On being ‘Progressive’

stephen says:

05:04am | 15/12/09

Sir,
You establish your own credentials as a Conservative by negating the attributes of your antitheses e.g. Progressives.
This is not a sound argument.
Let me point out, though, that a Progressive is not a descriptive word, in that it doesn’t describe a state of being, but a way of thinking.
Progressive thinkers, then, don’t assign their thoughts a creed, or necessarily follow the rank-and-file. They (we !) think each problem or topic to a conclusion which may or may not be ‘left’ or ‘right’.
Your way of political thought, Sir, appears bound rigid to a half-mast flag. It is one grave problem with Conservatism : it has the utmost disrespect for the endeavours and sentiments of Common Man.

Slim says:

06:27am | 15/12/09

Be careful with those strawmen - it’s a high fire danger day in many parts of the country!

I look forward to the sequel ‘On being a reactionary rightard”.

Andrew Goff says:

07:50am | 15/12/09

How silly. I know lots of progressive conservatives. They tend to be the ones who don’t talk in “us v them” phrasing and are likely to have a moral compass which continued to develop after leviticus.

Though I agree many on the left throw around the term “progressive” because they actually have no substantial argument behind their position, they are in fact anything but progressive!

David says:

08:09am | 15/12/09

Okay, so let’s look at the inherent contradiction of the conservatives.

For example, conservatives have recently told us both that the global financial crisis was NOT caused by neo-liberalism, and that the neo-liberal emissions trading scheme is THE WORST POSSIBLE RESPONSE to the global climate crisis.

Conservatives DO NOT want a Bill of Rights to empower individuals over against the community, but are VERY SUPPORTIVE of an industrial relations system that allows for individuals to opt out of collective arrangements and directly negotiate their own contract and conditions.

Conservatives believe in LIMITING the role of Government to bring positive social change, except when it involves intervention in dysfunctional communities the Northern Territory.

I mean, seriously, both sides have more nuanced views than just left or right, neo-liberal or socialist and conservatives are just as “contradictory” as progressives.

Liz says:

08:15am | 15/12/09

So they’re all boomers and old hippies then? If people didn’t believe in their own power to change things we’d all be dead and Hitler would be ruling the world.

T.Chong says:

08:23am | 15/12/09

Chris , you run the PCYC ? never would have picked that.
Great to see that a youth organisation has such a tolerant open minded CEO.
Progressives have hubris? Unlike conservatives such as Bishops, Abbott, Abetz, Sen Sophie, Lord Downer, “man of steel” Minchin, the rest.
Yes Dave , the polite progressives may only consider you a conservative, nasty ones might jokingly (of course) think your Chief Wiggum

Bob Mellows says:

08:35am | 15/12/09

Conservatives: Telling people how they should act and deciding who gets what rights since the 1950’s.

Chase Stevens says:

08:38am | 15/12/09

If anyone wants to know what an Australian Progressive person is, then they should do some research rather then read this tripe.

Super D says:

08:50am | 15/12/09

@ Stephen - Progressive Thinkers is a contradiction in terms. 

This article does an excellent job of highlighting the inconsistencies between lofty rhetoric and the minutae of actual life.

If you ever want to have fun with a progressive, get them to express two “noble” views and then demonstrate to them how they are in conflict with each other.

Progressives rarely care to get past the slogan, politics by soundbyte suits them down to the ground.

Tim says:

08:56am | 15/12/09

Very insightfull article Chris, and you seem to have struck a chord based on the negative comments which, ironically, seem to be based on the very traits you’ve outlined. The basis of the ‘progressive’ stance is sanctimony. As you say, their assumption of the word (and assigning of the term ‘conservative’ to anyone who disagrees with their position) is the sole basis for their argument, which is no basis at all. The moral high ground is getting awful crowded these days. Perhaps its because progressives think it will be the only place not underwater within the next few years.

COF says:

09:03am | 15/12/09

Gee Chris, you would almost have a political platform there if it wasn’t already taken. It takes a lot of hubris to claim the conservative stance when a lot of your platforms here are progressive.

To generalise about progressivism is as ill informed as generalising about conservatism. To be perpetually either is absurd, as conservatism is essentially the will not to change policy while progressivism is the reverse. It all depends on the policy, doesn’t it?

Your enemy isn’t necessarily ‘progressives”. His name is Kevin Rudd.

I understand that you have probably been hanging around with the wrong people, and your reaction to them has produced this piece. But you have to recognise that the worldview of the nation’s people is a hell of a lot more pluralistic than you are giving it credit for. Giving schools of thought character traits reeks of Today Tonight simplicity.

jack says:

09:11am | 15/12/09

The progressive looks at the Middle East, sees a small tolerant, modern, progressive democracy surrounded by tyrannies who oppress the majority and persecute minorities, and supports the latter.

David C says:

09:27am | 15/12/09

My own experience is that conservatives are not focussed on maintaining the status quo for the sake of no change but more recognise that there are fundamental values that will never change. The progressives on the other hand always seem to believe there is a better way that only they can see or “get”. From time to time the populace will allow the progressives to try and find this other way but we always end up back on the same path.

Leonid says:

09:48am | 15/12/09

Conservatives are people who work for a living, save for their future and their kids’ future, and respect the past while considering how to improve the present.

Progressives fill the ranks of the idle chatterati, expect to live without personal exertion in the manner to which they want to become accustomed, and demand that government ensure the fulfilment of their cascading expectations.

Fully funded by the productive conservatives, of course.

David C says:

09:58am | 15/12/09

Leonid you said it so much better than me

Ginger says:

10:08am | 15/12/09

Wow Chris, nice one tarring every single “progressive” with the same brush. Maybe progressives are against intervention in the NT because it SUSPENDS HUMAN RIGHTS…..
Your rhetoric is empty and discounts a lot of good work done by a lot of good people.

Helen says:

10:10am | 15/12/09

they believe that if Progressives control Government, Government can engineer positive change. So a will-to-power is another characteristic, disguised, self-reassuringly, of course, as a desire to serve the common good.

Whereas the “conservative” or RW will-to-power is a simple expression of their innate superiority and membership of the class that is Born to Rule.

Of course, Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones and others are humble scholars, completely free of hubris!

*Blows raspberry* Yes, indeed we need a sarcasm font!

Toddzilla says:

10:19am | 15/12/09

“Progressives” are people who are bitter that the skills so rewarded in school were less rewarded in the job market, and so turned against capitalism, even though they enjoyed vastly more enjoyable lives under it than under alternative systems. That, and the fact they think it’d be cool to marry a dog.

James says:

10:31am | 15/12/09

Wow guys, like to generalise much?  Lets take this step by step.

Toddzilla, who is talking about marrying dogs?  Take your anti-psychotics, buddy, your hearing things.

Leonid, I am fairly left-leaning on most issues, yet I am gainfully employed - what a contradiction in terms I must be.

Jack, again I am left-leaning, and yet I support Israel’s right to exist (I even sent money to the Labour Party over there a few years ago), as do many lefties that I know.

Tim, I know plenty of sanctimonious right-wingers as well, my friend.  Take for instance all the gay-bashing you read on blogs these days, I bet its not so-called progressives telling people that everyone should have equal rights as an individual unless they do certain things in the privacy of their own home.

No side of politics has a monopoly on truth, or goodness.  For every Stalin, there is a Hitler.  For every Bush, there is an Obama.  Like most things in this world, the truth lies somewhere in the middle of either extreme.  I think David has hit the nail on the head - both sides of politics hold these mutually contradictory positions, if only one would examine them closely.

Mavis says:

10:37am | 15/12/09

Seriously?

Conservatives believe the sky is green. But it’s not, it’s blue. Therefore conservatives is wrongz.

Jaz says:

11:17am | 15/12/09

Chris, you have struck a note. I also have noted the increasing use of the word “progressive” to describe all the things that are right with the world while “conservative” represents all the things that need to change. A recent book I read by Thomas E Woods called Meltdown clearly outlines the cause and effect of the current GFC and the incredible hypocrisy of the self important democrats in the US government that started with Fanny and Freddy and ended in what is arguably the biggest financial crisis ever. The cheep headlines continue with the ongoing blame of capitalism and the promotion of government. Its astounding how the so called progressives continue to live the bourgeois life while complaining about the conservative values that have provided them the freedom to do so.
The Balmain set who are the first to claim the progressive title will also be the first to complain about why the council has to interfere in the planning laws of the favourite local café. A friend of mine recently describes the left of politics in the best way I have herd in a long time. “Don’t fault the left” he said, ”They are well meaning people who believe that everything is important, they just haven’t realised there is a limited budget and that sacrifices need to be made”. This I thought describes why democratic governments are the first to start printing money as soon as they get the key to the lolly jar.
I’ll end with one of the best lines from Woods’ book for all the anti-capitalist progressives. “Blaming capitalism for the crisis is like blaming gravity for a plane falling out of the air”. 
If you don’t understand the fundamentals of gravity your bound for a fall problem is your taking a lot of us with you.

Sean says:

11:28am | 15/12/09

Great article and it has obviously struck a nerve.  A generalisation of course but made some valid points around the hypocrisy of progressives
Also, well said Leonid

AdamC says:

11:31am | 15/12/09

These articles are always best when they hit some nerves, which Chris has done here. Mind you, criticising political positions based on inconsistency is a dangerous game; in real life, most people’s views on various issues could be seen to be contradictory in some respects. Except for a few exceptions, people are not completely ideologically rigid in their outlook, even progressives.

On the term itself, progressive is just a silly euphemism for ‘left-wing’ or ‘politically-correct’. It doesn’t actually mean progressive in a literal sense, of course. Just as, despite being a conservative, Tony Abbott is in favour of changing several things. The best illustration of this in both respects is industrial relations, where ‘conservatives’ promote positive change while ‘progressives’ are terrified of any change (indeed, of any industrial relations policy idea developed since the 1970s). 

Oh and does the Punch have any policy (preferably anti) on the matter of people CAPITALISING words in comments? It is such an obnoxious habit.

Patrick says:

11:41am | 15/12/09

These are all ridiculously simple and partisan arguments. If I wanted to learn more about progressives then even Wikipedia would be more informative than this tripe.

stephen says:

01:24pm | 15/12/09

Jack 10.11.
You can still be a Democrat and at the same time, a fundamentalist.
That’s one problem with being called a descriptive word .e.g. Progressive, Conservative etc : it does not, or rather should not, necessarily exclude the opposing term.

Jacquie Butterfield says:

02:13pm | 15/12/09

I’m learning from talking with certain people that the definition of a non-progressive is ‘SMUG’  in the knowledge that they are right.  And I never want to win an argument.  Discussion, I enjoy.  Arguments?  A waste of time to all but those who are always sure they are right.

SC says:

02:25pm | 15/12/09

Somehow I’m not buying YOUR objectivity - little heavy on the rhetoric there, mister. Let me know if you ever want a liberal (little-L) sensibility to argue with so we can make sweeping generalizations and character-assasinate each other. Shouldn’t even need to meet first, you know me so well…

stephen says:

02:28pm | 15/12/09

Smug : a mug with no capital.

David says:

03:20pm | 15/12/09

AdamC - capitalising words in comments is necessary for emphasis given that italics and bold are not available to us.

Razor says:

03:42pm | 15/12/09

Plenty of ad hominem attacks on the author and supportive posters, various cries of generalisation, but no direct refutation of the issues raised in the article.

AdamC - I beleive that I have a consistent and cohesive outlook on life, economics, politics.  I actually would be very upset to be shown that I was inconsistent or a hypocrit.  For example - I would be very embarrassed to be someone who supports the theory of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change and fly all the way to Copenhagen on a carbon-dioxide spewing jet to ponce around in toasty warm conference buildings and hotels.

jk says:

03:51pm | 15/12/09

Awesome! Yet another post on The Punch that is a straw man argument. Seriously, it’s getting a bit shite kids. The occasional straw man argument has it’s place, but it’s getting ridiculous in these parts. The Punch is turning into a playground for wannabe conservative politicians to demonstrate the depth of their erudition and wit.
That last bit was irony, in case anyone was wondering…

papachango says:

04:10pm | 15/12/09

progressive and conservative are silly terms, and shouldn’t really be associated with left or right wing politics.

Progressive just means making lots of changes (presumably for the better) and conservative is sticking with the status quo. By that definition Margaret Thatcher was one of the most progressive leaders ever and Kim-Jog Il one of the most conservative.

TB says:

05:55pm | 15/12/09

I find most ‘progressives’ are not really that ‘progressive.’ When most of these progressives attempt to seek solutions to the problems which continue to be unaddressed, they ultimately seek solutions within the confines of the systems (be they social, political or economic) that created the problems in the first place. Ultimately we end up with a hodgepodge of solutions that really aren’t solutions at all, as the true root causes continue to be ignored. Broadly speaking, most progressives are not seeing enough of the big picture, and are not asking enough questions about environmental conditions (as in social, political and economic conditions) to come up with solutions that will lead to true ‘progress.’

Andrew Goff says:

06:04pm | 15/12/09

Progressive: Bringing about progress.
Conservative: Conserving what you have.

Gee wouldn’t it be great if we could have a government that was BOTH.