While I make no purposeful attempt to offend (in regards to my use of the term, Progressive), I also intend to tell only the truth, for which I will not apologize. Upon listening to or reading my entire work, you will understand why. If in disagreement with me, discarding of my work will only emphasize the point. As far as alternatives, I find that the term Progressive was the best one to use. Distant from any party, but the term leaves no mystery as to whom I’m writing about.
Let’s begin by talking technology for a moment. As it is my expertise, I tend to use technological models for explaining the world. We’ve so many models for our convoluted field, that I can always find a suitable one. Let’s go with programming. Programmers almost never write in assembly (Binary), rather, they write in an abstraction of the truth. This is how they manage to comprehend the machine. When multiple programmers agree upon someone’s abstraction, they call it a language. And as anyone is free to create their own abstractions from the truth, we end up with many languages.
Likewise, politics and law are also an abstraction of the moral truth, whatever it may be. Based off this truth, we have Monarchies, Republics, and Dictatorships. But for politics and law to function, they must both agree what truth is. Like a programming language, the law must function within the limits of the truth it’s built upon. But what truth is our law based upon? Who better to ask than a former President of the United States?
“The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount…If we don’t have a proper fundamental moral background, we will finally end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the State.” – Harry S. Truman
In the United States, western morality is the truth from which law is derived. It is the yardstick upon which our constitutions and rights are based. But take a ruler for example; a ruler is simply a measurement upon which we all agree. If we no longer agree, then an inch is an abstraction of nothing, and therefore such definitions are useless.
Enter the progressive’s moral authority, Nihilism. The thought that because nothing is, anything can be. What proponents of nihilistic morality fail to realize, is that through their inexistent ruler they surrender every right to an argument. If nothing is, then why is the progressive approach to morality superior to that of western or middle-eastern morality? If nothing is true, then all things are equal.
They are left with nothing to justify any morality, save for their emotion and desire. What is right, is what they want. C.S. Lewis insightfully lays this out in The Abolition of Man.
“My point is that those who stand outside all judgements of value cannot have any ground for preferring one of their own impulses to another except the emotional strength of that impulse.” – The Abolition of Man (Pg. 27)
This sets the progressive in opposition to any morality that denies them pleasure. To an extent, any moral ruler exists for the pure purpose of tempering desire. This places progressives against everybody, but of interest to us, is their opposition to western, Christian morality.
When met with opposition to their desire, they have nothing left with which to respond, due to their lack of moral law. Instead, progressives launch into an attack of carnal furry. They sometimes go so far, as to have their persecutor killed. Such happened to the Prophet Abinadi. He tried to call such people to repentance in Mosiah 11:20-22.
20 And it came to pass that there was a man among them whose name was Abinadi; and he went forth among them, and began to prophesy, saying: Behold, thus saith the Lord, and thus hath he commanded me, saying, Go forth, and say unto this people, thus saith the Lord—Wo be unto this people, for I have seen their abominations, and their wickedness, and their whoredoms; and except they repent I will visit them in mine anger.
21 And except they repent and turn to the Lord their God, behold, I will deliver them into the hands of their enemies; yea, and they shall be brought into bondage; and they shall be afflicted by the hand of their enemies.
22 And it shall come to pass that they shall know that I am the Lord their God, and am a jealous God, visiting the iniquities of my people.
They threw Abinadi into prison. In Mosiah 17:8-10, the wicked King Noah tried to make Abinadi rescind his argument, a typical progressive tactic. Apparently for Progressives, admission to the superiority of their worldview provides a pleasant salve.
7 And he (King Noah) said unto him: Abinadi, we have found an accusation against thee, and thou art worthy of death.
8 For thou hast said that God himself should come down among the children of men; and now, for this cause thou shalt be put to death unless thou wilt recall all the words which thou hast spoken evil concerning me and my people.
9 Now Abinadi said unto him: I say unto you, I will not recall the words which I have spoken unto you concerning this people, for they are true; and that ye may know of their surety I have suffered myself that I have fallen into your hands.
10 Yea, and I will suffer even until death, and I will not recall my words, and they shall stand as a testimony against you. And if ye slay me ye will shed innocent blood, and this shall also stand as a testimony against you at the last day.
Abinadi paid mightily for his valiant attempts in Mosiah 17:11-13
11 And now king Noah was about to release him, for he feared his word; for he feared that the judgments of God would come upon him.
12 But the priests lifted up their voices against him, and began to accuse him, saying: He has reviled the king. Therefore the king was stirred up in anger against him, and he delivered him up that he might be slain.
13 And it came to pass that they took him and bound him, and scourged his skin with faggots, yea, even unto death.
I recommend reading all of Mosiah, because Abinadi certainly gets the last word. But for my example, we’ll stop here. Notice, just as King Noah risked redeeming himself, the democratic consensus of his priests rescued him from logical folly. This is understandable. We know Progressives love democracy, as pure democracy simply follows the will of the majority. Convince the majority to share a desire, and Progressives are victorious. In my opinion, King Noah’s priests aren’t the only judges who enjoy the blatant disregard of the moral, or indeed, written law, in exchange for emotional pleasure.
Progressives have it backwards, by establishing a system where politics and laws can rewrite morality. You might as well attempt to change the flavor of a baked cake. This folly is required in progressive ideology, as “senseless” laws, based on morality they don’t believe in, only exist as a barricade to their pleasure. It doesn’t matter if the cake is chocolate. They will swear to no end that it’s red velvet. By approaching morality in this fashion, they’ve already given up their freedom to the adversary. In no way is my morality determined by the law. Just because an act is not prohibited, does not make it acceptable. The same logic does not apply in the mind of the nihilist. Hence their need to rewrite the law for everyone; it’s justification, a suave, and the collapse of a wall of deplorables.
What this leads to is one solution, determined by the enemy. For their party to survive, they must vow the destruction of any opposition; a perfectly acceptable approach under Nihilism. The enemy will find itself a hero, and rally around that candidate to reach their ends. Little do they know, what evil they’ve selected for their rally. Progressives have no allies, and in electing a leader that matches their interests, they inadvertently appoint a king who only cares about his own interests. Hence, corruption thrives. Once again, C.S. Lewis and I are of similar opinion;
“I am very doubtful whether history shows us one example of a man who, having stepped outside traditional morality and attained power, has used that power benevolently.” – The Abolition of Man (Pg. 25)
To you, it may sound like I intend to make war against this ideology. Well, that is exactly my intention. Wherever evil is, war is. A war where everyone is forced into the fight. We have no agency to avoid it. Inaction when war is forced upon you is to accept defeat. As Edmund Burke once wrote;
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke
Today, that war is taking place in our schools, workplaces, and the media. In these places, to offer even the slightest dissent from the opinion of a Progressive, is invite conflict. For them, there is no moderation in the fight, no cause to debate you. Rather, you exist simply as a barrier to pleasure, and must be eliminated through any means necessary. The tactic of the Progressive is to ridicule, pointing down from their great and spacious building.
One who is right, should not fear persecution, but relish it. The masses do not persecute lunatics, rather only those with opinions possessing a validity the masses want to ignore. To debate is one thing, to ridicule is another. Persecution is validation. They’re telling you, that you’re right.
Think of it like a horn in traffic. Because you’ve forced a driver into a position where they were powerless, they had to resort to honking. Some people feel insulted, but really, all you should hear are the trumpets of victory.
We are in a position with one choice. Stand up to them now, or succor their carnal needs later.