Herein lies the essential difference between progressives and conservatives, at least in Western philosophy: it's as old as ancient Greece, the dispute between Plato and Aristotle.
Plato thought the best society was built from the top down, with well-educated Guardians telling the schlubs, meaning the rest of us, ("lumpenproletariat," the Marxists would say) what to do, and in return be taken care of.
Aristotle thought the best society was built from the bottom up, with everyone educated in virtue, and authority balanced between the demos and the oligos, essentially the basis for the British Commons and Lords, or the original US House and Senate.
Progressives like Plato's politics, because they say they care about the people, but they don't trust the people. Conservatives like Aristotle's politics, because they also say they care about the people, but they show it, not by handouts, but by training in virtue, and then trusting the people.
The American amendment to Aristotle is the Founders' belief that virtue comes, not simply by practicing virtuous habits, but by relying on God's grace. That is why, among other reasons, Franklin defined humility as imitating Jesus and Socrates, because without Socrates there is no political basis for training people in virtue, and without Jesus there is no power (and remember, in Greek "virtue" is arete, meaning the power to do good) to overcome sin and replace it with virtue.
Great post. Thank you.
Actually, no. The lumpenproletariat was a term invented by Marx to describe what we would call the underclass, the marginalized, the criminals, the homeless, bums and vagrants who would never be able to develop class consciousness. "The rest if us" would be the bourgeoisie, marked by Marx for destruction. Hence Obama's war on the middle class.