I have always associated progressives with either communists of the Marxian variety or socialists of the Robert Owen variety. I am accordingly thankful to have my perspective revised by associating progressives with Jeremy Bentham, of whom I know very little, but in whose Wikipedia biography I see much that is both familiar and repugnant.
Beyond that, the writer captures the contemporary progressive mindset exactly as I experience it: Practicalities just don’t matter.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
People often make the error of thinking that socialism is evil because it always ends in poverty and oppression, but the reality is that it ends in poverty and oppression because it is evil.
Socialists enslave the individual for the supposed greater good of society, but society is made up of individuals and there is no greater good in slavery.
LikeLike
So, who is heading towards socialism as defined by history? That means state control of all means of production.
If you think we are, then the causes lie not where you think.
We have a caste system which has become very obvious when economic and natural disasters happen. We have millions without clean water, affordable healthcare, decent schools, food, or a voice in governance. Add in the highest prison population in the world.
If we don’t address these very real issues, capitalism will have to be maintained by force instead of economic virtue.
Welcome to Venezuela. Richest country in South America, but huge swaths of poor labor and a small number of connected and very wealthy autocrats and a segment of professionals. The rest is history.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It is true that incarceration for victimless crime is a real problem, but that is government acting counter to the free market. Note that true socialist countries are often very repressive on victimless crime.
It is the same “greater good” thinking that brought us prohibition, laws against prostitution and the drug war, all started by progressives, not libertarians.
LikeLike
“Note that true socialist countries are often very repressive on victimless crime.”
Which “true socialist countries” do you have in mind?
Libertarians never started ANYTHING.
(a) They don’t want to, and
(b) They have always been a powerless party on the fringe.
Unlike Libertarians progressives have the ability to change based on the evidence offered in the real world. Prohibition is gone, the war on drugs is in disrepute on the left (but not the right) and it is the social “conservatives” who keep laws about prostitution on the books – not progressives.
LikeLiked by 1 person
China and the USSR had draconian drug laws, and China even had dress codes.
Let’s just postulate that drug use is stupid and self-destructive.
So, how do a libertarian or socialist regime deal with that.
In a libertarian society, if you do something self-destructive, you bear the consequences. Friends and family may help you out, but no one is forced to protect you from the consequences of your stupidity. Those consequences are a deterrent to stupid behavior.
But in a socialist society, other are forced to care for you if you make yourself unemployable with drug use. Thus, to prevent you from being a burden, society will try to deter you with draconian legal penalties.
When others are forced to share in the consequences of self-destructive choices, liberty becomes impossible.
LikeLike
Neither China nor the Soviet Union were “true socialist countries.” The banning of personal property and small business is NOT a feature of a “true socialist country.” China under Mao and USSR under Stalin professed to be “communist” but were actually autocratic oligarchies.
There are today no “true socialist countries” except in the imaginary world of the right where the meaning of “socialist” has become so broad as to be meaningless. For example, your latest post where you contrast a “Libertarian society” and a “Socialist society” on drug addiction shows that ANYTHING that does not conform to libertarian ideology is “socialist.” In this case, help for the addicted is “socialist.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “People often make the error of thinking that socialism is evil because it always ends in poverty and oppression, but the reality is that it ends in poverty and oppression because it is evil.”
That’s a good way to put it.
I sometimes think that lies and deception are the essence of evil. The progressive mindset is full of them. The essay explores one in particular: The necessity to terminate fossil fuel use by 2035.
LikeLike
“I sometimes think that lies and deception are the essence of evil. ”
Yet you spread them a lot on this forum. Doesn’t that make you evil?
And it is not only the Progressive minds that are evil. I see a lot of evil in the voter suppression efforts across the country as inherently evil and a threat to our democratic republic. All because in the marketplace of ideas the conservatives fail miserably and have to suppress votes in order to attempt to stay in power.
LikeLiked by 2 people
So long as affordable and accessible healthcare and quality education are considered dangerous by conservatives we will have this conversation.
If we want to ensure that free market capitalism thrives in a stable society, we need to let innovators and entrepreneurs the freedom to create and profit. And this is done best in a stable country with healthy and well educated labor forces to carry out the plans of the drivers.
Fear tactics abound to squash this eminently proven and obvious observation. So much so that the hard right prefers dictatorship to control a desperate workforce.
Capitalism is an economic construct, not a social one. China has a capitalistic economic version that is controlled by dictatorship. Included in that control is corruption on a grand scale.
Yet, there has not be a violent overthrow of a government where the middle class is broad based and has a strong voice in the governance.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “So long as affordable and accessible healthcare and quality education are considered dangerous by conservatives we will have this conversation.”
So long as liberals/progressives believe a benevolent dictatorship of the ruling class is capable of deciding the “greatest good for the greatest number” this conversation cannot end.
LikeLike
You have just made my point, thank you.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “Capitalism is an economic construct, not a social one.”
I can’t figure out what this means. Economics, after all, is one of the social sciences. So, I’m flummoxed.
LikeLike
Pontifications about “evil” ring very hollow from a Trump supporter. And then throw in a dose of “slavery.” Always good for a laugh.
You seem very poorly informed about the actual history of what you pontificate about. Maybe you are somewhat confused about what “socialism” actually is? Here is a hint. The dictatorship of one man in at the center of a personality cult is NOT it. Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini Mao, Kim Jong-un were not socialists. They were autocrats.
Actual socialism where the government owns the principle means of production – but not the private property, shops and businesses of the people – has been experimented with briefly. Most notable in the UK after World War 2. It did not result in “poverty and oppression” but to dissatisfaction and the return to capitalism.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Freedom toast… nothing offensive here. Well….
LikeLiked by 3 people
Unless you can show a connection to the thread, this comment is off topic.
LikeLike