Get monthly updates directly to your email.

Unlock Expert Insights

Get exclusive access to in-depth analysis and expert opinions. Subscribe now for insider info!

Progressivism and Liberalism Are Enemies

James Ostrowski: Interventionist Mindset Has Destroyed US Individualism

Lea en español.

The “Classical” Qualifier

Spanish speakers have retained, to a large degree, the original meaning of liberalism. This is the intellectual tradition descending from Western European Enlightenment thinkers such as John Locke and Adam Smith. Liberalism emphasizes the individual and his natural rights—including life, property, and free exchange—and it places the burden of proof on government to justify any departure from the default of freedom and natural law.

English speakers—Americans and Canadians, in particular—have reason to envy that Spanish-language clarity. The Anglo-American understanding of the word liberalism has degraded terribly in the past century and made it synonymous with progressivism (statist interventionism). Conflating the two flips the meaning adhered to by some US founders, especially those with Jeffersonian affinities, and it has caused more than uneasiness among studious liberals. Often they now call themselves classical liberals to reduce confusion.¹ 

Attorney Jim Ostrowski, based in Buffalo, New York, has for more than a decade been on a mission to convey the true nature of progressivism and retake the liberal tradition for the liberty movement. In Progressivism: A Primer on the Idea Destroying America (226 pages, 2014), Ostrowski explains how the interventionist mindset has swept the United States since 1900 and is an archenemy of liberalism. He describes the primer as his “best book,” among many he has authored, and he contrasts the United States of today with that found by Alexis de Tocqueville in the early 19th century and described in Democracy in America.

The Breadth of the Enemy

Ostrowski’s book—albeit informative and compelling—is not uplifting. How could it be? The plain truth is that progressivism now dominates all US power centers, including both major political parties. Ostrowski makes this clear in his Liberty Moving video podcast, which I listen to without fail. His belief, for example, is that the Make America Great Again movement, insofar as it seeks liberty and decentralization, is at war with the Republican Party establishment: the RINOs who congregate in Washington, DC.

Calling a spade a spade, as Ostrowski does, will likely ruffle the feathers of many self-described Republicans and conservatives. That applies especially to those who defend government indoctrination centers and pension funding schemes, AKA public schools. Ostrowski identifies public schools as “glorified daytime prisons” and ideological enemies: “the foundation of big government in America.” In 2009, he released Government Schools Are Bad for Your Kids.

There is no shortage of meat for Ostrowski to go after when taking down progressivism, and he does not hesitate to take on sacred cows: Abraham Lincoln and the War between the States, Social Security, and nation-building, among many others. His politically incorrect critique even extends to what often seems like an Israel-first foreign policy.

We Must Fight with Direct Action

Fundamentally, Ostrowski asserts that progressivism is irrational and a departure from the greatest idea ever created for human flourishing: liberalism. However, the utopian folly of progressivism—that there can be a governmental (coercive) solution to every problem—is appealing to a vast swath of people.

Ostrowski likens progressivism to therapy for those who lack a sense of personal efficacy. Such is the intensity and precision of his takedown, though, few progressives are likely to finish the book. My guess is that it would be too unsettling and challenging to their emotionally driven worldview. This is somewhat ironic, since Ostrowski wants liberals to cease speaking only to themselves.

Progressivism’s adherents do not appear to have any limits and ignore the skyrocketing costs of their policies, which have brought the United States to her knees. In 2014, when Progressivism came out, Ostrowski was concerned about US$17 trillion in official national debt and $200 billion in interest payments. The debt has more than doubled in a decade, and the interest has cracked $1 trillion annually, while unfunded liabilities continue to mount. This indebtedness underlines why the progressive mentality is useful to power-hungry rulers and parasites such as public-sector unions.

The challenge then is what to do about the problem that seems more all-encompassing by the day. Because professionals and cronies profit so heavily from electoral engagement and lobbying, liberty-minded individuals are less experienced and have less incentive to participate. One does not feel good writing this, but just look at the Canadian and US Libertarian parties’ pitiful records for evidence.

The final chapter, “How to Bury Progressivism and Restore American Liberty,” takes on this challenge with rousing detail. It alone is worth the $7 for the digital version. Ostrowski promotes many steps, including voting with one’s feet and reclaiming one’s personal health. Above all, he calls for urgency and taking personal initiative, what he calls direct action. Waiting for a politician or political party to save the day reflects illiteracy of how democracy works, since insiders have vastly more sway than private-sector individuals.

The first step, he notes, is understanding the problem. While there are classic primers on economics, such as Economics in One Lesson, Ostrowski’s Progressivism is underrated and deserves broader attention. It has aged well and is even more relevant now than when it came out. This brief review cannot do justice to the book’s detail, importance, and sage perspectives.

Note

  1. The misunderstanding has in recent times spread to the British Isles and New Zealand, although to be fair, liberal retains its original meaning when used in specific ways. Examples include referencing market liberalization and illiberal speech codes. Australia is for the time being one English-language holdout, as noted by the Centre for Independent Studies. The Sydney-based think tank staunchly defends “liberal values” and “our liberal society.” CIS means “free choice and individual liberty … [and] cultural freedom and the open exchange of ideas.” For the Anglosphere that is not Australia, Daniel Klein of George Mason University is another who has led the charge in distinguishing liberalism from progressivism.

This article reflects the views of the author and not necessarily the views of the Impunity Observer.
Este artículo refleja únicamente la opinión del autor, mas no necesariamente la opinión del Impunity Observer.


Please subscribe to leave comments.

You cannot copy content of this page

Review Your Cart
0
Add Coupon Code
Subtotal

 
Scroll to Top