Bob suggested the term had something to do with supporting “bottom up”
Keynesian economics and later suggested that progressives should seek to the
greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people.
Mark seemed to
indicate that the term was essentially meaningless and suggested the word
“liberal” be reclaimed. As a Humanist, I found this exchange interesting,
because at its core, Humanism is a progressive philosophy
of life based in reason, compassion, optimism, courage and action, so the term
“progressive” is at the core of my beliefs in a very basic way.
Simply put, progressives advocate for social reform. Working
from the core value of compassion, progressives see the expansion of human and
civil rights as important goals and work to advance the well-being of all
humans. Built into progressive ideals is an optimism about the necessity of
human beings coming together to solve the larger issues confronting our world.
When done correctly, progressivism is not Utopian fantasy, because progressives
should be pragmatists, grounded in the real world.
Mark and Bob indicated in their podcast that being a pragmatic
progressive is akin to being a compassionate conservative. They were riffing
off statements made by House Speaker Gordon Fox and State Treasurer Gina
Raimondo, who both referred to themselves as pragmatists.
However, Raimondo and
Fox were not talking about pragmatism as an approach to values decisions but as
an approach to political realities, akin to Kissinger’s
realpolitik. The statements by Fox and Raimondo indicated a
willingness to abandon progressive values when politically expedient, rather
than adopting a pragmatic approach towards executing progressive values.
Pragmatically executing progressive values requires science and
reason, rather than cultural prejudices and tradition, as the best tools with
which to better society. Science and reason are not in and of themselves the
goal of progressives, they are the tools progressives use to create a better,
more just and more compassionate society.
Progressives are led by their
compassion to enable the best possible social reform by using the best possible
tools.
So what does this all mean in real world terms? Going back to
Bob Plain’s idea that progressives advance the ideas of Keynesian economics, for
instance, we can see that it’s not a belief in Keynesian economics that makes
one a progressive, it’s a belief in compassion, reason and science that
brings one to view that Keynesian economics is currently the best contender as
an economic theory around which to organize a capitalist economic system.
As to
whether capitalism is the best way to organize our economy, that’s a discussion
for another time, but here I will note that if capitalism cannot be properly
tamed by Keynesian proscriptions, it is not worth the misery it causes and
should be abandoned.
Progressives value democracy. Recognizing that all human beings
have inherent worth and dignity means that all human beings should have some
say in how our society should be arranged.
Progressives believe that democracy
and universal enfranchisement, limited by a commitment to the widest possible
understanding of human rights, is our best method of ensuring our fidelity to
the goal of protecting and enhancing human wellbeing.
Bob and Mark felt that support of organized labor was a sticking
point for some progressives. Just as all progressives should be in favor of
democracy, so should all progressives be in favor of unions.
Unions are simply
groups of people advocating for the best deal possible in their workplace under
a capitalist economic system. Unions at their best are democratically run, and
work to better the well being of workers/people. The right of people to
peaceably assemble and collectively bargain is as absolute and essential as any
right there is.
Progressives and others would be right to take issue with the
way some unions behave in the real world, just as they are right to take issue
with the way some democracies behave in the real world.
One can stand up for
democracy and be opposed to the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo or support
unions without supporting corruption. However, progressives should not be
opposed to unions on philosophical grounds. If you accept that people have the
right to collectively bargain, then you have to accept the right of people to
unionize.
If you deny that people have the right to collectively bargain, then
you should hang up your “progressive” hat for good, because you are denying
basic human rights, democracy and the advancement of human well being in favor
of monied interests, plutocracy and economic ideology.
Education is another issue that bedevils progressives. Right now
there is a concerted effort to wrest public education from government control
(and in our democracy that means wresting it from the control of the citizens)
and putting it under the auspices of private industry or religious
institutions.
Both of these options should be anathema to progressives. If
there is truly something deeply wrong with the public education system in the
United States (and that seems unclear to me, though I am by no means an expert
in this area) then it falls to the public to correct that issue.
Turning over control of our schools to private, for-profit
industry, in the hopes that business models will be more effective at finding
educational solutions, treats our children as commodities, which is the very
opposite of treating our children as worthy human beings.
Furthermore, the idea
that businesses, operating under the grinding Darwinism of the free market,
will do a better job educating our children flies in the face of what business
is truly about. Businesses are not about delivering better products,
businesses are about maximizing profits.
Look at the world around us. Most cars
are not high performance Teslas, and most cellphones are not state of the art
iPhones. Education by free market will produce some exceptionally high quality
educations but will mostly churn out sub-par, assembly line, cookie cutter
educations designed to meet minimum standards. Again, this treats our youth as
commodities.
Vouchers, which would give parents money allotments that would
allow them to send their children to private and parochial schools, are also
contrary to progressive values. The money handed out would be siphoned away
from already underfunded and struggling public school systems and channeled to
educational environments that may well stand in direct opposition to the values
of democracy, human rights and human wellbeing. Private educational
institutions are under no obligation to teach students in accordance with the
values of a free and open society.
Some private schools may deny the fundamental principles of
reason and science by rejecting evolutionary science education, and others may
reject universal human rights by denying the existence of women’s and LGBTQ
rights.
More extreme schools of thought cannot be excluded from public funding
through vouchers. Private schools could just as easily deny the roundness of
the earth or the humanity of non-whites.
Progressives believe that our society should be under no
obligation to fund, in any way whatsoever, ideas that fly in the face of
compassion, reason and human rights.
Though we recognize that in a pluralistic
society such ideas do exist, and understand that some parents and guardians
will make the decision to pull their children from public schools in order to
send their children to a private institution or home school, our commitment
should be to making our public schools the best they can be, using the best
ideas and most recent scientific studies to ground our work in reality, not helping
to fund those that would tear down our society based on religious or
ideological beliefs.
The root of the word “progressive” is “progress.” Progressives
need to look beyond current issues and current events and keep one eye on the
future. Progressives should imagine the kind of world this could be, and work
to get there.
Being a progressive in the 1930s did not necessarily include
being passionate about LGBTQ rights. But by the 1980s that’s exactly what it
meant. Today’s seemingly minor issue could become the great civil rights battle
of fifty years from now. There should be no shame in advocating today what will
only seem like common sense in the future.
Nor should there be shame in giving
due consideration to ideas that are outside our experience or seem somewhat
wacky. Many things we take for granted today would seem unbelievable to people
who existed a century or even fifty years ago. If progressives remember to use
compassion, tempered by reason, optimism and the council of others, we will not
go too far astray.
One final note on what it means to be a progressive,
particularly in Rhode Island, as regards religious and other concerns of
conscience. Democracy and a concern for the value of all human beings
necessitates a secular, non-religious government. This is as essential to being
a progressive as anything else I’ve mentioned.
Our private beliefs can be as
varied and imaginative as we desire, but the space in which we must all
interact, that is, the government and its institutions, needs to be free of
religion and dogma, so that all people feel free to express themselves fully.
Public, government sponsored religion and prayers, even if deemed ceremonial
and traditional, fly in the face of inclusion. The prayer that opens a
legislative session or the Christmas Tree displayed in the State House
privileges and legitimizes one set of beliefs over another. In this light
justice and equality seem a revokable gift of the ruling class, rather than
basic and guaranteed human rights.
Being a progressive is deeply meaningful, and progressives
should know that they are following a proud tradition of advancing human
rights, human well being, and institutional fairness. Progressives have a
history of making the world a better place, and I am proud to work in that tradition.
Steve Ahlquist is a writer, artist and current president of
the Humanists of Rhode Island, a non-profit group dedicated to reason,
compassion, optimism, courage and action. He also maintains the blog
SteveAhlquist.com where almost all his writing can be found. The views
expressed are his own and not necessarily those of any organization of which he
is a member.
His photos and video are usable under the Creative Commons
license. Free to share with credit.
Email: atomicsteve@gmail.com
Twitter: @SteveAhlquist
Twitter: @SteveAhlquist
