Jon Voigt Finally Says What We Were All Thinking About Progressives

3
Share

Jon Voigt

Midnight Cowboy star and Oscar winner Jon Voight gave an interview to Cigar Aficionado that covered his 52-year movie career and his sometimes contentious relationship with his daughter Angelina Jolie, but what was most interesting were his comments about Progressives. Someone finally approached the conversation we need to have.

“There are a lot of conservatives in Hollywood, and they’re not very welcome,” Voight told the December issue of Cigar Aficionado. “It’s a big surprise that we’ve come to this juncture where people with patriotic thoughts could not find a home in Hollywood.”

“I think the word ‘progressive’ is a very devious term. It was created as a substitute for ‘communist,’” he said. “What they propose is the reverse of progress. It’s some that that does taste of communism and Karl Marx’s pernicious philosophy.”

Is Progressivism synonymous with Communism and do distinctions matter?

Josh Lerner, Professor of Banking at Harvard Business School, said “Conservatives need to recognize not only what they stand for, but what we, in turn, wish to return to. We must be cognizant of the principles of the American founding rejected by Progressives, and we must really understand both. The fight between progressivism and American constitutionalism is far from over, and conservatives need to know which side we’re on and why…”

Progressivism is the opposite of Constitutionalism.

Progressivism is the belief that government needs to gain more control over society as society evolves and modernizes. They love bureaucracy, big government, heavy regulation of corporations, union labor is key, strong social activism is needed to make us all into clones, they want wage and price control, they see the necessity of reclaiming land for the government,and society must be used for the common good.

The government must be used by the collective for the common good. Social justice and wealth redistribution are foremost in their political decisions. The redistribution must be mandatory and must operate in accordance with their humanitarian beliefs.

Progressives do not see themselves as Marxist Socialists, but, rather, they see themselves as the purveyors of direct democracy, Hegelians (absolute idealism).

Professor Lerner, in his essay from The Conservative Quarterly, Understanding the Progressives, gives a summary of his thoughtful perspective of Progressivism.

In the essay, Lerner says:

…The essence of Progressivism is the rejection of the natural rights and social contract theories underlying the founding of the United States and the Declaration and Constitution…

…Progressivism is progress…

…Socially or politically traditional ideas and institutions became malevolent (hence the rise of the pejorative reactionary) and the new deliberately and rationally created ideas became intrinsically good…

Where the Constitution is seen as obstructionist, it’s decried. The Constitution limits their administrative bureaucracy which will lead to their idea of modernization and so-called progress.

Lerner does not see them as Marxists or proto-fascists because they embrace a fundamental Americanism. There are elements of Fascism and Marxism in their thinking but there are differences too according to Lerner.

They don’t really see a Communist state at the end.

All of these big government statists reject our Founding principles.

Marxism, Socialism, Communism, Progressivism all hold important things in common – statism over individual liberty.

For the Progressives, it might as well be 1910, blacks are enslaved, children are working in factories, women can’t vote and the rich are abusing the poor. Their idea of progress doesn’t coincide with the society of today. Their beliefs are regurgitated statist beliefs that have failed in the past.

child-laborer

Many of the statists calling themselves Progressives are just Communists, Socialists, and Marxists looking for a more euphemistic, obfuscating descriptor.

The fact is that Socialists, Marxists, Communists are all united with Progressives to undermine and overturn the Constitution of the United States. Once that is done, will it matter what we call them? We will be on the road to totalitarianism and in that respect, there is no difference.

As Professor Lerner said, we need to know what we believe in and be willing to fight for it.

Source on Jon Voight: Fox News 

Share

3 COMMENTS

  1. “There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism – by vote. It is merely the difference between murder and suicide.” — Ayn Rand, from “Foreign Policy Drains U.S. of Main Weapons”

    “I prefer the word progressive, which has a real American meaning, going back to the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th Century. I consider myself a modern progressive.” – Hillary Clinton, July 23, 2007.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Society

    “The Fabian Society, which favoured gradual ( progressive ) change rather than revolutionary change, was named – at the suggestion of Frank Podmore – in honour of the Roman general Fabius Maximus (nicknamed “Cunctator”, meaning “the Delayer”). His Fabian strategy advocated tactics of harassment and ATTRITION ( sound familiar? ) rather than head-on battles against the Carthaginian army under the renowned general Hannibal.

    • My friend’s father remembered running with his family through the woods, sometimes being carried as a six-year old, to escape the purge. They left with only the clothes on their backs. He still could recall the terror.

Comments are closed.