From Classical Liberalism To Progressive Collectivism
By: Les Carpenter III
Rational Nation USA
Today's post has been taking shape for some time. Perhaps for the better part of my adult life. Having went from a believer in the ideology of the left as a young man hoping to improve American society in his teens and early twenties, to a conservative with a strong Republican party allegiance for two decades, to the independent conservative with strong Libertarian leanings as I write this, I have given the broad scope of politics a fair shake. What has become glaringly obvious to me is the modern liberal, or progressive as they love to be called are in reality progressive collectivists.
The terminology I attach to their movement, and a movement it is indeed, is as concise and accurate a description as I can find. It simply says modern era liberalism is progressing toward collectivism and complete state control of our economy and lives. Their belief in the right of the Leviathan government to make decisions affecting our lives, thus controlling us in ways that are akin to the Bolsheviks of an earlier era.
I digress here to make a point. The progressive collectivists will argue that they are not socialists, certainly not communist, and most definitely not fascist. Of course they are wrong on all three. Collectivism is simply the belief that the good of the collective society outweighs that of the individual. Since we are all individuals, driven by natural law to work towards the achievement of our own self interest and that of our family, a strong and powerful body must be put in place to "control" and make decisions so that society as a whole will presumably benefit. This body is of course a strong all powerful central government that will seek to redistribute a societies wealth and in the process create the nanny state. Progressive collectivism... it has been at work since the turn of the twentieth century and it is at work today. Choose your variant, they all lead to less liberty.
Progressive collectivists love to paint those of us who believe in the Constitution as written, and in a smaller and less intrusive government and the inherent right of the individual to be free... accepting total responsibility for ourselves and not expecting the government to be our nanny, are somehow deluded, deranged, or irrational wing nuts. Which brings me full circle to the by line of my post.
Our nation was founded by individuals who were extremely liberal and progressive. So liberal in fact they fostered and won a revolution. A revolution that gained thirteen British colonies their independence from a Leviathan government that had no concern for the desires of its subjects. What distinguished the liberals of the eighteenth century was their belief the rights of the individual exceeded the rights of the state. Put another way the government gained it powers only by the consent of the governed. A radial and progressive shift from the belief throughout history that the people had only those rights granted them by the government, whatever form the government might be.
The Founding Fathers, and the patriots that won this countries freedom are often referenced as "Classical Liberals." The term defines what liberalism means. Which is the unwavering belief in the individual, the right of the individual to control their own lives, and a very wary eye of government in general. The classical liberal understood that government by its very nature is as an entity designed to control and thus by it's very nature is to be controlled and its scope limited.
This is in stark contrast with the modern era progressive collectivist, who in their heart of hearts firmly believe that government is an agency for good, and that it ought to be granted sweeping powers. Progressive collectivists believe the federal government's place is not only as set forth in our Constitution, but to play the role of social engineer and master of the business sector through suffocating regulation as well. Having said this I make the point here as well that businessmen have by their very own acceptance of government subsidies played into the hands of the statist government that desires to control them as well.
To illustrate classic liberalism I offer the following examples of just how far the progressive collectivists have veered away from liberal beliefs:
Thomas Jefferson...
"With all [our] blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow citizens--a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities." --Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural, 1801.
"Nor was it uninteresting to the world that an experiment should be fairly and fully made whether freedom of discussion, unaided by power, is not sufficient for the propagation and protection of truth: whether a government conducting itself in the true spirit of its constitution with zeal and purity and doing no act which it would be unwilling the whole world should witness can be written down by falsehood and defamation. The experiment has been tried; [we] have witnessed the scene; our fellow citizens have looked on, cool and collected. They saw the latent source from which these outrages proceeded; they gathered around their public functionaries, and when the Constitution called them to the decision by suffrage, they pronounced their verdict, honorable to those who had served them and consolatory to the friend of man who believes he may be intrusted with his own affairs." --Thomas Jefferson: 2nd Inaugural Address, 1805.
It is clear that Jefferson, perhaps one of the staunchest proponents of liberalism believed in the individual's ability to make proper decisions with respect to their own lives and happiness. It is equally as clear that as a classical liberal he believed government should play a limited role in the affairs and lives of the people.
Samuel Adams...
Adams, another classical liberal is essentially saying if you prefer the chains of guaranteed security and wealth over liberty and self determination you are not a countryman. Think about it. Samuel Adams was a liberal.
Thomas Paine...
As a long and violent abuse of power is generally the means of calling the right of it in question, (and in matters too which might never have been thought of, had not the sufferers been aggravated into the inquiry,) and as the king of England hath undertaken in his own right, to support the parliament in what he calls theirs, and as the good people of this country are grievously oppressed by the combination, they have an undoubted privilege to inquire into the pretensions of both, and equally to reject the usurpations of either.
In the following sheets, the author hath studiously avoided every thing which is personal among ourselves. Compliments as well as censure to individuals make no part thereof. The wise and the worthy need not the triumph of a pamphlet; and those whose sentiments are injudicious or unfriendly, will cease of themselves, unless too much pains is bestowed upon their conversion.
The cause of America is, in a great measure, the cause of all mankind. Many circumstances have, and will arise, which are not local, but universal, and through which the principles of all lovers of mankind are affected, and in the event of which, their affections are interested. The laying a country desolate with fire and sword, declaring war against the natural rights of all mankind, and extirpating the defenders thereof from the face of the earth, is the concern of every man to whom nature hath given the power of feeling; of which class, regardless of party censure, is
This is the introduction Thomas Paine's "Common Sense." From this short excerpt it is clear this classical liberal believed in the absence of a tyrannical government. The parallels of the era in which Paine penned his "Common Sense" and today are, to say the least frighteningly similar. But you won't find a modern era progressive collectivist even acknowledging Thomas Paine. It doesn't suit their false modern liberal progressive collectivist agenda.
George Washington... Our first President...
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.
Over grown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty.
Another classical liberal that understood the dangers of government and that governments are not bound by reason. It is also obvious this General understood the dangers of the military industrial complex just as a former modern day President understood the dangers and addressed it in his 1961 farewell speech to the nation. Are you listening Republicans?
This is an admittedly abbreviated commentary on the evolution from classical liberalism to the modern version of liberalism... which is in all reality progressive collectivism. I have intentionally left out convenient links and paths to additional supporting resources because it is available on the internet at the click of the mouse. Anyone who is truly interested in our history and the concept of limited government and individualism will take the time to do the research and arrive at to me, what is the obvious conclusion.
What is most troubling is the dishonesty of the "modern liberal progressive" movement (progressive collectivist) and their propensity to distort the truth that is true liberalism... Which is limited, effective, and honest government. Modern so called progressives, or liberals, stand for Leviathan and oppressive government. They are not honest enough to state that which they really are. They are statists that believe in the right of government to control rather than the rights of the individual free choice.
A word to the extremist right wing reactionaries, and you know who you are. You constitute an equally grave threat to the vision of the Founding Fathers and liberty. It is just as offensive and dishonest as the progressive collectivists attempt to control our lives and liberty. In fact you represent an equal, and just as threatening concern as the progressive collectivists. You represent the fascist element of the collective variant.
Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel.
Via: Memeorandum
Rational Nation USA
Today's post has been taking shape for some time. Perhaps for the better part of my adult life. Having went from a believer in the ideology of the left as a young man hoping to improve American society in his teens and early twenties, to a conservative with a strong Republican party allegiance for two decades, to the independent conservative with strong Libertarian leanings as I write this, I have given the broad scope of politics a fair shake. What has become glaringly obvious to me is the modern liberal, or progressive as they love to be called are in reality progressive collectivists.
The terminology I attach to their movement, and a movement it is indeed, is as concise and accurate a description as I can find. It simply says modern era liberalism is progressing toward collectivism and complete state control of our economy and lives. Their belief in the right of the Leviathan government to make decisions affecting our lives, thus controlling us in ways that are akin to the Bolsheviks of an earlier era.
I digress here to make a point. The progressive collectivists will argue that they are not socialists, certainly not communist, and most definitely not fascist. Of course they are wrong on all three. Collectivism is simply the belief that the good of the collective society outweighs that of the individual. Since we are all individuals, driven by natural law to work towards the achievement of our own self interest and that of our family, a strong and powerful body must be put in place to "control" and make decisions so that society as a whole will presumably benefit. This body is of course a strong all powerful central government that will seek to redistribute a societies wealth and in the process create the nanny state. Progressive collectivism... it has been at work since the turn of the twentieth century and it is at work today. Choose your variant, they all lead to less liberty.
Progressive collectivists love to paint those of us who believe in the Constitution as written, and in a smaller and less intrusive government and the inherent right of the individual to be free... accepting total responsibility for ourselves and not expecting the government to be our nanny, are somehow deluded, deranged, or irrational wing nuts. Which brings me full circle to the by line of my post.
Our nation was founded by individuals who were extremely liberal and progressive. So liberal in fact they fostered and won a revolution. A revolution that gained thirteen British colonies their independence from a Leviathan government that had no concern for the desires of its subjects. What distinguished the liberals of the eighteenth century was their belief the rights of the individual exceeded the rights of the state. Put another way the government gained it powers only by the consent of the governed. A radial and progressive shift from the belief throughout history that the people had only those rights granted them by the government, whatever form the government might be.
The Founding Fathers, and the patriots that won this countries freedom are often referenced as "Classical Liberals." The term defines what liberalism means. Which is the unwavering belief in the individual, the right of the individual to control their own lives, and a very wary eye of government in general. The classical liberal understood that government by its very nature is as an entity designed to control and thus by it's very nature is to be controlled and its scope limited.
This is in stark contrast with the modern era progressive collectivist, who in their heart of hearts firmly believe that government is an agency for good, and that it ought to be granted sweeping powers. Progressive collectivists believe the federal government's place is not only as set forth in our Constitution, but to play the role of social engineer and master of the business sector through suffocating regulation as well. Having said this I make the point here as well that businessmen have by their very own acceptance of government subsidies played into the hands of the statist government that desires to control them as well.
To illustrate classic liberalism I offer the following examples of just how far the progressive collectivists have veered away from liberal beliefs:
Thomas Jefferson...
"With all [our] blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow citizens--a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities." --Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural, 1801.
"Nor was it uninteresting to the world that an experiment should be fairly and fully made whether freedom of discussion, unaided by power, is not sufficient for the propagation and protection of truth: whether a government conducting itself in the true spirit of its constitution with zeal and purity and doing no act which it would be unwilling the whole world should witness can be written down by falsehood and defamation. The experiment has been tried; [we] have witnessed the scene; our fellow citizens have looked on, cool and collected. They saw the latent source from which these outrages proceeded; they gathered around their public functionaries, and when the Constitution called them to the decision by suffrage, they pronounced their verdict, honorable to those who had served them and consolatory to the friend of man who believes he may be intrusted with his own affairs." --Thomas Jefferson: 2nd Inaugural Address, 1805.
It is clear that Jefferson, perhaps one of the staunchest proponents of liberalism believed in the individual's ability to make proper decisions with respect to their own lives and happiness. It is equally as clear that as a classical liberal he believed government should play a limited role in the affairs and lives of the people.
Samuel Adams...
| “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, — go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen! |
Thomas Paine...
As a long and violent abuse of power is generally the means of calling the right of it in question, (and in matters too which might never have been thought of, had not the sufferers been aggravated into the inquiry,) and as the king of England hath undertaken in his own right, to support the parliament in what he calls theirs, and as the good people of this country are grievously oppressed by the combination, they have an undoubted privilege to inquire into the pretensions of both, and equally to reject the usurpations of either.
In the following sheets, the author hath studiously avoided every thing which is personal among ourselves. Compliments as well as censure to individuals make no part thereof. The wise and the worthy need not the triumph of a pamphlet; and those whose sentiments are injudicious or unfriendly, will cease of themselves, unless too much pains is bestowed upon their conversion.
The cause of America is, in a great measure, the cause of all mankind. Many circumstances have, and will arise, which are not local, but universal, and through which the principles of all lovers of mankind are affected, and in the event of which, their affections are interested. The laying a country desolate with fire and sword, declaring war against the natural rights of all mankind, and extirpating the defenders thereof from the face of the earth, is the concern of every man to whom nature hath given the power of feeling; of which class, regardless of party censure, is
This is the introduction Thomas Paine's "Common Sense." From this short excerpt it is clear this classical liberal believed in the absence of a tyrannical government. The parallels of the era in which Paine penned his "Common Sense" and today are, to say the least frighteningly similar. But you won't find a modern era progressive collectivist even acknowledging Thomas Paine. It doesn't suit their false modern liberal progressive collectivist agenda.
George Washington... Our first President...
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.
Over grown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty.
Another classical liberal that understood the dangers of government and that governments are not bound by reason. It is also obvious this General understood the dangers of the military industrial complex just as a former modern day President understood the dangers and addressed it in his 1961 farewell speech to the nation. Are you listening Republicans?
This is an admittedly abbreviated commentary on the evolution from classical liberalism to the modern version of liberalism... which is in all reality progressive collectivism. I have intentionally left out convenient links and paths to additional supporting resources because it is available on the internet at the click of the mouse. Anyone who is truly interested in our history and the concept of limited government and individualism will take the time to do the research and arrive at to me, what is the obvious conclusion.
What is most troubling is the dishonesty of the "modern liberal progressive" movement (progressive collectivist) and their propensity to distort the truth that is true liberalism... Which is limited, effective, and honest government. Modern so called progressives, or liberals, stand for Leviathan and oppressive government. They are not honest enough to state that which they really are. They are statists that believe in the right of government to control rather than the rights of the individual free choice.
A word to the extremist right wing reactionaries, and you know who you are. You constitute an equally grave threat to the vision of the Founding Fathers and liberty. It is just as offensive and dishonest as the progressive collectivists attempt to control our lives and liberty. In fact you represent an equal, and just as threatening concern as the progressive collectivists. You represent the fascist element of the collective variant.
Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel.
Via: Memeorandum
I think it's fascinating that what is called liberal and conservative has flipped 180 degrees since our founding era, yet today's liberals claim Jefferson as their own while despising his ideas.
ReplyDeleteGorges Smythe - Agreed. I believe you might have read this post prior to the acual completion. My error.
ReplyDeleteThe balance gives more supporting examples of my point that modern progressive collectivists have bastardized the meaning of liberalism.