THE CHARACTERISTICS OF PROGRESSIVISM by T. Edwin Perry
About a month ago, I published the Five-Part Series on the Principles of Conservatism, an overview of exactly WHAT makes a person a Conservative, but what are the alternatives? If being a Conservative is a Lifestyle Choice, as I contend that it is, what makes it different from being, say, a Progressive? That’s a great question, and one I’m going to try to answer today.
Let me start by saying that being a Progressive, just like being a Conservative, has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with which Political Party you support. John McCain, the 2008 Republican Presidential Candidate, is a Self-Proclaimed Progressive, with his favorite President from history being “Teddy Roosevelt.” (Those are HIS WORDS, mind you, not mine.) Likewise, Hillary Clinton, in her bid to be the Democrat Candidate in 2008, outed herself at a Debate as being a “Modern Progressive,” in deference to being a Liberal. And, let’s be fair, being “Progressive” certainly sounds like it should be a GOOD thing, right? I mean, who doesn’t want PROGRESS?! Well, I suppose the answer to that question depends entirely on WHAT we’re “Progressing” toward.
To make these differences clear, I’m going to use an “A-B Comparison” between each of the Principles of Conservatism, which I’ve already addressed and have linked to, and the Characteristics of Progressivism. Hopefully, this comparison will help you understand the differences in making your decision to be one or the other, or perhaps even none of the above. It’s about making an INFORMED decision, and, in this time in our history, making that decision may never be more important.
First up, in deference to the Conservative Principle of PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, we have the First Characteristic of Progressivism: PUBLIC RESPONSIBILITY. Public Responsibility means that your first priority isn’t taking care of yourself and your family, but supporting your community. It assumes that individuals are inherently unable or unwilling to care for themselves, to make the appropriate choices in their lives, or to succeed on their own without the intervention of their neighbors. If individuals are unable to be Personally Responsible for their successes, they are also unable to be Personally Responsible for their failures, essentially making EVERYONE victims in need of someone else’s support.
Whereas the Second Principle of Conservatism is SMALLER GOVERNMENT, which is the natural extension of Personal Responsibility, the corresponding Characteristic of Progressivism and extension of Public Responsibility is LARGER GOVERNMENT, the exact OPPOSITE of Conservatism. If EVERYONE is a victim in need of someone else’s support, then the GOVERNMENT is the most convenient source of that support for the Public Good. Since the birth of the Progressive Movement in 1901 with the Presidency of (gasp) Teddy Roosevelt, Government has expanded through a never ending cycle of Largesse, wherein the Government serves as source of REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH rather than performing the duties assigned to it in the Constitution. (Having read the Constitution and its Amendments, I can assure you that you will find no place in the entirety of the document that gives the Government this authority.) Even today, Departments such as “Health & Human Services” and the “Department of Education” violate the very precept of Smaller Government, interfering in everything from what you can eat to what you can learn! And, as Government has grown in both size and power, so, too, has it grown in corruption, graft and expense. The larger the Government becomes, the more it costs to run it, and funding those costs brings us to the Third Characteristic.
For Conservatives, the Third Principle is LOWER TAXES, which may make you assume that the Progressive Characteristic is “Higher Taxes.” While taxes do tend to rise when Progressives are in control, the Third Characteristic is actually PROGRESSIVE TAXES. For Progressives, the idea of Public Responsibility results in a type of Socioeconomic Class Warfare, wherein the poor are poor BECAUSE the rich are rich. There’s not enough for everyone, so one person’s success must come at the cost of another person’s failure. Under the Progressive Tax System, which was brought to us by Progressive President Woodrow Wilson, the more money you make, the higher the tax rate charged to you. This type of tax system punishes success, encourages mediocrity, and hurts the overall economy. (When is the last time you were employed by a poor person?) As your income increases, your tax rate increases, and while Wilson was able to pass this type of tax system by promising that the highest tax rate would NEVER exceed 7%, rates climbed to a high of 77% DURING Wilson’s Administration, and rates have actually GONE as high as 100% for wages over $25,000 during the Administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) in World War 2! The result of this “Punishment for Success” isn’t an increase in tax revenue (higher tax rates have always DECREASED actual tax revenue) but, rather, new and creative ways for the wealthy to HIDE their assets to AVOID paying taxes! Even when top tier tax rates are at more “Reasonable” levels than those evidenced during the Wilson & Roosevelt Administrations, the wealthy always pay the “Lion’s Share” of the tax burden. In 2007, the top 1% of Wage Earners paid over 40% of all taxes collected, and the top 10% pay approximately 71% of all taxes collected. And taxes paid by the top 50% of wage earners comprise approximately 97% of all of the taxes collected. That means that the bottom 50% of wage earners paid only 3% of the total tax burden, with many of them paying either NO TAXES or actually receiving redistributive CREDITS on top of their tax withholding, increasing their income TAX FREE!!! Still, the Progressive Mantra remains to be “Tax the Rich,” or that the “Rich aren’t paying their fair share.”
The Fourth Principle of Conservatism is GREATER LIBERTIES, but for Progressives, the Characteristic is Greater Regulation. Whereas Liberties are the choices we are able to make, Regulations are restrictions on those choices, and they target everything from what we eat and what we can watch on television to where we can work and what we can learn in school! For a nation that was FOUNDED on the concept that “All Men are Created Equal” and “Endowed by their Creator” with the rights of “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness,” the very idea of Government Regulation should be repugnant, and, for Conservatives, it is! For Progressives, however, the sacrifice of Liberty and Freedom in the name of the “Public Good” is a price they are more than willing to pay…or, more to the point, have SOMEONE ELSE pay! Perhaps the most obvious example of this philosophy is Prohibition, which outlawed by Constitutional Amendment the sale and transport of ALCOHOL in the United States from 1919 until its repeal in 1933. (Prohibition, by the way, was passed under the Progressive Wilson Administration and repealed during the Great Depression under FDR to provide a new source of Tax Revenue!) Prohibition didn’t make DRINKING a crime, just the sale and transportation; therefore, the wealthy Progressive Elite’s approved the measure to the help the “Poor Common Man” avoid the dangers of alcoholism. Progressive Presidents Hoover and FDR both enjoyed drinks…when they were outside of their own country…but the “common folk” just couldn’t enjoy that Liberty! They couldn’t GET alcohol, so they couldn’t DRINK it! The rich, however, who could afford membership to “Private Clubs” and pay the price to bootleggers, who would illegally transport the alcohol, were barely even affected by Prohibition. Progressive Regulations have also been used to influence everything from Banking & Finance to Employment & Wages. Through agencies like Fannie Mae (FNMA) and Freddie Mac (FHLMC), the Government REGULATED mortgage lending to REQUIRE banks to make loans to people who were, by their own admission, unsure if they could afford the payments in the name of Social Justice! The Minimum Wage, another Progressive Idea, has never done anything but spur an increase in unemployment and higher consumer prices each and every time that the wage is raised. And don’t even get me started on the recently passed “Healthcare Reform Act” of 2010!
Finally, Conservatives rely on an Honest Belief in Something Larger than Themselves as their Fifth Principle, and this is, perhaps, where Conservatives and Progressives have the most in common. Both believe in something larger than themselves. The difference is the aspect of HONESTY! Progressives tend to have an UNDERLYING Belief in Something Larger than Themselves, which serves as their Fifth Characteristic. While a handful of individuals have the courage to identify their Progressive Motivations, such as Hillary Clinton and John McCain, most others are far more secretive about their motivations. Nancy Pelosi, who certainly falls into the Progressive Camp, has always represented herself as a “Liberal.” Governor Charlie Crist was elected in Florida as a “Conservative,” but has, throughout his tenure, proven himself to be a Progressive in both action and rhetoric. President George W. Bush was elected as a Conservative, yet subscribed to the Progressive Characteristics of increasing the size of Government and Social Spending. And President Barack Obama, who campaigned solely on a promise of “Hope and Change,” never once clarified his eventual goals for either, and has proven himself not only to be a Progressive, but motivated to accelerate the Progressive Agenda in ways not seen in this country since FDR!
Since 1901, the majority of Presidents have been Progressive, and both the economy and social structure of the United States have suffered for it. Progressive Administrations have ALWAYS led to economic downturns, unemployment, and the social collapse of the traditional family structure. The Progressive Movement has always shared more in philosophy with Socialism and, at the extreme, Communism, promoting a “Political Elite” class with little or no experience in business dictating how business should be run for the “Public Good.” Progressives have always fought for “Social Justice” over “Equal Justice,” and have always favored a “Hand Out” over a “Hand Up!”
For those of you who may read this and feel that I’ve missed the mark on Progressivism, I challenge you to correct me, right here, in the comments of this posting. So long as you keep the name calling and swearing to a respectable level, we at MaverickVoice.com encourage the debate. (You don’t even have to be a Subscriber, though we’d love for you to join!) And for those of you who didn’t understand the difference, hopefully NOW you can say that you do.
Leave a Reply