Backward Progressives

"There's nothing progressive about progressivism, just as there is nothing liberal about modern liberalism," write Investor's Business Daily editors.

Progressivism. It sounds positive and uncontroversial. After all, we all want progress, don't we?

But progressivism ... is not a road to progress or any attempt to make progress. It is a return to a tribal existence in which groups fight among each other for government-distributed resources.  Progressivism dates back to the late 19th century. Its animating objective is to use the power of government to design, order, mold and control society.

Under this idea, professional politicians and master bureaucrats identify what they believe to be societal flaws and use government to "fix" them. It results in the practice of unlimited government and the supremacy of the state, which has the duty, according to progressive political scientist John Burgess, to perfect humanity.

Burgess, who rose to influence in the late 19th century, also believed the state should have "original, absolute, unlimited, universal power over the individual subject, and all associations of subjects."

To realize their goal, progressives must reject the Constitution, the Founders, individualism, God-given freedom and, in fact, God himself.  
---
The divide between progressivism and the march toward free people and markets could hardly be wider. One is a system of compulsion and threats, the other an order of voluntary associations in which individuals decide how much they want to participate.

In fact, no one has to participate at all. In a truly free society, all of us can choose for ourselves. But those who don't participate should not expect to receive benefits from those who do.

There's nothing progressive about progressivism, just as there is nothing liberal about modern liberalism. Neither promotes liberty. Both return society to a tribal status in which individuals are sacrificed to the collective. This is not the American ideal. It's something much more ancient and foul.

Read more Progressivism is a Move Backward, Not Forward.

Video: Why Progressive Institutions are Unsustainable

This fast-paced little video does a great job "outlining the differences between the classical liberalism of the Tea Parties and the progressive agenda advanced by the Occupy Wall Street movement." It's based on Richard Epstein's new book, Why Progressive Institutions are Unsustainable.



http://tinyurl.com/75smfq3%29

Obamacare an Indictment of Progressivism

The Left's Obamacare argument—in and out of court—sounds to John Hayward "like an excellent argument in favor of rejecting 'progressivism' root and branch. It contains no hint of self-determination, liberty, or the consent of the governed. The inability of Big Government to correct even its most ghastly errors is a stunning indictment of the entire liberal project..."

Beware Soft Authoritarianism

"Today's progressives cannot be viewed primarily as pragmatic Truman- or Clinton-style majoritarians," write Fred Siegel and Joe Kotkin in the City Journal. "Rather they resemble the medieval clerical class ... as dogmatic in their beliefs as the most strident evangelical minister or mullah." The see citizens as a "nation of dodos" "too dumb to thrive" without government direction. 

Soft authoritarian progressivism is at odds with democratic, pluralistic traditions and presents a growing potential for a constitutional crisis "pitting a relentless executive power against a disgruntled, alienated" nation of the "'dodos' who make up the majority of Americans ..."