Descriptions

Chesterton pointed out the bizarre inapplicability of some political labels a hundred years or so ago when he wrote rather sadly that all a Liberal ever wanted to liberate anyone from was his marriage vows and all a Conservative ever wanted to conserve was his bank balance. I suppose he meant the political parties of the time bearing those names. But it doesn't miss the mark by much our own American political factions.

I had a note the other day from an acquaintance who describes himself as a “progressive”. It occurred to me that we have here yet another political word that over the years has had all the meaning sucked out of it. Progressives don't really believe in progress any more. They used to believe in human perfectibility: eliminating poverty, disease, ignorance; increasingly efficient and benevolent government; a culture with ever higher values and standards; ever-increasing prosperity for all.

It's beside the point so far as this note is concerned whether any of that was ever achievable. But now even avowed progressives don't believe it. They don't like any sort of man-made development: no expanding suburbs, no nasty, smelly factories, no large farms. They hate science, except in the abstract and, of course, when it can be used as a club to beat the sorts of religion they don't like. They don't like complex, intricate or beautiful art. Anything that rises above the simplicity of a cube, a roomful of coloured balloons, a pink curtain across a ravine, or a comic book is elitist and beyond the pale.

Now, they may be right about some of that. I rather think they are. But all of that used to be called progress. And now progressives are against it.

My guess is that our contemporary progressives never really wanted to be “progressive” at all. But after some disastrous poll results the consensus became that “liberal” was an electoral non-starter. So progressive it is. At least for a while.