This is what I learned today. The differences between Liberalism, Progressivism and Socialism:
Liberalism advocates the use of government power to solve social problems. Classic liberalism says government power should only be used to solve problems external to the free market. For instance, you have a horse and carriage that many people benefit from, yet only a few pay. According to classic liberalism, the government would need to take over operation of the horse and carriage in order to ensure that this important service continues to be provided.
Social Liberalism is about social justice, but Progressivism believes the strong arm of the Fed gov’t should enforce that social justice. President Roosevelt with his “New Deal” expanded Liberalism even further. They believed that government power could solve not only economic problems, but social problems as well. This would be today’s version of Progressivism.
Progressivism, to which many Washington Democrats openly ascribe, is a method or ideology to move us toward the government controlling all aspects of society – economic, financial, social – all. Progressives advocate social programs to create a dependent class of voters that will ensure their power into perpetuity (social security, welfare, medicare, immigration reform, gov. handouts) Liberalism/Progressivism is not socialism, however it leads us to socialism through the back door. To Progressives, the ends justify the means. Sounds like….
Socialism/Marxism lives at the extreme end of the same spectrum. The terms “Socialism and Marxism” have earned very negative connations, so are used rarely, even if the all the same principles are there. True Radical Socialists, like the dozen who are Obama advisers (Bill Ayers, Mark Loyd, Van Jones, Jim Wallis, Robert Creamer, Andy Stern to name a few) were active in the 1960s radical Students for Democratic Society group, which used violence and bombing instead of arguments. History bears this out, I’m not making it up. These Obama czars and advisers were there.
Socialist ideologies, though, include the FORCED re-distribtuion of wealth, the gov’t control of production and distribution of all capital, and advocates the government taking control of everything to make sure wealth is distributed evenly (ummm…even Senators’ and Congressmen’s $175k salaries??? …nah.) Socialists want to “fundamentally transform America” into some kind of utopia where everything is “free.”
Here’s a quote for you from our very own MI-Democrat Rep. John Dingell, on Monday of this week “…it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together TO CONTROL THE PEOPLE.”
So am I being extreme in my concern about where our Fed gov’t is headed? Maybe. But maybe not. I hope I’m over-reacting, I hope to God I am.