Three Approaches that Make America

Since we seem unable in today’s world to carry on non-partisan political discussions about important policies and societal concerns, perhaps it is time for a new way of looking at things and at our fellow human beings.  Perhaps the following is a way to do this, or to at least assist us all in understanding our society and those who view it somewhat differently than do we.

While the animosity and disruption in our society today is most frequently identified as Red vs. Blue politics, I think that conflict is simply the way something else is manifesting itself.  I think that we are actually seeing a struggle between three different approaches to existence that are all struggling to find their way in the rapidly changing world of today. 

These three approaches are:

1. The Progressives who are for social change.
2. The Conventionals who are for the established institutions.
3. The Populists who are for the people.

The three approaches are actually all interrelated, and we all use all three approaches from time to time, but we generally lean more heavily toward one approach.    These leanings are resulting in support for or opposition to particular political policies and approaches as each approach struggles to become dominant. 

Approach	Progressive	Conventional	Populist
Primary Concern	For Social Change	For Established Institutions	For the People
Role	Starters of Action	Holders of Status Quo	Concluders and Transitioners
Political approaches	·        Socialist ·        Big government ·        Little individual freedom	·        Conservative ·        Democratic republic ·        Restricted freedom	·        Pure democracy ·        Minimal government ·        Individual freedom with minimal restriction
Role	Starter/Instigator/ Visionary/Disrupter	Stabilizer/Inflexible/ Defender/ Institutionalist	Enforcer/Fluid/ Finalizer /Majority
Today primarily	Progressive Left	Traditional moderate Republicans and Democrats	MAGA Republicans
Interactions	Need Populist support to enact social change; if change is effected, need Conventional support to defend and stabilize it.	Will fully embody Progressive vision once convinced to support it and/or once it becomes established.  Slows impulsiveness of Progressives and Populists	Mutability creates vulnerability to new Inspirations. Effectuate/complete a vision and lead transition to new change.

The Progressives

These are the starters, the visionaries.  They have an idea, and they want to see it implemented.  They believe their vision is a good one, though others may disagree with that assessment.  Their goal is to generally upend what currently exists and replace it with what they view as something better, whether that is for society/the world at large or simply in regard to a particular problem.

These are the socialists who seek a bigger government to support and control the societal changes which they advocate.    Socialism, according to Marx, is a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.  

But these can also be the Progressive Republicans who would similarly dismantle some of our longstanding institutions in favor of Populist dreams; their method is not socialism but pure democracy which in essence is simply mob rule.   Mob rule, whether in conjunction with or in opposition to a Progressive vision, can upend existing conventions in the hopes of replacing them with something better.

The vision of the Progressives is fragile.  That is, the goal is to demolish what exists and then build anew.  This is not something that people easily jump on board with.  The vision of the Progressives needs the Populists to lend support.  Only with that support will they be able to alter the fixed society of the Conventionals.   Once the Populists take control and convince the Conventionals to support their cause, society will shift as necessary to make the institutional position conform so that the vision of the Progressives can be realized.

The Conventionals

These are the conservatives, not necessarily in the common political connotation, but in the sense that they are reluctant to change.  Rather than jump to support current popular trends or policies, they will instead support longstanding institutions that are a part of the current societal status quo.

This gives stability to a society, but it also encourages a slower evolution as the Conventionals will need both time and strong evidence supporting any need to change that upon which their society is based.  Once a particular society is established with its culture and its underlying institutions, this group will fully embody and defend it.

The problem that the Conventionals face is that once the Populists become the majority, they will either prevail by simple mob rule or, if their populist view conforms with the vison of the Progressives the two will become an almost invincible force.

Today these are the establishment Republicans as well as the traditional moderate or “lunch bucket” Democrats.  While these groups find much to be lacking in our current government, they are more likely to blame the individuals rather than the underlying institutions.  These are often today’s Independents or those who feel that their party, be it Republican or Democrat, has abandoned them.

The Populists

These are the people who believe fully in the individual and oppose large government and/or extensive regulation of behavior.  Populism by its own definition involves a large group of the populace who, by their mere size, are able to sway society.

The Populists are not the visionaries, but they will adopt a vision and bring it to the fore, in essence concluding the work of the Progressives.  As such they are vulnerable to manipulation by the Progressives who need the support of the masses.   If their vision is adopted by society at large, it will be the Conventionals who will end up supporting the altered institutions.  The mutable Populists will be ever ready to adopt a new vision and, as such, while they may aid in bringing about changes, they will also be the group that will end one vision and help bring about the transition to yet another new society.

Currently, the Populists most frequently identify as MAGA Republicans, yet in many ways the rank-and-file Democrats are working as Populists as their majority supports the various identity groups and causes that the Progressive Left uses to further its Progressive goals for societal change.  Yet, in another way neither group is truly Populist because each supports only a popular majority of one political group.

Interactions

These three approaches and their interaction manifest on all levels from individual to global issues.  While having leanings towards all three, we will primarily exhibit one approach on any given issue. Believing that our approach is the only one is what causes much friction in today’s world. 

Moreover, we may exhibit one approach on one issue while having a different approach on another.  For example, on the environment one might be a Progressive, but on taxation and governmental spending one might be a Conventional or a Populist.

Identifying as any one of these three types of actors is not permanent.  Once a Progressive’s vision becomes the established reality, that individual may then become a Conventional who supports that reality or perhaps will join a new Populist cause that will lead to a transition away from that vision’s reality to begin the establishment of a new vision.

This is where I think we get into trouble.  If one holds a Progressive or Conventional or Populist position on one issue, the tendency is to assume that they hold the same type of approach on all issues and that such an approach is a permanent personality characteristic.  That assumption makes it hard to find common ground on anything.

The strength of the Conventionals

I think that America needs all three types, but it is the Conventionals upon whom we must count to preserve the Democratic Republic form of government that makes America what it is.

America is an ever-evolving country.  Generally its evolution has been slow but positive.  We need the visions of Progressives to push us forward.  But, in the face of those exciting visions, we need the Conventionals to slow us down, make us think and carefully put one foot in front of the other with deliberation as we move forward.  It is the Conventionals who will ensure that we make positive changes without totally upending those institutions that allow us to have visions and to make changes in the first place.

Populism is also exciting.  But as a form of pure democracy, the bottom line is that it is really mob rule.  Again, it is the institutions of our Democratic Republic that have protected the minority from the negatives of a mob rule where the majority gets its way regardless of what that may mean to our institutions or the individuals whom those institutions protect.

We need all three, but sadly today the Conventionals are being lost, crushed by the visions and popular support coming from both sides of the aisle.  The Progressive Left and its Populist supporters would deny and destroy our Constitution along with many of our laws in order to create their Socialist utopia. The Populist Right, in the name of individual rights and popular rule would disband many of our governmental institutions and agencies that, while perhaps currently bloated or mismanaged, are key parts of the Democratic Republic and the America that these Populists claim to hold dear.

If we could only talk with one another, we might find that there are pieces of the Progressive Left agenda that are worth considering while at the same time the voice of the Populist Right needs to be listened to.  And we need the Conventionals to sustain the scaffolding that will hold all this together as America continues to evolve while remaining the America that is the shining star of democracy for the world.