Armchair Philosophy: Progressivism Will Kill You

Isn't it a fancy turn of phrase to label oneself "progressive" when the reality is that ideology is actually repressive and stifling of the human spirit, and with it, personal liberty. I am of the firm belief progressivism is misguided and Marx-like because exactly like Marxism it seeks to address social structure with political ends. Such an effort always leads to unintended consequences. Society should be a reflection of the people and not a mosaic of guidance and forced compliance.

I am of the belief autonomous action by free men will develop naturally a set of acceptable societal parameters. Look to the US as the example. We had few "rules" other than laws to protect us from each other, but NO rules to allegedly protect us from ourselves. See the difference?

Did government, before entrenched progressivism, spend it's days and resources telling us what was hate speech? Did they address religion, other than complete individual autonomy? Did government tell us what we could or should eat? How many products manufactured before the nanny state harmed people? Probably a lot, but society and autonomous decision making addressed that issue, as it always does.

No one should confuse my mention of harmful products as any advocacy of zero regulation. Instead it was to remind readers that people will naturally through time, experience and knowledge, discover what is good or bad for them. We didn't need government to tell us the Yugo was a lousy automobile...we figured that out all on our own, no? The Hyundai was introduced at about the same time and it thrives today. Why? Because the consumer saw what worked and what did not and without government guidance to boot. See? When it's my money, my sweat and my decision, I'll almost always default to the better choice.

Progressive ideology assumes a very flawed nature of humanity, and I agree in principle that man is flawed, no doubt. But man thrived for a couple million years before progressives showed up. The greatest conflagrations of human's attempting to destroy themselves have come SINCE progressives gained the ability to influence societies. An even cursory look at history shows this to be the case. Why?

Can anyone factually demonstrate an example of progressivism that has not caused exceptional strife to someone in its seeking itself? The ends justify the means. Marx was clear about this. To make it better for the amalgam many must be pushed aside along the way.

To make the progressive Utopia personal property is devalued and denied to persons so that no one has too much more than another. Does that sound like a winning strategy? Is "sameness" a laudable end? Not to me it's not, but to one who has less than me perhaps so.

Aren't some of the major efforts of American progressives to instill anger and envy through class warfare? Pitting one class against another as if to say the only way the upper class got there was by taking what was somehow rightfully someone else's? In Europe and their monarchies there was some truth to that allegation. But does that fit a nation founded upon individual liberty and limited government? Clearly it does not. It's that stuffing a square peg in a round hole thing. It will not work, but somehow that reality is ignored by those seeking it.

For the most part, who are the progressive constituencies comprised of? Progressivism is all about cobbling together power with identity politics. It seeks to build a ruling coalition if you will by taking all the subgroups and lumping them into one big pot. To achieve this end progressives attempt to address the specific ills of each subgroup.

Are the issues of gay American's the same as black Americans? Are the issues of feminists the same as those of seeking collective bargaining? Are the end wishes of illegal immigrants the same as the redress sought by consumer advocacy groups? See my point? How can any ideology honestly seek to solve everyone's ills through such a ridiculous premise? One size does not fit all no matter how many times progressives claim it does.

Ever notice how no matter the ill, no matter the issue, no matter the group, progressivism claims to be the answer. Can you say arrogance? Can you say BS? How can any one ideal be everyone's answer? It cannot, which brings me to this point: individual autonomy, despite the denigrations that may come, does not claim to fix all problems, but merely seeks to allow each to address their own issues with their own remedies. See the difference between the American Founding and progressivism?

Only in this light can one ideology address everyone fairly, for it does not dictate individual choice...it merely provides that each soul can choose their own end in whatever legal manner they wish. See? The American Founding does not portend to be the answer to your problems but that within autonomy one can seek their own ends, provided they do not infringe upon others in so doing. It's not rocket science except to the lame brains.

In my mind the snake in Eden was named "Progressive." He lay up on a low branch and when Eve trundled over he planted the seeds of discontent. He flicked his forked tongue at her and not knowing any better, she listened to him and we can see the apocryphal results. Not that I buy that narrative as one of pure fact, but as allegory it rocks!

Which brings me to my next piece and topic - If one is against Progressive politics, does that make them "regressive?" See ya then and thanks for reading!