Have you ever heard of the Progressive Ideal? You should have.Progressivism is the ancestor of modern Liberalism, Globalism, Socialism, and its less-than-legitimate grandchild Communism.Progressivism was invented in the 19th century, as an antidote to the blatant self-serving Imperialism of the age.It inspired the great Reform movements of the past hundred years, and much fine literature and music.Unfortunately, it also inspired much dangerous stupidity, in politics and economics, which plagues us to this day.The basic tenets of the Progressive Ideal start with simple truths, but then elaborate into philosophical fantasies that warp out of sync with reality.These include..1) All Men (And Women) Are Created Equal -- therefore, all people are basically the same.They all think and feel alike, and all want the same things.There's no such thing as a bad person. only a dissatisfied or, at worst, a sick one.Give everybody a good education and income and healthcare, including proper mental hygiene, and everybody will happily join in the great worldwide community of civilized people, and there'll be no more war or crime.Therefore it's the duty of all proper civilized people to guarantee a good education and income and healthcare to 'disadvantaged' people the world over.2) All cultures have something to contribute to the human experience -- therefore, all societies are equally valid.There's no such thing as a bad culture, only an ignorant one.Give all societies good educations and they'll all become equally enlightened, and they'll happily join the great worldwide community of civilized nations, and.Etc.Therefore it's the duty of all civilized societies.Etc.3) People who live in privileged societies are often ignorant of the condition of other societies, or are blinded by their own prejudices -- therefore nobody from a wealthy, free, generally happy society has any right to judge other societies or the people in them.However, people from 'disadvantaged' societies are never ignorant of the condition of their privileged brethren or blinded by their own prejudices, so they can see the sins of the privileged clearly; they have the right to judge those better off than themselves, and their criticisms must always be taken seriously.4) Economics is a powerful motivation -- therefore all people are moved, above all else, by the promise or lack of money.Economics is the key to world peace.Give people or societies enough money to satisfy their needs and wants, and they'll happily join in.Etc.The starting truths are valid, but the idealistic elaborations are just plain wrong -- and that was clear even 100 years ago.That's what inspired George Bernard Shaw to make his famous comment. "He who is not a Socialist at 20 has no heart; he who is not a Capitalist at 40 has no head." It also inspired Gilbert and Sullivan to add to their "little list" of people who never would be missed. "The idiot who praises, with enthusiastic tone, Every age but this one, every country but his own.".To take those basic tenets in order. first, "equal" does not mean "same".All men are not brothers; 'cousins' would be more accurate, and not always first cousins either.All people do not think and feel alike.Second, all societies are not equally valid; there are some which cause constant misery and ruin to their own people, not to mention their neighbors.Third, people who have access to thorough educations, honest information and the ability to travel and check facts for themselves are a good bit less likely to be blindly prejudiced or ignorant than people who don't have those advantages.Fourth, no, there are some motivations stronger than money; you cannot bribe people into being Good.Yes, we do have the right to study, judge and criticize other societies.Yes, there are some objective standards by which we can judge the success and value of a society.And no, all societies are not equally 'good' by any objective standards.What makes the difference is culture.Now 'culture' doesn't mean just the theatre and the opera and the ballet, nor even popular clothing styles and music, crafts and cuisine and current TV shows.A 'culture' is the way an entire society thinks -- and there are some societies which think very badly.All men -- and women -- may be created equal, but all human cultures are not.If you want a religious reason for this, you could say it's because human beings were created by God, who is perfect, but human cultures are created by human beings, who are.Not.In spite of the Progressive Ideal, there really are some downright evil cultures -- and downright evil societies, and governments, and even individual human beings -- judged by the standards of long-term survival.For example, what would you say about a society that's produced marvelous food and music and art and architecture -- but which condones or actively encourages dissociative psychosis, self-mutilation, the rape of children and the burning to death of women? What would you do with a culture that produces wonderful music, dance and poetry -- but which treats women and children as livestock, and assumes it has a duty to conquer the world and slaughter everyone not just like themselves? How would you evaluate a culture which assumes that political and economic corruption are as natural as air, that you can never trust your neighbors or friends or families but must always be prepared to back-stab the other guy before he can do it to you? I name no names, but these are not healthy or terribly successful societies.The societies I've just described have managed to survive for centuries, while others like them have fallen to dust, on the sheer inertia of their large populations -- but they've been repeatedly conquered and ruled by other cultures with better standards.In fact, these societies have been dragged into the modern age, and into a few better habits, largely by the charity -- or practical greed -- of their conquerors.Yes, it's true that all cultures have something to contribute to human knowledge -- arts and crafts at least -- but it's also true that a stopped clock is right twice a day; that doesn't make it something worth keeping.Yes, good people can live in bad cultures, but they don't survive easily and they don't have much influence.An evil culture can -- and often does -- sweep its people along with it, whether they will or no, at which point all that a decent person can do is run.This accounts for many of the immigrants who've come to America over the last few centuries.You can tell who those immigrants were, and are, by the way they wanted to become Americans and assimilated as fast as they could.No matter how much sentimental fondness they might have held for the Old Country, they recognized that not just the economy but the culture Here was better than back There.Here's where the Progressive Ideal collides with itself.The same people who judged that one culture can very well be superior to another, that the culture Here was better than back There, were those same 'disadvantaged' -- the poor and the powerless -- whom the Progressive Ideal claims are the only fit judges.So, are all cultures equally valid, or are only the 'disadvantaged' virtuous enough to judge them? You can't have it both ways.When unavoidably faced with this logical contradiction, people who are passionately devoted to the Progressive Ideal will all too often choose to jettison Assumption #3; they assume that the poor and powerless may be virtuous and innocent, but they're also ignorant -- and must therefore be guided and protected by their intellectual superiors.At this point the Progressive Ideal tilts over into elitism and tiptoes toward tyranny.It's only a short step from 'protecting and guiding the innocent' to lying to them outright. teaching them only 'what's good for them to know' and censoring the rest.The next step after that is locking people up 'for their own good'.Thus did the Progressive Ideal progress into the great tyrannies of the 20th century.It's far wiser to get out of the logical contradiction by admitting that it's Assumption #2 that's wrong. that all cultures are not created equal, that some societies really are worse than others, that some governments are downright dangerous, and that when they start encroaching on their neighbors there's no choice but to go to war.Political philosophers throughout the 20th century have tied themselves in knots trying to find workable alternatives to war, but history has shown that the only real alternatives to war are to surrender or run away.Running away requires the means to travel far and fast, and having some safe place to run to.It's no accident that for the last few centuries the safest place to run to has been America.That's how various groups of religious pacifists, like the Amish, wound up here.The Amish came to America from Switzerland, of all places, fleeing religious persecution.Here they thrived, and were allowed to keep their culture for themselves -- but you'll note that there are no Amish left in Switzerland.Surrender can mean danger worse than war.In World War Two the US lost over 400,000 men in just under four years of war.That's a sobering number, but it doesn't compare with the 20,000,000 helpless people killed by the Nazis outside of the war zone.It doesn't even compare with the 2,000,000 killed in Cambodia when Pol Pot took over.The grim truth is that there is something worse than war -- and that is to be killed in vast numbers without even the chance to fight.This is why wars will, and must, continue so long as there are honestly bad cultures, societies and governments in the world.Still, the Progressive Ideal insists that all people and all cultures are equal and the same, and they should all join together to create a happy one-world economy, society and government.People who believe this blithely overlook the fact that many cultures -- and societies -- in this world are not something we want to add to the mix.You don't make good steel by mixing iron with lead.No, we can't have One Glorious World Order until a lot of just plain bad cultures have changed beyond recognition.This won't happen while the Progressive Ideal, with all its naive flaws, still rules our political thinking.
Friday, September 7, 2012
Progressive Failure
Have you ever heard of the Progressive Ideal? You should have.Progressivism is the ancestor of modern Liberalism, Globalism, Socialism, and its less-than-legitimate grandchild Communism.Progressivism was invented in the 19th century, as an antidote to the blatant self-serving Imperialism of the age.It inspired the great Reform movements of the past hundred years, and much fine literature and music.Unfortunately, it also inspired much dangerous stupidity, in politics and economics, which plagues us to this day.The basic tenets of the Progressive Ideal start with simple truths, but then elaborate into philosophical fantasies that warp out of sync with reality.These include..1) All Men (And Women) Are Created Equal -- therefore, all people are basically the same.They all think and feel alike, and all want the same things.There's no such thing as a bad person. only a dissatisfied or, at worst, a sick one.Give everybody a good education and income and healthcare, including proper mental hygiene, and everybody will happily join in the great worldwide community of civilized people, and there'll be no more war or crime.Therefore it's the duty of all proper civilized people to guarantee a good education and income and healthcare to 'disadvantaged' people the world over.2) All cultures have something to contribute to the human experience -- therefore, all societies are equally valid.There's no such thing as a bad culture, only an ignorant one.Give all societies good educations and they'll all become equally enlightened, and they'll happily join the great worldwide community of civilized nations, and.Etc.Therefore it's the duty of all civilized societies.Etc.3) People who live in privileged societies are often ignorant of the condition of other societies, or are blinded by their own prejudices -- therefore nobody from a wealthy, free, generally happy society has any right to judge other societies or the people in them.However, people from 'disadvantaged' societies are never ignorant of the condition of their privileged brethren or blinded by their own prejudices, so they can see the sins of the privileged clearly; they have the right to judge those better off than themselves, and their criticisms must always be taken seriously.4) Economics is a powerful motivation -- therefore all people are moved, above all else, by the promise or lack of money.Economics is the key to world peace.Give people or societies enough money to satisfy their needs and wants, and they'll happily join in.Etc.The starting truths are valid, but the idealistic elaborations are just plain wrong -- and that was clear even 100 years ago.That's what inspired George Bernard Shaw to make his famous comment. "He who is not a Socialist at 20 has no heart; he who is not a Capitalist at 40 has no head." It also inspired Gilbert and Sullivan to add to their "little list" of people who never would be missed. "The idiot who praises, with enthusiastic tone, Every age but this one, every country but his own.".To take those basic tenets in order. first, "equal" does not mean "same".All men are not brothers; 'cousins' would be more accurate, and not always first cousins either.All people do not think and feel alike.Second, all societies are not equally valid; there are some which cause constant misery and ruin to their own people, not to mention their neighbors.Third, people who have access to thorough educations, honest information and the ability to travel and check facts for themselves are a good bit less likely to be blindly prejudiced or ignorant than people who don't have those advantages.Fourth, no, there are some motivations stronger than money; you cannot bribe people into being Good.Yes, we do have the right to study, judge and criticize other societies.Yes, there are some objective standards by which we can judge the success and value of a society.And no, all societies are not equally 'good' by any objective standards.What makes the difference is culture.Now 'culture' doesn't mean just the theatre and the opera and the ballet, nor even popular clothing styles and music, crafts and cuisine and current TV shows.A 'culture' is the way an entire society thinks -- and there are some societies which think very badly.All men -- and women -- may be created equal, but all human cultures are not.If you want a religious reason for this, you could say it's because human beings were created by God, who is perfect, but human cultures are created by human beings, who are.Not.In spite of the Progressive Ideal, there really are some downright evil cultures -- and downright evil societies, and governments, and even individual human beings -- judged by the standards of long-term survival.For example, what would you say about a society that's produced marvelous food and music and art and architecture -- but which condones or actively encourages dissociative psychosis, self-mutilation, the rape of children and the burning to death of women? What would you do with a culture that produces wonderful music, dance and poetry -- but which treats women and children as livestock, and assumes it has a duty to conquer the world and slaughter everyone not just like themselves? How would you evaluate a culture which assumes that political and economic corruption are as natural as air, that you can never trust your neighbors or friends or families but must always be prepared to back-stab the other guy before he can do it to you? I name no names, but these are not healthy or terribly successful societies.The societies I've just described have managed to survive for centuries, while others like them have fallen to dust, on the sheer inertia of their large populations -- but they've been repeatedly conquered and ruled by other cultures with better standards.In fact, these societies have been dragged into the modern age, and into a few better habits, largely by the charity -- or practical greed -- of their conquerors.Yes, it's true that all cultures have something to contribute to human knowledge -- arts and crafts at least -- but it's also true that a stopped clock is right twice a day; that doesn't make it something worth keeping.Yes, good people can live in bad cultures, but they don't survive easily and they don't have much influence.An evil culture can -- and often does -- sweep its people along with it, whether they will or no, at which point all that a decent person can do is run.This accounts for many of the immigrants who've come to America over the last few centuries.You can tell who those immigrants were, and are, by the way they wanted to become Americans and assimilated as fast as they could.No matter how much sentimental fondness they might have held for the Old Country, they recognized that not just the economy but the culture Here was better than back There.Here's where the Progressive Ideal collides with itself.The same people who judged that one culture can very well be superior to another, that the culture Here was better than back There, were those same 'disadvantaged' -- the poor and the powerless -- whom the Progressive Ideal claims are the only fit judges.So, are all cultures equally valid, or are only the 'disadvantaged' virtuous enough to judge them? You can't have it both ways.When unavoidably faced with this logical contradiction, people who are passionately devoted to the Progressive Ideal will all too often choose to jettison Assumption #3; they assume that the poor and powerless may be virtuous and innocent, but they're also ignorant -- and must therefore be guided and protected by their intellectual superiors.At this point the Progressive Ideal tilts over into elitism and tiptoes toward tyranny.It's only a short step from 'protecting and guiding the innocent' to lying to them outright. teaching them only 'what's good for them to know' and censoring the rest.The next step after that is locking people up 'for their own good'.Thus did the Progressive Ideal progress into the great tyrannies of the 20th century.It's far wiser to get out of the logical contradiction by admitting that it's Assumption #2 that's wrong. that all cultures are not created equal, that some societies really are worse than others, that some governments are downright dangerous, and that when they start encroaching on their neighbors there's no choice but to go to war.Political philosophers throughout the 20th century have tied themselves in knots trying to find workable alternatives to war, but history has shown that the only real alternatives to war are to surrender or run away.Running away requires the means to travel far and fast, and having some safe place to run to.It's no accident that for the last few centuries the safest place to run to has been America.That's how various groups of religious pacifists, like the Amish, wound up here.The Amish came to America from Switzerland, of all places, fleeing religious persecution.Here they thrived, and were allowed to keep their culture for themselves -- but you'll note that there are no Amish left in Switzerland.Surrender can mean danger worse than war.In World War Two the US lost over 400,000 men in just under four years of war.That's a sobering number, but it doesn't compare with the 20,000,000 helpless people killed by the Nazis outside of the war zone.It doesn't even compare with the 2,000,000 killed in Cambodia when Pol Pot took over.The grim truth is that there is something worse than war -- and that is to be killed in vast numbers without even the chance to fight.This is why wars will, and must, continue so long as there are honestly bad cultures, societies and governments in the world.Still, the Progressive Ideal insists that all people and all cultures are equal and the same, and they should all join together to create a happy one-world economy, society and government.People who believe this blithely overlook the fact that many cultures -- and societies -- in this world are not something we want to add to the mix.You don't make good steel by mixing iron with lead.No, we can't have One Glorious World Order until a lot of just plain bad cultures have changed beyond recognition.This won't happen while the Progressive Ideal, with all its naive flaws, still rules our political thinking.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment