The Federal Government a Progressive’s Paradox
The Federal Government, at every instance, stands opposed to the/any progressive agenda. Why is the progressive movement, that has zero victories and an endless list of lost causes at the hands of the Federal Government, against substantially limiting its influence? The paradox.
Almost all progressives, I have spoken to, deem states rights advocates to be oddballs, lunes, sector of the far right, fringe ect ect for adapting the position that the federal government, according to the Constitution of the United States, should have much less power over the states. Most progressives, I have spoke to, believe that the way forward is not to limit the power of the federal government but to petition it to change to support the, in some part, the progressive agenda. Hasn’t happened, ain’t going to happen,wake up. Even gay rights was forced on the federal government from the state level. Now they take the mantle as the advocates when the thrust and inevitable outcome are a given. Thanks for nothing.
The Federal Government is not there to help you get a better quality of life, it is there to preclude you from effectively petitioning your government for redress of your grievances. If you look to the federalist papers #10, the drafter writes of “faction”. “faction” is the animus that the average Joe would experience because of the substantial disparities income, quality of life, wealth acquisition that would inevitably occur in system they were designing. To address this “faction” they could follow have followed Plato or Socrates. One advocated for addressing faction by mitigating the disparities and trying to make a more just, equal society, the other was to preclude this “faction” from ever being able to affect the interests of the wealthy plantation owners. Guess which one they chose? Their answer The United States Senate, where good legislation goes to die.
It is so effective that I made a recent post citing a Princeton study in which it was determined that the American people have absolutely “zero influence” on the federal government. Why not actively support, advocate to diminish the power of any entity with that record irrespective of what they call it. Those who call for increased states rights as advocated for by the people who demanded, required that the bill of rights be added to the constitution before it would have a chance of passing, are not the lunes. The lunes are those who support a large federal entity that at every turn is adverse to their righteous agenda. The lunes are those that think they are going to ” change” the federal government into anything that is not diametrically opposed to and has been opposed to for a generation and more. Where’s a scintilla of evidence to support that? What about the overwhelming evidence in the record that they will do anything to stop the progressive agenda? Only in the most delusional fantasy land do you have the federal government operating in your interests in an attempt to mitigate the “faction” you may be experiencing.
A breakdown by Federal Agency:
Department of Drug Enforcement- Go ahead, defend this government agency as beneficial to progressive causes
Department of Agriculture- The Greek translation is “defender of Monsanto” a conduit of cash to the one percent, farmers are rich, and receive massive subsidies through this cash conduit.
Note: you can administer food stamps without a huge DOA. You can have SS without a huge government bureaucracy, it is a matter of administration, hard to corrupt. You can have Universal Healthcare it requires much less Federal Gov than they use now to forward their medical scheme, again for the one percent.
Food and Drug Administration- The FDA Greek Translation “Defenders of PHARMA” the gatekeeper to high drug price, stagnate innovations, conduit of cash to the one percent
Department of Defense – Can’t account for two trillion dollars, it’s treated like a mulligan in golf.
Central Intelligence Agency- I’m afraid to say.
Department of Education- well, we are ranked about 35th in the world and trending down,defend that- The feds place perverse incentives in the system to encourage privatization/charter. On it’s face, believing that sending your money to the Federal government, in which they send some of that money back to the schools with mandates. Why does the Federal government know how to educate the children of a community better than the community/parents? They don’t’, look at the record. They dont have perfect knowledge, they don’t care more– I put my money on the parents.
Environmental Protection Agency- Greek translation, you got it-” defender of Big Polluters” and a terror to small business “BP”
Department of Energy-All together now “Defenders of Big Oil” slayer of alternative energy sources
The Securities and Exchange Commission- the SEC “the defenders of yes yes yes Wall Street”
The Department of Justice- Never prosecute a wall-street crook , bank that launders millions in drug money, and gets caught a second time, Director of national security who lies to congress and admits it, nor Tortures ect ect ect, but who refuses to reschedule Marijuana, throws drug users in jail for decades( as bankers launder), Massive, epic assault on whistle blowers ect ect .
I do not see why this is not an issue on the forefront for progressives. why is it not the natural vehicle for change. No, because libertarians advocate for a lesser role for the Federal Government something must be wrong with it? Just because it is in essence a libertarian idea does not make it wrong. In the case present, the progressives efforts that have attempted to make the Federal Government adapt some small part of its agenda have failed miserably, while the agenda opposed by progreesives has been forwarded greatly.
The progressives are missing on this issue, why am I wrong?