Featured Post

How To Deal With Gaza After Hamas

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Why the "Progressive" movement is actually a "Regressive" movement

Don't let socialists get away with calling themselves "progressive." They are anything but that.

The "Progressive" movement never really was about progress. Not in the way most people in a liberal democracy would define social progress. They have a vision of a socialist, non-racist society, which they undermine at every turn by defining everything in terms of race. And despite their claims to the desire of a society without class differentiation, they believe very religiously in class. The class of the ruling and the ruled. And guess which class they aspire to?

What is progress?

Technological progress is very easily defined. While there may be negative environmental ramifications to some technologies, innovations which improve the speed and efficiency of performing tasks qualify. Why is it that capitalist societies have always been more advanced and produced more technological innovations than non-capitalist ones?


Less government interference and more incentive for individual creativity.

But that doesn't line up with a "Progressive" socialist world-view which implicitly creates disincentives for individual achievement in the form of fewer rewards for more work than a capitalist culture. So as far as technology goes, "progressives" are actually regressive.

What about social policy?

In an ideal world, all people would be treated and thought of as equal regardless of their skin color, race, or ethnicity. In our world, the people who are arguing for racial preference, who are suggesting racial conspiracies and ethnic guilt are none other than the "progressives."

Judging a person on the basis of race, whatever your motive, is racism. Racism is regressive behavior.

Which leads to cultural relativism and equivalence - the ideas that all cultures are equal.

Some cultures suppress women's rights. Some cultures persecute Gays and minorities. Some cultures do not allow press freedom and some will execute you for blasphemy.

These are all manifestations that a liberal democracy would consider backward. But cultural relativists say that those cultures are equal to ours.

Who are the cultural relativists in our society?  You guessed it. The self described "progressives".

Lots of self-described "progressives" are adherents of Marxism. Yup, the same Marxism that is responsible for millions of deaths under Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and the repression of free speech and civil rights in the Soviet Union, Cuba, North Korea, and more.

So the next time one of these buffoons tries to call themselves a "progressive," consider reminding them: "No. You're not progressive.  You're a follower of a regressive socialist ideology. The rest of us have already progressed beyond you."


Anonymous said...

Well put.

Cultural relativism is particularly unfortunate, I feel. At least some leftists have the guts to support liberal democratic values such as freedom and women's rights both at home and abroad. But cultural relativists, in giving up the idea that human rights are universal, become sad hypocrites.

Anonymous said...

This whole post is a mess, but I'll focus on just one point... you don't think government funding plays a role in technological advancement? Think again. We have enjoyed the massive leaps in computing and biotech BECAUSE the government took in tax revenue and funded science, which in turn fuels industry and capitolism


But don't let the truth get in the way of your paranoia. You've created some socialist boogieman, and frankly, there aren't that many out there. The vast majority of North Americans who are centrists or on the left side of the political spectrum are basically capitalists who believe in some forms of socialism such as government funding for infrastructure, education, and healthcare. Hardly a bunch of goosestepping commies.

Unknown said...

Nazis goosestep, not commies

Richard K said...

Anonymous picked one point and couldn't even get that right, which isn't surprising, since basic comprehension isn't a strong point among the regressive left.

No one says government has no role in scientific progress. But in capitalist societies, it doesn't control it. It works when it's market-driven, which is why it advances best in capitalist societies and failed where it was dictated by government central-planners.