Wonderings, Realizations, Understatements, Poetry, Hunches
Do Progressives See the Irony in Their Beliefs?
I don’t view politics as Progressives vs Conservatives in some competition. After all, we’re not talking about a Super Bowl or an NCAA championship. Those championship titles are fleeting, lasting only until the next season. Our country has survived over 230 years, but we are now at risk of losing our republic because we somehow believe keeping political score will solve problems.
While competition in sports (or any healthy competition) encourages participants to elevate their game, political games reward the first to drop to a new low. This happens on both sides of the political aisle; however, progressives – by nature of their agenda, must justify their existence by dropping to the ultimate low: squelching individual thought.
To those who hold progressive values, please tell me:
- Why do you think there must be diversity in everything? It seems that requiring schools, corporations, and even TV shows to hire women and minorities has divided us even further. Why can’t we see everyone just as individuals and reward people based on their own merits?
- Why hould everyone learn to code? I get it, we live in an increasingly digital world. There will obviously be a strong need for developers, but our world is – and will always be - an analog experience. Why would we want to create an entire generation of coders when individual talents and interests can be put to greater good?
- Why is it better to live off government rather than earning a living through traditional capitalism? Why is it that the Clintons and Obamas, who make their money off political means are held in higher esteem than the Donald Trumps of the world who create opportunities and wealth for themselves and others?
- Why is it NOT okay for a wealthy entrepreneur to run for public office, but it is okay for someone to run who gained power through special interest? Why do progressives hate market success but love a guy like Bernie Sanders who has spent his entire career on a government salary but yet somehow affords 3 houses and flies privately?
- How is it okay for Al Gore and other so called, “environmentalists” to get a pass for having an extremely large carbon footprint? Shouldn’t these individuals be held to the same – or even higher – standard?
- How do you think taking wealth away from someone who earned it is somehow going to enhance the lives of poor people? Don’t people who get something for nothing become a long-term burden on society to say nothing of their own depleting self-worth?
- Why does the answer to every public issue involve government as the solution? What has government ever done better than an open, free market? Okay, this actually has an answer: prisons. It’s true, government has proven to be a better operator of prisons than the private sector. This is sad on so many levels... So besides prisons, do you want the government to run your life like it runs the DMV? I didn’t think so.
I propose the reason there are no logical answers to these questions is because there are none. They’re not supposed to be logical. I propose it boils down to these motivators which defy logic:
- For the political elite: Power. They maintain it by kicking the ladder down so others cannot achieve the same success. “Level the playing field” is code for “I’m not going to let you do it the way I (or my donors) did it.”
- For the guilt-ridden: Justification. People who feel guilty for their success are likely to embrace to progressive ideas to justify their behavior or accomplishments.
- For those who want to be left alone: Selfishness. similar to the guilt-ridden, but this group is more interested in throwing a bone to the crowd so as to be left alone to enjoy their success. A corporate example of this might be a hotel chain claiming to be green by allowing customers to choose not to have their towels laundered every day. It’s a simple gesture that costs virtually nothing (or in this case even saves them money), and it keeps the environmental bullies at bay.
- Followers of progressive doctrines: Victimhood. This is the largest group of progressives. These are people who have been made to feel they are a victim of some sort of social wrong. What makes this group so disconcerting is they will overlook their own personal principles in order to support even just a single facet of the progressive movement. Rather than acting on their relevant issue(s), they will support the entire platform even if they disagree with the majority of its policies.
- Disruptors: Chaos. This is the most dangerous sect of progressives. These are influencers who understand that the values they promote will do no actual good but rather to serve its own purpose. They create solutions that cause further issues that then justify even greater progressive responses. They are not interested in society’s wellbeing; they are driven solely to profit off the misery of others.
No country in the world – particularly ours - should be influenced, let alone run, under these motivating factors. Beware of anyone seeking authority who exhibits any of these characteristics. No good will come from leaders who put their own self-interest above those they serve.
We should be seeking leaders who serve with humility, embrace abundance, strive to improve the wellbeing for all citizens, and uniformly enforce the law - all while maintaining order.
Get in touch with us.