Up here in Canada there used to be a thing called “Progressive Conservatives”. Fiscally Conservative, but socially fairly liberal. “We need to keep spending down, etc… but we still need to build hospitals, maintain healthcare, etc…”
The modern hard-C Conservative party drove them out because a hard-right, Alberta asshole with nothing more than a bachelor of Arts, named Preston fucking Manning merged his “reform” party with the Progressive Conservatives and steered them hard into the “let’s give all the money to the oil and gas sector and let them trickle it down to the peasants as they see fit.”
Ironically, the Progressive Conservatives that didn’t like that, basically all went to the Liberals, who shifted a little bit more to the centre as a result.
I’m assuming that other countries must have a similar group of “progressive” conservatives of some ilk. Ones that are educated and intelligent enough to have empathy, but skew conservative fiscally.
Niether concepts nor humans are monolithic things. It’s possible to be conservative in some areas of your life (finance, relationships, etc…) but progressive in others (equal rights, healthcare, etc…)
This notion that all conservatives are hard-C conservatives in every facet of their life, and all progressives are radical leftists in every area of their life, is frankly stupid and a major contributor to the polarization that we see all around us.
The reality is that with the exception (edited for spelling error) of maybe 5% of crazy people on either side (far right or far left) the VAST majority of us are a mixture of conservative and progressive opinions depending on the particular issue we’re talking about.
Thinking otherwise is frankly not helpful. But as I said, you’re welcome to your opinion.
Military intelligence is an oxymoron but there are plenty of smart people in the military. It is an oxymoron whether you admit it or not. I was just pointing that out.
Furthermore your definitions are very sus. An extreme progressive has nothing to do with leftist ideology. Progressives believe in using evidence to change policy to improve society.
Military and Intelligence are nouns. So they are comparable things and can therefore be oxymoronic to one another.
Progressive and Conservative are adjectives and can only be oxymoronic if they’re describing the same thing.
They’re only function is to describe the noun that comes after them. In some cases, that is an unspoken noun, as is the case when someone describes themselves as “Progressive Conservative”. Really, what they’re saying is they are “Socially Progressive Fiscally Conservative”.
But that has trouble fitting on a lawn sign.
If they say “Socially progressive and Socially conservative” THAT’S an oxymoron. But as long as those two adjectives are describing different concepts (fiscal and social), they have nothing to do with each other and therefore not an oxymoron, whether you admit it or not.
If you want to go an a pedantic well actually battle royale in regards to the english language and proper nomenclature, bring receipts.
Military, Intelligence, Progressive, and Conservative are all nouns. Not sure where you are going with this. I think what you mean is these words can be a noun adjunct.
I totally get everyone is on a spectrum. Thank you for pointing that out.
When someone says they are a progressive conservative what they mean is they are a conservative who is embarrassed by the garbage conservatives push out. They are not progressive because a progressive is the opposite of a conservative.
Progressive want change, conservatives do not. So you are essentially saying you are someone who doesn’t want change that wants change. It is nonsensical.
Please stop it with pretending you have English language mastery.
Not in the context in which we’re discussing, they’re not.
The Liberal Party of Canada (not “The Party of Liberals”)
The Conservative Party of Canada (not “The Party of Conservatives”)
The New Democratic Party of Canada (not “The Party of New Democrats”)
and then back in the early 90’s,
The Progressive Conservative Party of Canada (not “The Party of Progressive Conservatives”…which, FYI…THAT would be the oxymoron by definition that you are trying to argue.)
In the context of party names, which is precisely what we are discussing, these words are adjectives.
Which brings me all the way back around to “The Socially Progressive Fiscally Conservative Party of Canada” being too long to fit on a sign, and so it’s shortened to just Progressive Conservative. Which YOU seem to think means that Progressive is being used as an adjective for Conservative, which yes…WOULD be an oxymoron if that was how the words were used in the party name.
But…they’re…not… They are two adjectives describing two separate things (Fiscal policy & social policy)
You want to talk about English competency? How is the difference between adjective and noun and when to use each so difficult for you to grasp?
Good lord. I’m done. I tried being respectful, but you’re beyond hopeless.
Up here in Canada there used to be a thing called “Progressive Conservatives”. Fiscally Conservative, but socially fairly liberal. “We need to keep spending down, etc… but we still need to build hospitals, maintain healthcare, etc…”
The modern hard-C Conservative party drove them out because a hard-right, Alberta asshole with nothing more than a bachelor of Arts, named Preston fucking Manning merged his “reform” party with the Progressive Conservatives and steered them hard into the “let’s give all the money to the oil and gas sector and let them trickle it down to the peasants as they see fit.”
Ironically, the Progressive Conservatives that didn’t like that, basically all went to the Liberals, who shifted a little bit more to the centre as a result.
I’m assuming that other countries must have a similar group of “progressive” conservatives of some ilk. Ones that are educated and intelligent enough to have empathy, but skew conservative fiscally.
Progressive conservatives is an oxymoron.
It is classic doublethink nonsense.
Respectfully disagree. But you’re welcome to your opinion.
About what, that spamming two polar opposite concepts together isn’t an oxymoron?
That isn’t an opinion, that is a definition. The opposite of Progressive is Conservative.
Niether concepts nor humans are monolithic things. It’s possible to be conservative in some areas of your life (finance, relationships, etc…) but progressive in others (equal rights, healthcare, etc…)
This notion that all conservatives are hard-C conservatives in every facet of their life, and all progressives are radical leftists in every area of their life, is frankly stupid and a major contributor to the polarization that we see all around us.
The reality is that with the exception (edited for spelling error) of maybe 5% of crazy people on either side (far right or far left) the VAST majority of us are a mixture of conservative and progressive opinions depending on the particular issue we’re talking about.
Thinking otherwise is frankly not helpful. But as I said, you’re welcome to your opinion.
Military intelligence is an oxymoron but there are plenty of smart people in the military. It is an oxymoron whether you admit it or not. I was just pointing that out.
Furthermore your definitions are very sus. An extreme progressive has nothing to do with leftist ideology. Progressives believe in using evidence to change policy to improve society.
Military and Intelligence are nouns. So they are comparable things and can therefore be oxymoronic to one another.
Progressive and Conservative are adjectives and can only be oxymoronic if they’re describing the same thing.
They’re only function is to describe the noun that comes after them. In some cases, that is an unspoken noun, as is the case when someone describes themselves as “Progressive Conservative”. Really, what they’re saying is they are “Socially Progressive Fiscally Conservative”.
But that has trouble fitting on a lawn sign.
If they say “Socially progressive and Socially conservative” THAT’S an oxymoron. But as long as those two adjectives are describing different concepts (fiscal and social), they have nothing to do with each other and therefore not an oxymoron, whether you admit it or not.
If you want to go an a pedantic well actually battle royale in regards to the english language and proper nomenclature, bring receipts.
Military, Intelligence, Progressive, and Conservative are all nouns. Not sure where you are going with this. I think what you mean is these words can be a noun adjunct.
I totally get everyone is on a spectrum. Thank you for pointing that out.
When someone says they are a progressive conservative what they mean is they are a conservative who is embarrassed by the garbage conservatives push out. They are not progressive because a progressive is the opposite of a conservative.
Progressive want change, conservatives do not. So you are essentially saying you are someone who doesn’t want change that wants change. It is nonsensical.
Please stop it with pretending you have English language mastery.
Not in the context in which we’re discussing, they’re not.
and then back in the early 90’s,
In the context of party names, which is precisely what we are discussing, these words are adjectives.
Which brings me all the way back around to “The Socially Progressive Fiscally Conservative Party of Canada” being too long to fit on a sign, and so it’s shortened to just Progressive Conservative. Which YOU seem to think means that Progressive is being used as an adjective for Conservative, which yes…WOULD be an oxymoron if that was how the words were used in the party name.
But…they’re…not… They are two adjectives describing two separate things (Fiscal policy & social policy)
You want to talk about English competency? How is the difference between adjective and noun and when to use each so difficult for you to grasp?
Good lord. I’m done. I tried being respectful, but you’re beyond hopeless.
Its not the people in the military but the processes that bring about all the stupidity.