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.

 

Happy New Year! What is Your Mission?

Happy New Year!

I am hoping for a new year in which everyone (including myself) becomes a bit more tolerant and that we are able to be thankful for what we each have and take joy simply in living without forever taking issue with those who have more, less, or are simply different in mind, body, or spirit than we are.

But, then, I read the morning news and learned that the Left has declared this the “year of resistance.”  (One wonders what the last 3 years have been?!)  The Left have vowed to double their efforts to remove President Trump from office, whether by the electoral process or by other means, they don’t really seem to care.

This caused me to again reflect upon what is “the Left” and why are they always so discontented and hateful?  We must begin with the understanding that, even though they both inhabit the Democrat Party, Leftists are not Liberals and that Leftism is not Liberalism.

While we often use the two terms interchangeably or think of Left as simply more extreme Liberalism, the reality is that the two have very different world views and each’s ideal includes very different Americas. 

Liberals essentially believe in American Democracy and Capitalism but understand its imperfections and would make changes to improve but not fundamentally change them.  Liberals would like to see more income equality, more affordable housing, better and more affordable health care, less discrimination, etc., but they would create these things within the capitalist structure of this country.  Their disagreements with the Right are more often on how to achieve these things within our governmental structure rather than with the governmental structure itself.   

The Right also has a number of conservative factions including fiscal, Christian, traditionalist, libertarian, moderate, as well as some extremists; but, for the most part the Right or Republicans all support the American capitalist form of government.   As such, when the two parties consisted mostly of conservatives and liberals, it was easier for the government to accomplish necessary changes as the two sides could more easily work toward successful compromises within the same fundamental government structure and ideals.

In contrast, the Left considers capitalism as something that should be done away with.  While they would like to see many results similar to those advocated by Liberals, their method of achieving those goals is to fundamentally change the governing structure of America.  While Liberals might want to see governmental structures change more quickly, the Left would like to see them change completely.  Ultimately, in their desire to create what they would see as a better incarnation, the Left would destroy everything that makes America what it is today. 

Hence the Left’s hatred of Trump, patriotism, and nationalism.  A note here:  nationalism is simply a support for one’s own nation.  While that nationalism can take a dark turn it is not in and of itself an evil; indeed, it is something that is necessary for the health and sustenance of any country or nation-state.  Similarly, patriotism is nothing more than support for one’s country along with a feeling of attachment to that country.  These are not negative things, but they become negative to a group that would completely destroy that country and rebuild it with something else.  This is what the Left would do.

The Left would completely restructure our economy, and in doing so would also completely restructure our democracy.  They cannot follow the Liberal approach of compromise or have patience for the slower path of change that occurs within our current systems because the Left does not believe in that system.  The Left wants not only immediate change but also change to a completely different system.  Their entire ideology is different.

The Left rejects the core ideologies of this country.  For example, Leftism is based on class solidarity, not national solidarity and not human solidarity.  The class – the identity group – is essential to a Left philosophy.  While America believes that the color of one’s skin should be insignificant (and despite history that contradicted that, our country has and continues to allow us to move past inequalities based upon race or other identifiable factors),  to the left, seeing race as insignificant is actually racist.  That is, the Left needs racial identity to build class or identity group solidarity.

The Left’s view toward free speech is entirely antithetical to that of traditional Liberals and to the core values of this country.  “I disagree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it.”  That statement encapsulates the essence of our belief in free speech and the free and often passionate interchange of ideas along with the individual's right to hold and speak ideas with which others disagree.  This concept is essential to our democracy.  The Left, on the other hand, would ban all speech which they find offensive or which counters the speech necessary to their vision of what America should be. 

In this suppression of free speech and with it the freedom of individuality in speech, values, and ideas, the Left would eliminate the individual in furtherance of class solidarity.  The Left has contempt for all which does not further its goals.  Indeed, some would completely obliterate anything based on “Western Civilization” which does, indeed, hold most of the underlying principles of America:  morals, ethics, literature, artistic work, music, philosophy, religion.  These are all denounced in one way or another as the Left seeks to remake America.

To the Left, America is a capitalist horror filled only with people who are racist, sexist, homophobic, etc.  While Liberals acknowledge that such mindsets exist, they will work to remove the effects of such negative attitudes within our current Constitutional, legal, and capitalist system.  Economically, Liberals' work will be more towards equality of opportunity rather than equality of result.  While Liberals will use the current democratic and capitalist systems to eliminate such things as economic gaps, the Left will ignore individual enterprise and turn to such things as redistribution of income and/or property promulgated by government fiat.

The democratic system of this country will always recognize individuality and with it the unreality of total sameness.  The Left, on the other hand, would envision absolutely no differences in economic or other results; that is, the Left strives for one unified class supervised by a government that holds and enforces Leftist ideals. The individual is lost to the dictates of a large and controlling government who will create what the Leftists (but perhaps not the people) will determine to be good.

No, Liberalism is not Leftism.  While both philosophies currently inhabit the Democrat party, they actually have very little in common.  They do however, both want to take the power of the presidency back from Donald Trump.   Frighteningly, they have joined forces in this; however, the Liberals have, in so doing, forgotten their core belief in and allegiance to this country.  The Left could care less.

This country, while always holding a variety of beliefs, including political, has always been generally united in the core support for the fundamental structure of our government.  That is no longer true.  The Left has a different mission, one not to support and improve America, but to totally destroy it.  They hate not only President Trump, but also his supporters, and every traditional value upon which this country was built.  They will not give up until they have eradicated them all and remade this country into something no longer recognizable as the shining beacon of individual freedoms and democracy.

That is the mission of the Left.  I do not believe that is the mission of Liberals or Conservatives or most Americans.  The mission of the Left is filled with hate and nihilism.  As the rest of us consider our New Year’s resolutions, we can make them ones of respect and tolerance and inclusion.  Rather than discarding all that is good in America simply because it is not perfect, we can make resolutions that improve and strengthen the already greatness of this country and all that it stands for.  We can make that our mission.  I hope that we do.