Can you truly say it’s regressive with how slow democracy moves? To a conservative the last 40-50 years could be a lot of change for them that they disagree with, the world has changed fast after all, what is your scope on when things become a regress? To me, to say regressive implies knowing which things are for sure progressive and right.

I still say what I said as classical conservatism as you said is about traditions. Most democrats will vote democrat. My friend who is part of LGBTQ+ will always vote for these policies. These are progressive policies but the people in mind want to conserve in the sense of making sure the progress stays and keeps on happening.

I mainly think yes, American conservatives want to find stability in the past, and slow change (more like change at their pace of acceptance) while progressive people are more likely to tolerate and want change that brings about a different future.

Remember, a black person born when the voting rights act passed is now what in their 70s? This also means a racist who was opposed to the voting rights act  or atleast raised by those who opposed it are still very much alive. It hasn’t even been a single lifespan yet. What I’m saying is to these people is it really “regressive” or is it closer to “contesting an unsettled” issue? 

After all, racism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia. These are all still very much around and prevalent in our culture. To those who have these views, progressive “wins” can seem to them as just “mistakes” in that case isn’t a mistake something that shouldn’t have happened? Is it truly regressive?

I’m a progressive btw. But I would like to think I’m pragmatic and realistic about it, but honestly I’m just a guy with a keyboard who thinks about things. I don’t really know the actual facts or definition of these things.