More Thoughts On Progressive Collectivism
By: Les Carpenter III
Rational Nation USA
The concept of progressive collectivism is one which makes perfect sense. Of course unless one happens to be a progressive collectivist. In which case charges of Reich winger, or some other such nonsensical term will be tossed out by the left in it's attempt to dismiss the terms validity.
Lets start by looking at the specific definition of each word (or concept) followed by the natural linage. Definitions taken from Websters New Collegiate Dictionary.
Progressive - a: one that is progressive b: one believing in moderate political change and esp. social improvement by government action
Collectivism - a: a political or economic theory advocating collective control esp. over production and distribution or a system marked by such control
A progressive is someone who believes it is the proper function of the federal government (through political activism) is to advance social and economic theory that results in social legislation being passed which over time has significantly altered our market based capitalist system of economics.
The advancement of progressive thought has resulted in our country becoming less individualistic and self reliant. Through the combined efforts of liberal academia as personified by Wilsonian thought, and progressives in government, America has increasingly accepted the notion they are entitled to benefits as provided by, and compliments of Leviathan.
For progressivism to work requires a strong central source of control. It requires a body that can enact laws placing authority in the hands of the government to establish tax code and collect the loot. The progressives goal simply stated is to redistribute wealth in the Utopian ideal of raising the collective good.
The Leviathan government acts as the collective force towards the advancement of the progressives agenda. As we have moved further and further into the realm of progressive collectivism so has our dependency on the federal government increased. The less individualistic and self reliant America becomes the less able we will be to enjoy the benefits of liberty. When individuals become dependent on others they by give up some of their right to liberty. America is an elective republic and therefore loss of liberty is in large share by our own doing. At least for now.
As Frederic Bastiat observed:
Now, legal plunder can be committed in an infinite number of ways. Thus we have an infinite number of plans for organizing it: tariffs, protection, benefits, subsidies, encouragements, progressive taxation, public schools, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed profits, minimum wages, a right to relief, a right to the tools of labor, free credit, and so on, and so on. All these plans as a whole—with their common aim of legal plunder—constitute socialism.
Benjamin Franklin simplified it saying:
Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
What say you?
Rational Nation USA
The concept of progressive collectivism is one which makes perfect sense. Of course unless one happens to be a progressive collectivist. In which case charges of Reich winger, or some other such nonsensical term will be tossed out by the left in it's attempt to dismiss the terms validity.
Lets start by looking at the specific definition of each word (or concept) followed by the natural linage. Definitions taken from Websters New Collegiate Dictionary.
Progressive - a: one that is progressive b: one believing in moderate political change and esp. social improvement by government action
Collectivism - a: a political or economic theory advocating collective control esp. over production and distribution or a system marked by such control
A progressive is someone who believes it is the proper function of the federal government (through political activism) is to advance social and economic theory that results in social legislation being passed which over time has significantly altered our market based capitalist system of economics.
The advancement of progressive thought has resulted in our country becoming less individualistic and self reliant. Through the combined efforts of liberal academia as personified by Wilsonian thought, and progressives in government, America has increasingly accepted the notion they are entitled to benefits as provided by, and compliments of Leviathan.
For progressivism to work requires a strong central source of control. It requires a body that can enact laws placing authority in the hands of the government to establish tax code and collect the loot. The progressives goal simply stated is to redistribute wealth in the Utopian ideal of raising the collective good.
The Leviathan government acts as the collective force towards the advancement of the progressives agenda. As we have moved further and further into the realm of progressive collectivism so has our dependency on the federal government increased. The less individualistic and self reliant America becomes the less able we will be to enjoy the benefits of liberty. When individuals become dependent on others they by give up some of their right to liberty. America is an elective republic and therefore loss of liberty is in large share by our own doing. At least for now.
As Frederic Bastiat observed:
Now, legal plunder can be committed in an infinite number of ways. Thus we have an infinite number of plans for organizing it: tariffs, protection, benefits, subsidies, encouragements, progressive taxation, public schools, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed profits, minimum wages, a right to relief, a right to the tools of labor, free credit, and so on, and so on. All these plans as a whole—with their common aim of legal plunder—constitute socialism.
Benjamin Franklin simplified it saying:
Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
What say you?
>What say you?
ReplyDeleteI say that, as usual, you are exactly right. (Plus, you get extra credit for the Basiat quote. :))
The "progressive" collectivist suffers under two fundamental fallacies. One is that the government SHOULD "take care" of people. The other is that the government CAN "take care" of people. As for the first, I have yet to meet anyone that can give me a rational argument to justify stealing from one person to give to another. As for the second, the dismal record of utter failure by EVERY coercive collectivist government to "take care" of its citizens efficiently and effectively in the long term should be sufficient to refute the belief.
Bastiatarian - Thank you,
ReplyDeleteYour further analysis is right on. Laser sharp and insightful as always.
I notice that the libs that check in to this sight have refrained from commenting.
One can only conclude it is because they realize we are correct and aside from their emotionalism they have no counter arguments that hold water.