Thread #18370658
Disregarding the fall of the Roman Empire, in the long-term, social progress has almost always been on a forward projectory.
What gives the conservatives and reactionaries the idea that *this time*, they'll maintain/revert progress?
Wouldn't it be better for right-wingers to recognize this and try influencing said progress to benefit the nation and its people?
9 RepliesView Thread
Showing all 9 replies.>>
>What gives the conservatives and reactionaries the idea that *this time*, they'll maintain/revert progress?
The many times they have at least temporarily succeeded.
>Wouldn't it be better for right-wingers to recognize this and try influencing said progress to benefit the nation and its people?
Right-wingers aren't loyal to any nation. It's just an excuse to maintain their own position in the hieratchy.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>18370658
Progress to where? Would HG Wells, or some other fabian of his time, say we hage progressed or not? Would a social democrat who died in 1910 look at the modern world and say oh yes evidently there's progress, the general strike must have happened? How about a liberal like Herbert Spencer, I mean we know from his later work that he was heavily disillusioned with "progress", but maybe something has changed since. Was Iranian Revolution progressive or not? By some aspects it was(Iran has one of the highest amounts of female engineers in proportion to male ones in the world for instance some people would think of it as socially progressive) by some it wasn't(self explanatory), it's really convoluted. So how does that fit in in your framework?
People talk about concepts like progress but what they actually mean is "do what I want to do". They may have rational reasoning for why they want to do it(just because something is rational doesn't mean it's true, the opposite is also the case), but they talk about it as if a foregone conclusion that doing what they want is the way forward - good rhetorics, but that's not what this board is for.
>>
>>
HISTORY DOES NOT PROGRESS.
>>
>>18370658
Changes in social orders are pretty much always a results of changes in technology. To assume that "social progress" will keep advancing infinitely into the future is to assume that technology will keep advancing infinitely - which granted, there are people who think that will be the case. But is it really a foregone conclusion?