Understanding the Progressive Mind II

Understanding the Progressive Mind II. By David Horowitz. There is a post on part 1 here.

In a previous article, I explained that “progressivism is a criminal mentality.”

By progressivism, I mean every political philosophy that regards itself as “revolutionary,” or “transformative,” that describes itself as socialist, communist, fascist or jihadist — or that believes “the moral arc of the universe that bends towards justice.” The belief that history is marching towards justice is a cult ideology refuted by the mass genocides of the modern era, which were carried out by Marxists and Nazis. The belief that the world is marching towards justice, that progressives are “on the right side of history” is a delusion that will justify any atrocity and already has.

That is why today’s progressives are advancing the same genocidal agendas that the West defeated in World War II and the Cold War. …

Socialism is a parasite’s religion:

Virtually every progressive proposal, from the moratorium on rent payments to cancelling student debts to handing out other people’s money to their favored constituents for doing nothing is an eloquent expression of the fact that socialism is theft.

Student loans guaranteed by the federal government were a progressive legislative achievement. They led directly to a rampant inflation of student fees as university administrators raised tuition rates because they could. These student “victims,” championed by progressives, weren’t forced to take loans, nor did anyone twist their arms to spend the money on frivolous courses in woke agendas which would probably not lead to paying jobs that would allow them to honor their debts. Consequently, now that the program is a burden on those who took advantage of it, the progressive solution is to make the taxpayers — including students who paid their debts — foot the bill for those who couldn’t be bothered to. Theft.

“Social justice” is invariably a scheme to reward one’s political friends and punish one’s enemies. It’s basically a Ponzi scheme that works until you run out of other people’s money, as Margaret Thatcher once observed. In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.

It’s a moral thing. Do you prefer the market and voluntary transactions to set your income, or do you prefer the government and involuntary transactions to decide your level of reward?