Marching Side by Side
Possible Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren has spelled out what Progressives stand for. Though the specifics are vague, we can all agree that every single 'definition' she offers is based on income redistribution and growth of government control and erosion of freedom.
As a part of their aspirations to destroy America as we know it, some of the Stated Goals of the American Communist Party were told to a former member of Congress during an investigation into un-American activities in the early '60's. Though it was over fifty years ago, neo-Socialists (Progressives) still hold the company line on most, if not all of their stated goals.
I have juxtaposed some of them with some of Ms. Warrens talking points defining her Progressive policies and ideologies; other comments are mine:
"We believe that Wall Street needs stronger rules and tougher enforcement, and we're willing to fight for it." ...Paint Capitalism as oppressive; pit the workers against the business owners and exploit the emotion of envy and hatred of the successful by legislating against 'obscene' profits.
"We believe in science (vs. God) and that means that we have a responsibility to protect this Earth." ...Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
"We believe that the Internet shouldn't be rigged to benefit big corporations, and that means real net neutrality." ...Infiltrate the press. Get control of book review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions (and by extension, the blogosphere.)
"We believe that no one should work full-time and still live in poverty, and that means raising the minimum wage." ...Workers unite! You are an oppressed class that must stick together to overcome the exploitation of big business ( with the noted exception for employees of Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, etc. ).
"We believe that fast-food workers deserve a livable wage, and that means that when they take to the picket line, we are proud to fight alongside them." ...Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under attack.
"We believe that students are entitled to get an education without being crushed by debt." Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for Socialism, and current (Communist) propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers associations. Put the party line in text books. (This will create a new generation of socially oriented workers.) Focus the curriculum on dividing society over social issues like sexism, abortion, global warming, and unequal wealth distribution.
"We believe that after a lifetime of work, people are entitled to retire with dignity, and that means protecting Social Security, Medicare, and pensions." Maybe we should forget the name 'Progressive' and just go with 'Entitle-lists.' And as these entitlement programs continue to grow exponentially, they will squeeze out most other government spending, especially military. As services decline, citizens will grow more and more disillusioned and violent.
"We believe—I can't believe I have to say this in 2014—we believe in equal pay for equal work." That is another thing Government should guarantee through legislation, whether your performance earns it or not, promotions and raises would be determined by race and sex and enforced by laws.
"We believe that equal means equal, and that's true in marriage, it's true in the workplace, it's true in all of America." ...Present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as "normal, natural, and healthy." There should be legislation to guarantee no financial compensation distinction between men, women, or transgender people, no matter who owns a business or controls business compensation policies. Now, we just have to figure out how to explain our exemptions for elected officials and union leaders.
"We believe that immigration has made this country strong and vibrant, and that means reform." We are for open borders, so we can grow more dependency groups into a malleable voting blocks for our Party.
"And we believe that corporations are not people, that women have a right to their bodies (i.e,birth control paid for with public funds). We will overturn Hobby Lobby and we will fight for it. We will fight for it!" ...Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions, by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
Modern 'Progressives' can't promote clearly Communist policies, so they conflate issues and redefine language to achieve their ends. They conflate 'rights' and 'entitlement' because it is not yet acceptable to just call their policies 'Socialist.' The net is that all of these policies are funded by government confiscatory legislation and the monies are redistributed to favored constituencies, women and minority groups, labor unions, students and educators, and scientists who tout the company line.
Everyone else would be marginalized as 'Republicans' and self-centered extremists who need to be reprogramed.
Didn't Elizabeth Warren get some scholarship support because she claimed to have some Native American blood in her family tree? It sounds like her tribe were more Maoist than Mohican.
Not Too Swift
Liberals talk of themselves as Progressives, but upon further analysis it might be more accurate to call them Regressives. That is, they never seem to learn from the past.
As smart as they think they are, and they tell us all the time that intelligent people are people of the Left, the facts are that they continually explore, and more often than not, support ideas from the past that have proven to be morally vacant and downright defective.
Adam Swift is a perfect example: he has suddenly come upon a seminal moment. It just occurred to him that if we, as a society, want to 'level the playing field' (the single most important objective of Progressives) then we should abolish the family unit.
Here is his thinking: since studies show that the main reason some children outperform other children in almost all areas of measurable success in life is that they were raised in a family atmosphere of two parent support, unconditional love, strong moral leadership and constant interactive instructional activities like being read bedtime stories, therefore the best way to equalize the outcomes for less 'fortunate' children would be to give all responsibilities of parenting to the state! Yep, let's put the future of all children in the hands of those with a proven track record of failing to inspire, socialize, use critical thinking and to generate unique and creative ideas and solutions.
Voila! Now all of the children would be equally unprepared for dealing with life's challenges, so our society would be more egalitarian! Let the state develop the next generation of young people to build a society of harmony and social justice.
I wonder, does it ever occur to this man that his convoluted and intellectually vapid thinking is the result of too much time spent in lecture halls listening to the sanctimonious indoctrination of Marxist professors whose real world experience amounts to near nothing other than reading the ideological theories of losers like Stalin, Castro, and Mao?
Of course not, he has been brainwashed! He can't think for himself. But that doesn't stop him from 'thinking' for everybody else!
Adam Swift (born 1961) is a British political philosopher and sociologist who specialises in debates surrounding liberal egalitarianism. He has published books on communitarianism, on the philosophical aspects of school choice, and on social justice, as well as an introduction to contemporary political theory which has been translated into several languages.