A New Progressive Agenda

A New Progressive Agenda
“…Never Waste A Good Crisis”


“This is, or should be, the guiding principle of all social reform – to organize the economic, practical and social relationships between human beings in such a way that there shall be, for any individual or group within that society, a minimum of temptations to covetousness, pride, cruelty and lust for power.”

-Aldous Huxley-
The Perennial Philosophy


When I was a student, in the late 1950’s, we were repeatedly warned about the potential for dire consequences in three emerging marketing concepts: planned obsolescence, artificial demand and excess consumption. Welcome to a world beset by dire consequences. The piper is here, demanding his payment. Not only are we spiraling into economic chaos, we have despoiled our world, perhaps beyond recovery. The climate is on a deathwatch; we are running out of potable water; our air is fouled with toxic chemicals; our population is exploding, even as our resources are in precipitous decline.

The most alarming aspect of this calamity is the nearly unanimous response of our clueless leaders, whose solution is to resume, as quickly as possible, the very practices that got us here. Governments everywhere are desperately “stimulating” their economies, hoping (and “hope” is the only “hope”) to resuscitate the old economic system by encouraging a return to foolish and wasteful production and consumption.

Of course, we do hear voices of reason, advocates of “voluntary simplicity” and sustainable agriculture and environmental sanity, but they are a relatively minor and thoroughly powerless group: “Idealists,” we are told; “dreamers,” even “utopians,” or, worst, “anarchists.” Where is John Lennon when we need him (“Imagine”), or Martin Luther King, Jr. (“I Have A Dream”)? What happened to all the 60’s radicals and their communal, ecological ideas? When did we stop evolving as a society and start devolving?

The turning point, for me, was the 1980 election of Ronald Reagan, aided and abetted by Margaret Thatcher and the Ayn Rand clones at the Chicago School of Economics and the Hoover Institute and similar “Conservative Think Tanks” (an oxymoron, in my opinion). Sensing our collective fear of radical change, they rode to power by rolling back the clock, year by year, until, by the early 21st Century, we had regressed, in America and around much of the world, to a medieval concept of government: protect and enhance the wealth and power of the privileged few, at the expense of the powerless many, the illusion of “democracy” notwithstanding.

Which brings us to the most important issue: the role of government in society. We can all agree that government, at all levels, has the potential for considerable harm, both within a given society and around the world, representing, as it does, such a concentration of power. For the last three or four hundred years, this awareness has been modified, however haltingly, by an evolving realization that government is at least capable of reversing its medieval role, and being organized and implemented primarily to protect and enhance the welfare of the least powerful citizens from the inevitable predations of those for whom enough power and money is never enough.

The present economic crisis inevitably evokes the memory of Franklin Roosevelt. One of his most important issues is rarely, if ever, discussed. In his State of the Union message delivered January 6, 1941, known as the “Four Freedoms Speech,” he outlined four “fundamental” freedoms, the third of which was “Freedom from want.” It is not so well known that in 1944, shortly before his death, he was preparing to introduce one or more new amendments to the “Bill of Rights,” elucidating and mandating certain economic Human Rights, to supplement the political rights already guaranteed therein. After his death, his wife, Eleanor, continued this campaign, ultimately playing a leading role in the passage of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. Ironically, the United States has never signed that document, largely because it includes things like food, clothing, shelter, healthcare and education. The rest of the world responds with appropriate contempt when we lecture others on the subject of Human Rights.

“Economic injustice will stop the moment we want it to stop, and no sooner.”

-George Orwell-


When discussing economic Human Rights, it is necessary to point out a glaring inconsistency in our legal system: lawmakers, lawyers, enforcers, judges, all the way up to the Supreme Court are ready to go to the wall, pay any price, to protect the economic rights of the individuals and corporations that dominate and control our economy, yet the vast majority manifest open contempt for the economic right of those whose needs are greatest.

One man’s utopia is often another’s dystopia. Tragically, every attempt to ensure economic Human Rights in the 20th Century ended up restricting, if not eliminating, the political Human Rights of those who opposed these efforts, if not their very lives. The main cause of this is that, with few exceptions, those who love the Market hate the Poor (“Get out of the way! You’re holding us back! Get back to work!), while those who love the Poor hate the Market (“Give us all your wealth, you greedy oligarch! Nationalize the means of production! Outlaw private property!). Is there no middle ground in this conflict? Of course there is. We can start the discussion with a few basic suggestions.

First, we need to resume the evolutionary development of government: not only should its primary purpose be the protection of the relatively powerless from human predators (at home or abroad), the cost must be borne disproportionately by those who have the most to give (however that wealth may have been accrued). We could begin by reinstating the Progressive tax system we had in the US before the Reagan devolution: up to 70% of ordinary income and as much as 90% of “excess” income (you could look it up). The economic elite would rather consume sold waste material than give money to the government, so they would inevitably find more socially constructive means of creating wealth.

Next, we have to recognize that Representative Democracy, as it was envisioned by our founding fathers, has outgrown its relevance and has been co-opted by those whose “covetousness” and “lust for power” knows no reasonable bounds. Again, there is a simple solution: a tax reform which eliminates all deductions and includes a form reading, “Please spend my taxes as follows: do spend it for these programs, and do not spend it for these other programs.” In a true democracy, spending must reflect the desires of its citizens, not those of “special interests.”

There is at least one excellent model for this process: Working Assets, which provides telephone service and credit cards, distributed more than $3.5 million to nonprofit groups “working to change the world” (for which we can all be thankful). Those funds were allocated according to preferences of customers, who vote each year for their favorite causes. Maybe Working Assets would be willing to donate the software to our government tax agencies..

Think of it – if those special interests wanted to corrupt someone, they’d have to do it by treating us right. If you don’t think the government should support abortion, fine, your money will not be used for that purpose. If you want the government to protect your private wealth, you can pay for it. If a program lacks public support, it should be discontinued. Our “representatives” would allocate the resources according to our instructions. No need to lobby or otherwise corrupt them.

Finally, and here is where the present “crisis” provides a golden opportunity, as banks or auto companies or other “too big to fail” institutions come calling with their begging bowls in hand, we can have our economic “cake” and eat it too: instead of “nationalizing” them, we should collectively take ownership of them, creating a Citizens’ Mutual Fund, with shares and any subsequent profits distributed to all (with the possible exception of those who have way more than they need). People’s Capitalism! Talk about an “ownership society!” There is a precedent: Alaska already does this with a percentage of its oil income. While we’re at it, the Citizens Mutual Fund should also receive shares in the many private companies that will be profiting handsomely from the stimulus funds designated for restoring and expanding our decrepit infrastructure. Seems like simple justice to deal us all in on the game. After all, it will be our money paying for everything.

Similarly, we must resolve the threat of insolvency in Social Security and Medicare (and other Safety Net programs) by returning to the original intent of these programs, and making them available only to those who actually need them. A simple means test would suffice. Social Security was never meant to be a private retirement fund, or a return of your personal investment. Look at the name. It is supposed to be a Safety Net for those who have little or no other means of surviving in old age. By the same token, Medicare and other types of public healthcare should be reserved for those who would otherwise not have access to something that is one of the most basic Human Rights.

To summarize, the new Progressive agenda needs to reflect reality. There will never be enough good jobs again. Returning to our old economic models is nothing less than species suicide. Certainly, work can be ennobling and personally rewarding. Too much work for not enough compensation is a form of living death. Excessive, wasteful production and consumption in order to keep people working forty hours a week or more just to make ends meet is not only immoral, it is economically and ecologically unsustainable. We have to stop talking about more jobs and start demanding economic justice.

It will never be easy to implement such radical changes. Less work for more pay requires new economic models. Substantially contracting the Gross National Product will involve dislocation and discomfort, especially for those who have been the biggest beneficiaries of the old system. But we will never have a better opportunity than we do now. The last Great Depression was also the last time we acted like a “civilization,” paying artists to create art and writers to write. The forty-hour week, overtime, Social Security and many other humane programs were initiated. Surely, we can use the present crisis to develop even more “civilized” solutions. But, it will not happen unless Progressives organize and manifest our power. There really are a lot more of “us” than there are of “them.” Reactionary forces are well financed, well organized and motivated by their addiction to power and money. They will only be overcome by organization and effort.

“"If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without demand. It never did and it never will."

-Frederick Douglas-