be created.

Dang....I thought you were creating a poll where a high score
is on the surface "progressive", but in reality is authoritarian.
Once again, my brain failed me.

 

[icehorse]

Dang....I thought you were creating a poll where a high score
is on the surface "progressive", but in reality is authoritarian.
Once again, my brain failed me.

well actually there might be a lot of truth to that conclusion!

 

[Estro Felino]

I think we should NOT bundle secular and egalitarian together. IMO, one is a good idea and the other is a horrible idea.

As I'm from Europe, I shouldn't have replied...I am sorry. This poll exclusively focuses on the political and social issues in the US.
In my country, for example we have never had "limitations of Freedom of speech", and the concept of PC talk is totally alien to our culture, but we do value egalitarianism.

 

[Quintessence]

I didn't really know what these "speech codes" were. We don't have them at the university I work for, so I'm not familiar with the idea. The closest thing to a "speech code" I'm familiar with are the strict rules against plagiarism.

 

[gnomon]

I rejected all of them.

So if that makes me a bigot........I would rather be the liberal bigot that I am than check off on that bull**** list.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Dang....I thought you were creating a poll where a high score
is on the surface "progressive", but in reality is authoritarian.
Once again, my brain failed me.

Imo authoritarians wouldn't say all cultures deserve equal respect because they are attempting to set themselves up as a superior culture.

However, it is actually one of the few I would say no on because I believe 'no culture merits respect'. I think it plays into the very identity politics anti-sjw folk often rail against. Too much treating culture as a monolith and too little addessing individual subjects in an 'us vs them' kinda way.
Same with saying something like x religion deserves more respect than y religion.

 

[Revoltingest]

Imo authoritarians wouldn't say all cultures deserve equal respect because they are attempting to set themselves up as a superior culture.

In the spirit of Kurt Vonnegut, I can imagine a brutally enforced belief in cultural equality.

 

[icehorse]

Imo authoritarians wouldn't say all cultures deserve equal respect because they are attempting to set themselves up as a superior culture.

However, it is actually one of the few I would say no on because I believe 'no culture merits respect'. I think it plays into the very identity politics anti-sjw folk often rail against. Too much treating culture as a monolith and too little addessing individual subjects in an 'us vs them' kinda way.
Same with saying something like x religion deserves more respect than y religion.

(Until someone let's me know the correct label I'll use SJW...)

It strikes me that the SJW faction is all about identity politics and not at all about individuals. For example intersectionality is all about classifying people based on external factors, and not at all on individual merit.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

In the spirit of Kurt Vonnegut, I can imagine a brutally enforced belief in cultural equality.

From my reading of Harrison Bergeron, it was an authoritarian removal of merit based society to an extreme. But they still claimed cultural superiority and violently opposed any new system. 'We are better than them.'
As cautionary tales go, it's not too different from an opposite story where merit is the only rule that matters and whomever is deemed weak is pushed to the side. Either as a ablist/eugenics allegory like in Gattaca or an extreme venture capitalist allegory like in Bioshock.
Moderation seems to be key.

 

[Revoltingest]

From my reading of Harrison Bergeron, it was an authoritarian removal of merit based society to an extreme. But they still claimed cultural superiority and violently opposed any new system. 'We are better than them.'
As cautionary tales go, it's not too different from an opposite story where merit is the only rule that matters and whomever is deemed weak is pushed to the side. Either as a ablist/eugenics allegory like in Gattaca or an extreme venture capitalist allegory like in Bioshock.
Moderation seems to be key.

Let's not torture the poor analog.
Consider the idea that all people were equal
could be extended to all cultures being equal.
(Some of them might have to wear weights
around their necks, eh?)

 

[osgart]

I thought I was progressive, but I don't subscribe to any of the poll options.

All I know is I am not conservative whatsoever.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I checked all except for 3.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

(Until someone let's me know the correct label I'll use SJW...)

It strikes me that the SJW faction is all about identity politics and not at all about individuals. For example intersectionality is all about classifying people based on external factors, and not at all on individual merit.

Intersectionality is about individuality, because individuals within a group have different advantages and disadvatages depending on a wide variety of factors which play into their individual experience. As a result, two people from any group will have different factors affecting their experience and how they're viewed as a culture. Intersectionaloty attempts to explore that interplay and reduce generalization, not increase it.
As a result it's both vague and dynamic (welcome to social studied) And often gets oversimplified to being about race, class and sexuality as they are some of the most divisive hot buttons and it's an easy example to show a situation of advantage or disadvantage based on one factor. But no two gay people will have the same advantage or disadvantage according to intersectionality.

Treating all of one religion as a monolith, though, that would be identity politics. The notion of US being number one by nationionalists is identity politics. Crony politics is (literally) identity politics. Western vs Eastern culturalism is identity politics.