BeaverFever BeaverFever:
Proc,
I don't think "progressives" want to reinstate any policies from the 60's and 70's, I think you're playing with semantics. But I think "progressive" is almost entirely defined by their social policy so you can't remove that from the equation. They may want to rekindle the progressive movement, which was popular in those days, but that's a different thing entirely. Unions and strong government are seen by some as vehicles to continue driving change, but are not a status-quo in and of themselves. Change defined as new policies that aim to improve society in my last post. Even on the economic front, where Progressives think that we've gone down the wrong road, it doesn't mean they want to go back to the beginning, most simply think we should have gone down a different road altogether. Unions are not necessarily the same as "progressives". Some Unions are not political at all and strictly focus on the terms of employment for their members. Other unions are "progressive" and advocate on a variety of social issues, from human rights and affirmative action to the environment etc.
Also, I think we have to question what you define as "the advancement of society". What does that mean to you, besides inventing new gadgets? Further, I don't think we can say "all entrepreneurs" are for anything. Most entrepreneurs are not out there advancing anything, theyre just running a restaurant chain or an internet porn site or some other providing some other mundane good or service. These people likely don't have any lofty social ideals or goals beyond being their own boss and making money. Even in the tech sector, where there are plenty of entreprenuers with revolutionary dreams, they may be interested in techonological advancement, but that necesarily doens't mean social advancement. I mean, they may not necessarily be concerned with creating a more equal society, they're more likely interested in selling expensive tech to government, corporations and affluent people, who use it to ENTRENCH the status quo (i.e. their continued power and influence) rather than reform it.
I think you paint with too broad a brush my friend.
I think you resolved the difference between the ROC and Quebec. Most of what you said about unions being "modernized" is not what we see here in Quebec. The government is so big that if they try to do something about the public sector, thousands of people will paralyze the streets and the government will bend. Statu quo.
CKA Uber 
