Commandments?

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-30-2018, 03:38 PM)Galen Wrote: The problem with progressives is that they don't know their own history.  The faith you show in the efficacy of the state mirrors the Christian faith in Jesus.  It is the magic wand that you hope to use to cure all of the evils in the world.  Before you bitch about the who the author is, which Eric the Obtuse and pbrower will certainly do, you might try reading the damn thing and following the references.  At least see what other readers thought of it.

Conservative books on progressives are apt to be as messed up as progressive books on conservatives.  They are more apt to contain vile stereotypes as real histories of the time.  I chose instead George Washington University's Elanor Roosevelt project to briefly review the Progressive Era.

Quote:The Progressive Era (1890 - 1920)

Progressivism is the term applied to a variety of responses to the economic and social problems rapid industrialization introduced to America. Progressivism began as a social movement and grew into a political movement. The early progressives rejected Social Darwinism. In other words, they were people who believed that the problems society faced (poverty, violence, greed, racism, class warfare) could best be addressed by providing good education, a safe environment, and an efficient workplace. Progressives lived mainly in the cities, were college educated, and believed that government could be a tool for change. Social reformers, like Jane Addams, and journalists, like Jacob Riis and Ida Tarbel, were powerful voices for progressivism. They concentrated on exposing the evils of corporate greed, combating fear of immigrants, and urging Americans to think hard about what democracy meant. Other local leaders encouraged Americans to register to vote, fight political corruption, and let the voting public decide how issues should best be addressed (the initiative, the referendum, and the recall). On a national level, progressivism gained a strong voice in the White House when Theodore Roosevelt became president in 1901. TR believed that strong corporations were good for America, but he also believed that corporate behavior must be watched to ensure that corporate greed did not get out of hand (trust-busting and federal regulation of business). Progressivism ended with World War I when the horrors of war exposed people's cruelty and many Americans associated President Woodrow Wilson's use of progressive language ("the war to make the world safe for democracy") with the war.

I would include the New Deal through Great Society period as another progressive era, though the names were changed, and the issues.

I quoted Global Warming, waste and population as issues I was concerned about.  The above period features child labor, worker safety and hours.  This is because in some issues the government is the right tool to fight corporate greed.  You pass a law banning certain practices, and the problem is solved.  I like the line about having strong corporations, but a strong government to check the greed of the corporations.  You can argue that OSHA and similar agencies have gone regulation happy, that we are far past the point of good returns.  You cannot say that government is a poor tool at fighting corporate greed.

I found the blaming of race problems on that generation of progressive disingenuous.  At that time both major parties had conservative and progressive wings, the parties were still fighting the Civil War, and Jim Crow was in its prime.  You could merrily prove all white power structures racist.  It was not until the 50s and 60s and the Civil Rights movement that things began to change.

Nowadays it is more clear.  The Democrats have gone all progressive, favor racial equality, and the racists have gone conservative, the Southern Strategy forever, clinging to yesterday and prejudice.  It is the exact opposite of what the author tries to show.  He is similarly confused on the other issues.

Yes, I believe in fighting corporate greed, and that government is a needed tool to achieve that end.  No, I don't think this religious, or worship the power structure.  Greed is part of the human equation, something I'd hope most religions (and high holy men like Jesus, Muhammad and Buddha) would preach against.  I believe this strongly, but strong belief does not make one's motives religious. Atheists and agnostics can dislike excessive greed too.

And while child labor, safety in the workplace and hours were very strong issues during the late Guided Age, they do not define progressive generally.  My definition is more inclusive over a broader time frame.  I would say that checking corporate greed is broad, that my concerns over Global Warming, waste and population also reflect a need to change the culture to meet changing technology and environment.

I would say the problem is not that government is not effective in writing laws to limit greedy corporations.  It is that the government has been bought by the rich, which makes them not apt to enact the correct laws.