Progress Cannot Be Defined as Belonging Solely to a Specific Political Spectrum

Ok, as you said in your argument, "Liberal means all men are created equal and Conservative means all men are not created equal." Nope. That's wrong. I said that Left-Wing means all men are created equal, Right-Wing means all men are not created equal. My opponent is conflating the Left-Wing/Right-Wing spectrum with the Liberal/Conservative spectrum, a commplace mistake. Left-Wing/Right-Wing is an allusion to the French Estates General evolving out of the French Revolution. The terms "left" and "right" appeared during the French Revolution of 1789 when members of the National Assembly divided into supporters of the king to the president's right and supporters of the revolution to his left. As I established in Round 1, Left-Wing describes an outlook or specific position that accepts or supports social equality,[5] Right-Wing describes an outlook or specific position that accepts or supports social heirarchy or social inequality. [6]That is the origin and meaning of those terms. That's not a personal perspective or a Liberal perspective, that's just reporting the facts. Any person who admires the first sentence of the Declaration of Independence is by definition Left-Wing. Many conservatives define themselves as Right-Wing without investigating the meaning of the word, but you'd better believe that when Newt Gingrich or Rush Limbaugh define themselves as Right-Wing, they are perfectly cognizant of the term's history and connotation. your definition of "Conservative" and your definition of "Liberal" don't necessarily match real life Conservatives and real life Liberals in AmericaAgain, these are not my definitions, I am quoting Merriam-Webster as an objective source. Nevertheless, I would certainly agree that most Americans are not neatly pigeon-holed into Conservative/Liberal ideology. Almost every American admires the capacity of science and reason to promote social equality and at the same time upholds some traditional values or worries about the consequences of change. The political views of American citizens are far more complex and nuanced than the labels offered by American ideology.RE: abortion, LGBT rights, Intelligent Design, Ku Klux Klan Perhaps not unexpectedly, Pro has drifted away from his original argument into a general survey of American political issues. For the final round, let's remember that Pro's resolution was that the word "progress" cannot be defined as belonging to a specific political spectrum. To support his argument, Pro offered one definiton of the word progress: "movement as towards a goal." Pro then offered a variety of poltical scenarios wherein Right-Wing or Conservative movements can be seen as moving towards a goal. Pro has overlooked (and persisted in that oversight while ignoring the evidence) the fact that the word progress has more than one meaning. Some well documented, objective, persistent definitions of the word "progress" reflect a decidedly Left-Wing, Liberal agenda.A dictionary declaring what is progress and Wikipedia declaring what is progress and a bunch of "progressives" declaring what is progress don't make progress what it is.I agree that the objectivity of politicians should be challenged when it comes to defining the word "progress," although it is difficult when one political movement had so much influence on the meaning of the word. Therefore, I relied on more objective sources such as dictionaries and encyclopedias, just as Pro turned to a dictionary in Round 1. The problem with Pro's argument is that he only considered one possible definition of the word "progress" when "progress," like most English words, has multiple meanings depending on context and intent. If my opponent wishes to challenge the objectivity of Merriam-Webster or the Oxford English Dictionary, then Pro must demonstrate the ways in which those sources are unreliable and offer alternative definitions that refute the "Englightenment" definition of the word. If Pro wishes to toss out the dictionaries and encyclopedias when defining the word "progress," what definiton from what source is Pro offering in their place?The word progress originally described an official parade or tour in Middle English, descending from the latin progradi "to walk forward." The word developed in the 16th and 17th century to encompass Pro's definition, advancement, but fell out of use in England by the 18th century. In the late 18th, early 19th century, the word was revived by the thinkers of American Enlightenment (Franklin, Jefferson) to connote "the theory that advances in technology, science, and social organization can produce an improvement in the human condition." [1] The word was resurrected by American Liberals for the purposes of American Liberalism. In this later-day usage, the word progress is virtually inseperable from Liberalism.liberalism: a political and social philosophy advocating individual freedom, representational forms of government, progress and reform, and protection of civil liberties. (Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary) [2]liberalism: a political philosophy based on belief in progress (Merriam-Webster) [3]liberalism:favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs. (Dictionary.com) [4]Here's a modern analogy. Microsoft can point out that the word "google" in lowercase just means to search the internet. Microsoft can point out that the word "google" has been use for more than a century as a number (1 followed by 100 zeroes). However, Microsoft can't complain that Google acts like they invented the word, because in a very real sense they did. Common usage of the word "google" is a direct reflection of the popularity of the Google search engine, in the same way that common usage of the word "progress" is a direct reflection of the popularity of American Liberalism after the Revolutionary War. Pro can't complain that Liberals act like they invented the word "progess," because in a very real sense they did.I have demonstrated that there are multiple defnitions for the word "progress" and that one ordinary set of definitons explicity implies and is derived from the American Liberal tradition. To the extent that my opponent has only offered one definition of the word progress, a definition that is not as relevant to American politics as my definition, Pro's argument that progress cannot be defined as belonging to one side of any political spectrum stands refuted. My thesis, that some accepted definitions of the word "progress" do not apply to every degree on the political spectrum (extreme Right-Wing, for example, or radical Conservatism), stands proven.Thanks to Pro for interesting discussion. Please VOTE CON![1] http://en.wikipedia.org...[2 http://www.thefreedictionary.com...[3] http://www.merriam-webster.com...[4] http://dictionary.reference.com...[5] http://en.wikipedia.org...[6] http://en.wikipedia.org...