Our 1776 Moment: Either a Liberal or Progressive America

American Greatness ^ | 1-21-2022 | Bradley A. Thayer

[Sir_Humphrey]

There are many significant moments in American history that have informed the principles of America’s tradition of liberalism, but not since the American founding have we lived in one so important. The United States is at a “1776 Moment” of ideological transformation. The American Revolution of 1776 marked a change of political ideology from constitutional monarchy to liberalism. Today, the ideological transformation is from liberalism to progressivism.

[Sir_Humphrey]

A long but fascinating read. Knowing your enemy makes it easier to argue against and ultimately thwart them.

Just note that when the author refers to "Liberalism" he is talking about 18th or 19th century "liberalism" not the current version of progressivism or leftist thought which has been re-branded as liberalism so that it's an easier sell to the American public.

[Disambiguator]

Small “l” and capital “L” liberalism are 180 degree opposites.

[Ikeon]

Tthe revelutionary war 2asnt all for one and one for all. There were a lot of people who supported the British against the colonies. Expect the same again. Their will be a lot of people who support the government.

The US civil war should have been enough proof to show waathe government will do and how men will kill others because the government says its ok.

and now come the flying monkees declaring the war of northern aggression was was justified. Because killing your own brother is ok to save them .

[Sir_Humphrey]

There are very few true liberals today and hardly any under the age of 50. I am not going to mention names because that will bring out the typical crowd who will throw out the knee jerk ad-homs but you can guess the people I mean.

Yes, it's possible for me to respectfully disagree with a true liberal because I think, though well intentioned, their ideas are downright foolish. I can't say the about progressives and leftists who control today's' Democrat party and who permeate pop culture.

[Sirius Lee]

I prefer to use the term "leftist" to describe them, as they are not liberal at all. Actually most of them are are proponents of that other leftist movement known as Fascism.

They hate the middle class/entrepreneur class, but they love big Pharma, bit tech, big corporations, and the government's use of them to suppress Christians and Conservatives.

[Disambiguator]

One of them once chastised me for telling them they just lost an argument by immediately going into ad-hominem attacks and never once addressing the actual matter at hand.

Sorry, proggies, that’s the way it is.

[Dr. Franklin]

Just note that when the author refers to "Liberalism" he is talking about 18th or 19th century "liberalism" not the current version of progressivism or leftist thought which has been re-branded as liberalism so that it's an easier sell to the American public.

FDR didn't like calling his program socialism, so he decided to rebrand it as liberalism, when it is quite the opposite from classical Liberalism.

[Jim Noble]

18th and 19th century liberalism is the cause of our present difficulties.

No liberal democracy (or republic, if you insist - Weimar was a republic) has ever defeated a bolshevik revolution of the size and scope we are dealing with at present.

This one won’t, either.

[No name given]

The left is anything but progressive. Someone needs to tell them that communism is regressive, not progressive.

[kalee]

Thanks, very worthwhile article.

[libertylover]

I can't say the about progressives and leftists who control today's' Democrat party and who permeate pop culture.

Don't forget the media. See Tagline.

[Sir_Humphrey]

Respectfully disagree. Classical Liberalism, (not modern liberalism) is our only hope to stifle the shite show rolling in from the left.

Then again I am an optimist. I am not going to throw in the towel.

[Jim Noble]

I’m not a pessimist.

I like the 1788 Constitution, and I hope it can be restored (as it was in 1865) after the danger is over.

All I’m saying is that, as in 1861, a government limited to the rules of the 1788 Constitution cannot suppress and eventually eliminate the Bolshevik rebellion and if you, or anyone else, believes classical liberalism is equal to the task, I believe you are wrong.

I hoped Trump would be a Lincoln. He was not.

[Disambiguator]

That’s another example of the left hijacking the language so they can misrepresent who and what they are (IOW, lie).

[ProgressingAmerica]

This article is pretty good and I do highly appreciate that "Liberalism" gets separated from "Progressivism" because progressives are not liberals and liberals are not progressive. But the article goes off the rails about half way through.

"Progressivism’s origins are found in the thought of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels."

The huge problem with this is that we have progressive presidents going back to Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt, and realistically, in those days for about a decade or two the GOP was in fact the progressive party.

At no time, anytime, in its history was the GOP ever a Marxist party. Does anybody want to tell me I'm wrong here? Was the GOP deeply Marxist for that time period and I missed it? I would like to hear it. I would like to review the evidence. I haven't seen it. I would like to receive the evidence.

In 1912, the actual PROGRESSIVE PARTY was formed right here in the United States. This party, again, was not a Marxist Party. These are simple, easy to verify facts that anybody can go and look for.

We as conservatives have got to get this correct. The history of progressivism and their zeal to destroy and remake America is not well served by casting a communist behind every corner. It simply looks foolish, but beyond the optics, it's factually incorrect.

[Sir_Humphrey]

You have a point from a historical perspective. However, I interpreted that sentence as saying that “progressivism” of today bastardized some of the ideals from circa 1900 progressivism into something whole unrecognizable from the original meaning. Unlike years past, the progressivism of today is incompatible within the confines of a democracy or a representative republic or whatever the nit pickers want to call it.

You know, the thing.

[wardaddy]

Such nuance is lost on people who live by talk radio and Faux

[Pelham]

“The US civil war should have been enough proof to show waathe government will do and how men will kill others because the government says its ok.”

A point that gets lost in our national mythology. Using gov’t to kill opponents has a long history on the Left and the Radical Republicans of 1861 were just that. Karl Marx was an ardent fan of the war and the Radicals.

[Pelham]

“There are very few true liberals today and hardly any under the age of 50”

The Democratic Party purged the last of them about the time that Obama and the hard left seized control.

[ProgressingAmerica]

I know that's a fashionable viewpoint, but I don't think that that sieve can hold any water either.

I think it's insulting whenever some journalist tells me that so and so democrat is a moderate. There are no moderates. Those are progressives.

The titles of nobility that they give to themselves are probably what get people messed up sometimes. The socialist members of congress try to hide themselves under the fashionable label of progressive, but I don't know about you - I see right through that. A number of them are not progressives, they are socialists.

There's clearly a difference between the moderateprogressive democrats and the proclaimed-progressivesocialists.

Perhaps the moral of the story here is this: never trust a journalist handing out free narratives. Accepting these labels as reported is to some extent accepting a false journalist premise.