How many people really know what "Progressive Politics" is all about ? The person that wrote this is like Fred on steroids but still gets the basics clear enough for even me to comprehend.
The human mind is a product of multiple complementary impulses. Most relevant to this discussion is the fact that human beings need to be separate, autonomous, independent and individual while at the same time needing to live in community with others, to love others and be loved, and to function interdependently. A competent human mind attempts to find a balance between these two impulses which are mutually exclusive but also both necessary.
The progressive argument has been that as a nation, we have become too selfish, too individual. The solution of Progressives, however, is to make the equal and opposite error. They emphasize the collective while doing violence to the individual.
Politics has become populated by legalistic thinking. Politicians are accustommed to thinking in adversarial terms. Consequently, they frame problems as a choice between opposites when, in reality, there is no choice but rather a necessary balance between complements. So the nation is torn between its founding principles of individuality, individual freedom, individual responsibility and the complementary impulses of collective responsibility and the sacrifice of individuality for the common good.
What we are experiencing is a political action by Progressives who (being generous here) may have recognized an over-balance toward individuality in our political life and are now viewing the very opposite as the ultimate solution. Because they think in terms of opposites, they fail to see that in their idealism, they are throwing the baby (individuality) out with the bathwater (over-balance).
And what evidence do I have for believing that Progressives are pushing this new political agenda? My answer is, there is lots of data that supports the abolition of individual differences in favor of the commonality of all people.
Immigration: the emphasis of the left is that borders are imaginary lines that separate people and consequently can be ignored. There is no such thing as illegal immigration because there is no such thing as a national border that arbitrarily separates one group of people from another. We can see the abolition of borders not only between the United States and Mexico but also as Central Americans cross Mexican borders and freely enter the United States. We have also seen the dissolution of borders throughout all of Europe as a result of the formation of the European Union.
Gender: Here is where the Caitlyn Jenner matter becomes part of the larger issue of breaking down borders or "arbitrary" differences. Progressives would have us believe that there is little or no difference between males and females and that regardless of what one's anatomy and genetics dictate, the human mind can vanquish such differences and people are male or female depending on what they feel like.
Race: the latest issue put forth by Progressives is that race is now a social construct. Once again individual differences are eradicated in favor of the notion that all people are the same and can simply alter reality through the use of imagination.
Marriage, after thousands of years of being primarily between a man and a woman can now be between men and between women because it is not gender that matter but love. The distinction between men and women no longer exists. The issue is that people are people and differences are arbitrary and irrelevant. Since there are no boundaries to the imagination there should be no boundaries anywhere. Everyone can do what they want. It sounds like complete individuality where one is free to do whatever one wants to do but that is an adolescents notion of freedom. Adults realize that freedom is constrained by reality and only in the imagination does total and complete freedom exist unconstrained.
Religion: Religions that differentiate themselves because of their beliefs, whether that be Christianity or Islam, are being characterized as inappropriate not based on the values and beliefs that they espouse but simply because they differentiate themselves from those who do not share their beliefs. All beliefs should be the same and should not separate people from each other. You will read over and over again from Progressives that religion is a major cause of wars between people. Unfortunately Progressives fail to realize that it is the notion that all people should share the same religion, the eradication of individualism, that is the cause of wars. And that holds true for the secular religion of Statism.
Wealth and Money: for Progressives, the great unequalizer, the great divider is wealth. Socialism and Communism spring from this notion that differences in wealth cause problems between people so the State should manage the distribution of wealth among the people in an effort to equalize it and do away with individual differences.
It has been my observation that the battle between individualism and collectivism is not restricted to a battle between Democrats and Republicans because there are, indeed, Republicans who lean toward the collectivist mentality when they support uniform education policies dictated by the state or relatively open borders. And there are Democrats who are somewhat unsettled by the attacks on religious beliefs and income redistribution.
One of the fundamental ways that America has changed over most of our lifetimes is that in our past, political individuality was balanced by religious concern for each other. Consequently, there was a fundamental balance between the individual and the community. Slowly, religion has begun to lose its influence in America, and as a result, it is the State that seeks to redress the imbalance. Unfortunately, activists like our president do not think in terms of balancing complementary ideals but in choosing what they believe to be the "right" course. And, they are now choosing collectivism over individuality.
So for older Americans who are accustomed to a world in which politics and religion balance each other to achieve the complementarity so necessary for a healthy society, we see that something is wrong. But we assume the correctness of political individuality and are confused when a President of the United States does not share that fundamental value. We take it so much for granted that we do not notice that it is precisely that fundamental change from individualism to collectivism that Progressives intended. Consequently, we do not think of their actions, all of which are framed as concern for others, in terms of the extent to which they are destroying the fundamental assumption of individualism.
Now, I am fully aware that Progressives will argue with the thesis I am putting forward here. They will say that letting people choose their gender, letting people choose their race, letting people cross any national border, doing away with religious differences: all of it, they will argue, is, in fact, allowing everyone to be whatever they want to be and consequently is the very height of individuality. It is a difficult argument to fight. But there is one ground upon which their arguments fail. You see, they believe that the world is a purely subjective place, that there is no reality except subjective reality. They believe that individuality is expressing whatever you believe to be true and that there is no absolute truth. But this is not individuality. It is insanity. True individuality must be tempered by interaction with reality. There are absolute realities. One's genetics are, indeed, one's genetics. There IS such a thing as a male and a female. There is such a thing as individual differences between people. There are events that shape and effect people differently no matter how much the State tries to equalize it all. Differences exist, they are real, and there is no individuality without the recognition of the effect of the real world on a person and that person's effect on the real world. We do not live only in the world of what we imagine to be true. We do not live only in a world of what we feel or think. We live in a world that is real and has real consequences that effect each and every one of us regardless of how much the State attempts to control those effects. The reality is that the more one attempts to suppress the impulse toward autonomy, independence and freedom from coercion, the stronger those impulses grow. The reason all States that over-emphasize collectivism ultimately fail is because socialism, fascism, communism all must ultimately rely upon military and police power to control the rising of the impulse toward independence that they are attempting to suppress. That is a reality. And it is quite the opposite of the imagined world of Progressives who believe the words of the following song because they live in denial of the fact that there is such a reality.
The song is "imagine" because the world it imagines can only exist in a drug hazed imagination.
The human mind is a product of multiple complementary impulses. Most relevant to this discussion is the fact that human beings need to be separate, autonomous, independent and individual while at the same time needing to live in community with others, to love others and be loved, and to function interdependently. A competent human mind attempts to find a balance between these two impulses which are mutually exclusive but also both necessary.
The progressive argument has been that as a nation, we have become too selfish, too individual. The solution of Progressives, however, is to make the equal and opposite error. They emphasize the collective while doing violence to the individual.
Politics has become populated by legalistic thinking. Politicians are accustommed to thinking in adversarial terms. Consequently, they frame problems as a choice between opposites when, in reality, there is no choice but rather a necessary balance between complements. So the nation is torn between its founding principles of individuality, individual freedom, individual responsibility and the complementary impulses of collective responsibility and the sacrifice of individuality for the common good.
What we are experiencing is a political action by Progressives who (being generous here) may have recognized an over-balance toward individuality in our political life and are now viewing the very opposite as the ultimate solution. Because they think in terms of opposites, they fail to see that in their idealism, they are throwing the baby (individuality) out with the bathwater (over-balance).
And what evidence do I have for believing that Progressives are pushing this new political agenda? My answer is, there is lots of data that supports the abolition of individual differences in favor of the commonality of all people.
Immigration: the emphasis of the left is that borders are imaginary lines that separate people and consequently can be ignored. There is no such thing as illegal immigration because there is no such thing as a national border that arbitrarily separates one group of people from another. We can see the abolition of borders not only between the United States and Mexico but also as Central Americans cross Mexican borders and freely enter the United States. We have also seen the dissolution of borders throughout all of Europe as a result of the formation of the European Union.
Gender: Here is where the Caitlyn Jenner matter becomes part of the larger issue of breaking down borders or "arbitrary" differences. Progressives would have us believe that there is little or no difference between males and females and that regardless of what one's anatomy and genetics dictate, the human mind can vanquish such differences and people are male or female depending on what they feel like.
Race: the latest issue put forth by Progressives is that race is now a social construct. Once again individual differences are eradicated in favor of the notion that all people are the same and can simply alter reality through the use of imagination.
Marriage, after thousands of years of being primarily between a man and a woman can now be between men and between women because it is not gender that matter but love. The distinction between men and women no longer exists. The issue is that people are people and differences are arbitrary and irrelevant. Since there are no boundaries to the imagination there should be no boundaries anywhere. Everyone can do what they want. It sounds like complete individuality where one is free to do whatever one wants to do but that is an adolescents notion of freedom. Adults realize that freedom is constrained by reality and only in the imagination does total and complete freedom exist unconstrained.
Religion: Religions that differentiate themselves because of their beliefs, whether that be Christianity or Islam, are being characterized as inappropriate not based on the values and beliefs that they espouse but simply because they differentiate themselves from those who do not share their beliefs. All beliefs should be the same and should not separate people from each other. You will read over and over again from Progressives that religion is a major cause of wars between people. Unfortunately Progressives fail to realize that it is the notion that all people should share the same religion, the eradication of individualism, that is the cause of wars. And that holds true for the secular religion of Statism.
Wealth and Money: for Progressives, the great unequalizer, the great divider is wealth. Socialism and Communism spring from this notion that differences in wealth cause problems between people so the State should manage the distribution of wealth among the people in an effort to equalize it and do away with individual differences.
It has been my observation that the battle between individualism and collectivism is not restricted to a battle between Democrats and Republicans because there are, indeed, Republicans who lean toward the collectivist mentality when they support uniform education policies dictated by the state or relatively open borders. And there are Democrats who are somewhat unsettled by the attacks on religious beliefs and income redistribution.
One of the fundamental ways that America has changed over most of our lifetimes is that in our past, political individuality was balanced by religious concern for each other. Consequently, there was a fundamental balance between the individual and the community. Slowly, religion has begun to lose its influence in America, and as a result, it is the State that seeks to redress the imbalance. Unfortunately, activists like our president do not think in terms of balancing complementary ideals but in choosing what they believe to be the "right" course. And, they are now choosing collectivism over individuality.
So for older Americans who are accustomed to a world in which politics and religion balance each other to achieve the complementarity so necessary for a healthy society, we see that something is wrong. But we assume the correctness of political individuality and are confused when a President of the United States does not share that fundamental value. We take it so much for granted that we do not notice that it is precisely that fundamental change from individualism to collectivism that Progressives intended. Consequently, we do not think of their actions, all of which are framed as concern for others, in terms of the extent to which they are destroying the fundamental assumption of individualism.
Now, I am fully aware that Progressives will argue with the thesis I am putting forward here. They will say that letting people choose their gender, letting people choose their race, letting people cross any national border, doing away with religious differences: all of it, they will argue, is, in fact, allowing everyone to be whatever they want to be and consequently is the very height of individuality. It is a difficult argument to fight. But there is one ground upon which their arguments fail. You see, they believe that the world is a purely subjective place, that there is no reality except subjective reality. They believe that individuality is expressing whatever you believe to be true and that there is no absolute truth. But this is not individuality. It is insanity. True individuality must be tempered by interaction with reality. There are absolute realities. One's genetics are, indeed, one's genetics. There IS such a thing as a male and a female. There is such a thing as individual differences between people. There are events that shape and effect people differently no matter how much the State tries to equalize it all. Differences exist, they are real, and there is no individuality without the recognition of the effect of the real world on a person and that person's effect on the real world. We do not live only in the world of what we imagine to be true. We do not live only in a world of what we feel or think. We live in a world that is real and has real consequences that effect each and every one of us regardless of how much the State attempts to control those effects. The reality is that the more one attempts to suppress the impulse toward autonomy, independence and freedom from coercion, the stronger those impulses grow. The reason all States that over-emphasize collectivism ultimately fail is because socialism, fascism, communism all must ultimately rely upon military and police power to control the rising of the impulse toward independence that they are attempting to suppress. That is a reality. And it is quite the opposite of the imagined world of Progressives who believe the words of the following song because they live in denial of the fact that there is such a reality.
The song is "imagine" because the world it imagines can only exist in a drug hazed imagination.
