Greta Christina is a progressive who opens an article of hers with these words: “I don’t approve of threats of physical violence”. Yet she approves of the state and government. She doesn’t recognize its threats of physical violence or its actual acts of physical violence. How is she thinking? I’ll get to that.
She writes “Nobody should be dehumanizing people — and progressives especially are supposed to be fighting for the dignity, equality, and humanity of everyone. It is hypocritical for us to claim to be doing that, while treating hundreds of millions of people as placeholders.” Yet she approves of a government that dehumanizes people and treats hundreds of millions of people as placeholders. Again, how does she hold to such an ideal and then go ahead and approve of a government that violates it? How is she thinking?
Here’s a key to her thought in the same article. She’s trying to get people to vote and she writes “If we want more Americans to think of government as Us rather than Them, as the way a society pools its resources and makes decisions about those resources rather than as the evil cackling villains lording it over the plebes…”
She says that a lot of Americans think of government as something foreign or as “Them”. She admits this fact in passing, but she doesn’t accept it as a fact in her thinking. If she did accept it, she might be led to connect this fact to the threat of physical violence and the actual violence of the government that dehumanize people and lead people to look upon government as “Them”. Instead of seeing facts and understanding them, she’s thinking about an ideal. Government to her is legitimate and good. It’s “the way a society pools its resources and makes decisions about those resources…” She doesn’t recognize other facts, such as the multiple ways that people pool resources and decide about them without government and outside of government. Think of how people pool capital in business ventures, for example. She also doesn’t recognize that what she thinks of as “a society” is a fiction. A society doesn’t exist as a person, and it can neither pool resources nor make decisions. People can pool resources and then make decisions about them voluntarily; government officials can do the same, but only by the threat of physical violence that she abhors. Why doesn’t she recognize this fact?
If Ms. Christina is a typical progressive, the picture I get is that progressives do not think logically. They do not admit facts into their consciousness or attempt to understand why they are as they are. They are not scientific. They accept society as a homogeneous entity. They accept government as a legitimate organization whose officials speak for society without threat of violence and without dehumanizing anyone. Progressives hold to an idea of government that’s unreal. It’s what they wish government to be. They want their imagined society to be one big happy family, and the government is that family’s head which somehow makes everyone happy without ever pushing around the family’s hundreds of millions of members. Their wishes greatly predominate over their critical faculties. To wish is to want something that either cannot happen or probably won’t happen. The minds of progressives are awash with their wishes as they ignore reality.5:53 pm on October 20, 2014 Email Michael S. Rozeff