The Old Progressives Versus Today’s Progressives (First in a Series)

Today, progressiveism lies in the hearts of many people (including mine). It is mainly because liberalists accepted this name as a way to escape the stench of liberalism from the 1960s. This is a clever way of tying yourself to older moments in America's history - progressive era. That word is "progress", and no one really opposes the progress understood by common sense.

But is today's "progressive" really loyal to the old progressive tradition they claim? As the answer is not so clear, I will start a short power line series on this issue. In a sense, the answer is definitely yes. Think about two in particular. The impulse to centralize the political solution (which means bigger federal government) and the indifference and contempt for the constitution and our founder's principle.

But from another point of view, progressiveists of today stand out from the progressiveists 100 years ago. As we are approaching the election season in 2012, let's think about two things. Teddy Roosevelt and his "Bull Bulls" progressive party apparently regard themselves as a fort for socialism, TR and other major progressive parties reject class conflict language. Today's most progressive people are invisible socialists who regard class conflict as central organizational principle.

Secondly, as Sid Milisis pointed out in his exquisite book on the 1912 elections, the progressive movement and the TR party was filled with the spirit of the Protestant Evangelical Christianity of 1912. Conference singers shake for Christian hymns, including "Christian soldiers in the front". . The words of today's Democratic convention will arrest you; there is no group deviating from the Protestant evangelical Christian than today's progressive agenda. William Jennings Brian would say "Joe Lieberman" earlier than the Democratic Party if he is still alive today.

For a very simple reason today's revolution is not gradual but retrograde. What will they be like? The only option that is offered is to retreat instead of retreat instead of backwards. There are no agendas, plans, ideas, actions on how to advance the circle of progress - just to pull it back. Progressive vision, leadership, values, agenda, powerful, comprehensive, resonating, moving, inspiring, courageous, geek that is forgotten about tax statistics, not millions of failures totally fail To an amazing degree to achieve. As extreme marginal rights destroy everything, can you tell the center, the left wing or a reasonable politician who has a foresighted agenda and is fully rebuilding everything? How to truly rebuild a broad and large plan of broken society, economy, politics, cities, towns and livelihoods? Can not

But is today's "progressive" really loyal to the old progressive tradition they claim? As the answer is not so clear, I will start a short power line series on this issue. In a sense, the answer is definitely yes. I have two ideas in particular. The impulse to centralize political solutions (which means bigger federal government), and indifference and contempt for the constitution and our founder principle. But from another point of view, progressiveists of today stand out from the progressiveists 100 years ago. As we are approaching the election season in 2012, let's think about two things. Teddy Roosevelt and his "Bull Bulls" progressive party apparently regard themselves as a fort for socialism, TR and other major progressive parties reject class conflict language. The most progressive people today are invisible socialists, thinking of class conflict as the central organizational principle.