The Progressive Paradigm

Watching the commentary in the political arena, there appears to be a disconnect in the direct analysis of the true ideology of the progressive left. How can this be? They attack each other with the vociferousness and vitriolic fervor of combatants in a verbal life or death struggle.

I contend it is a battlefield where the observer is watching an illusory confrontation, where the perception of the adversaries are being sold to the audience by a media that seeks to give one side an advantage of perception. It is often painted as a battle between conservative and liberal ideals, and that is the deception. The real battle is for socio-economic ideological supremacy. It is a struggle that has been obfuscated by litanies of high sounding verbal surgery, creating terminology to frame issues in palatable verbiage that the public will swallow more easily (i.e. universal healthcare instead of socialized medicine). Hidden behind the chimerical façade is the real battle for the future of our society and country, capitalism versus socialism, individual freedom versus collective security.

The first illusion lies in the attempt to equate liberalism and the progressive left as synonymous. Nothing could be further from the truth. In most of Europe, liberalism is considered to be on the right side of the political spectrum. Here in the United States, the left has bastardized and abducted the word and it’s ideals. Simple research reveals that the foundational tenets of liberalism are individual economic and social freedom, not the collective or communal good espoused by the progressive left. Liberalism believes in smaller government and in the individual as the primary motivator of change, the progressive left believes in using government and government control as a force for change. Liberalism is open minded to change, which party is seeking change and which is defending the status quo ?

The second, and most venal, illusion is the imposition of political correctness in the name of tolerance. This is a creation of the progressive left, a means of thought control that actually promulgates that which it claims to defeat, intolerance. One only need to watch current events, specifically the coverage of Colorado University pseudo-professor Ward Churchill (he has no PhD) and Harvard University president, Larry Summers, to see the double standard evoked by the PC champions of the left. Without delving into the details of both, the defense of Churchill’s free speech rights are in stark contrast to the vehement attack on Summers.

First, let’s take the case of Larry Summers. Because Summers dared to speak out on a politically sensitive subject, that of intrinsic and/or innate differences between men and women in the fields of science and engineering, he is castigated and his job and career are threatened. This subject is still open to research and has no definitive scientific conclusion that these differences do not exist. Where is the defense of academic freedom? Where is the defense of his free speech rights? Are we now going to limit free speech and the scope of knowledge and research to that which fits in politically correct parameters?

Contrastingly, Ward Churchill is defended for exercising his right of free speech, even though his premises are unfounded, and in some instances, blatantly false. He is praised for ‘making his students think’. There is no outcry about the lack of factual foundation or truth in his writings or teachings. The ACLU comes to his defense under the guise of free speech protection. The left claims to disagree with his statements, but defend his right to say it. This lays bare the hypocrisy that permeates the politically correct agenda of the progressive left. Political correctness only protects speech acceptable to the left.

The list of illusions is long, from denial of news media bias to the façade of academic freedom and claims of upholding the Constitution, yet the public is continually served a smorgasbord of meandering sophistry that conceals what the end result of the progressive agenda would be. Conservatives must shoulder some of the blame for not being more direct in confronting this assault on our way of life, our values and our country. They have not been vocal enough in challenging the subtle, yet insidious, attempts at shaping public opinion through manipulation of what information is imparted to create misrepresentations, half-truths and misperceptions.

We would be wise to recall the words of Nikita Khrushchev: “We can't expect the American People to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism.” For that is exactly where the progressive agenda of the left, whether by design or ignorance, will lead this country. Creating a society of citizens that are reliant on the government for their sustenance, a country where the Constitution is eroded to irrelevance and real freedom is only a memory.

Is there any solace in the progressive paradigm if it succeeds? At least you will have ‘social’ security and your government will take care of you from cradle to grave. One can only hope that voices will be heard that expose the progressive movement for what it really is, Neo-socialism, the new incarnation of the philosophy of Karl Marx.

A little editorializing vanity here. I really do wonder why the right and republicans do not attach the 'socialist/socialism' label to the left/democrats and especially to the progressive left ? Progressive is another of those verbally palatable terms, but it is, by definition, at least closer in accuracy. Why do we never challenge their claim to being liberal ? It is ceding a positive to them that should be challenged. To the politically unaware, and there are many, if they were to look up the definition of liberal, they would surmise that it sounds good. In their limited political interest, they then see liberal attached to the democrats, and make a choice based on false perceptions. As the conservatives are controlling political power and are in ascendency, now is the time to take command of the debate and terminology.

I offer up this proposition, it is really the conservatives and republicans that uphold the true liberal ideals of individual freedom (economic and social), smaller government and change, more then the progressives and the democrats. We need to do a better job identifying the opposition and defining their agenda. The bastardization of the term liberal is proof of Joseph Goebbels theory:

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."

Attach the accurate label of neo-socialist to the progressive left, and take away their lying claim of liberalism, and you will have delegitimized a major leg of support, one based on fraud and lies.

Hold the phone there - remember the Progressives were spawned in reaction to the Democrats. Garrison, Sanger, Cady-Stanton, Jane Adams, Roger Baldwin et al were the anti-saloon, universal suffragists, planned parenthood, abortion, free the criminals New Englander Republicans. How the hell did they get morphed into the nut-wing of my party? Yep, I'm a Freeper Democrat.

You might want to look to your own party and those on the left who have claimed the progressive label. You make the mistake of trying to equate the past with the present. It is safe to say that today's democrats are not the same democrats who gave us FDR, Truman and JFK. Vietnam changed the democrat party, making it swerve sharply to the left. Ergo, what was seen as progressive in 1920s would not be seen that way today. The only common trait is that today's leftist progressives believe in the same use of governemnt to bring about change.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.