Changing the Principles Entry

So, I saw the new bonus points opportunity where we try to redefine the site's "Progressive Principles," and a light bulb went off in my head. Well, I suppose not exactly a light bulb, but more to the effect of, "I may as well give this a shot and hope for the best." So, here goes nothing.

First and foremost, for those of you who missed the entry :) , there are five basic principles that ProgressiveU likes to focus on. They are listed whenever you post a new blog entry at the top of the page: Broad Prosperity, Shared Responsibility, Effective Government, Personal Freedom, and Better Future. I appreciate all of them for what they are worth. (Though I do like debating effective government and personal freedom. They are my personal favorites.) I'm fairly certain that you do not have to write under one of these categories for it to count towards the Blogging for Progress Scholarship Contest (correct me if I'm wrong, though), but there have been complaints about them being too narrow. Though they can be limiting in nature, I think that all five of them are progressive in some way or another and are relevant to this site.

Firstly, I'll touch on Broad Prosperity. Literally, it means success as a whole among a group, usually a large one. To me, that just sounds like communism because everyone would have equal prosperity and they'll all be happy... etc. Communism is nice in theory, certainly, but human beings are far too individualistic for it to work on a large scale. Socialism, maybe, if it is applied correctly (IE, still having people be fiscally responsible, but helping out the hardworking poor). But communism requires that everyone work for no wage and still be happy with each other. I don't think it's possible just because of human nature; not just because of humans' innate individuality, but because it needs a leader to put it into place, as does everything. That defeats the purpose of everyone being totally equal. That leader would almost definitely not renounce their position of power. And even if they did, it would leave a power vacuum for someone else corrupt to take over.

But I suppose I have digressed again. I believe that for everyone to prosper, they need to be responsible for their actions. This ties in directly with Shared Responsibility. If people work, they will probably prosper. I understand, though, that not everyone is so lucky. There are people who try to get work but still do not get anywhere. For these cases, I can fully understand giving people a leg up. But people who don't even try shouldn't expect help from anyone. That's as broad as I think general prosperity can get. As a second option, then, perhaps there should be a category called personal responsibility, or maybe the title can be changed all together. Shared and personal responsibility are almost two different things, yet can be under one category. I think just plain old "Responsibility" would cover it.

And now, my personal favorite ranting topic: Effective Government. Socially, I'm very liberal. But as far as government is concerned, I'm rather conservative/ libertarian. I think government should be small and stay small so people have more Personal Freedom. In one of my previous rants about removing the Massachusetts state income tax, I argued for its repeal because the government is simply not effective with this money. 40% of the tax revenue here goes to wasteful programs and bribes to rich politicians. This is not effective government at all. If the government was effective, it would be spending money on programs that matter. Removing the income tax would not significantly increase taxes (for the act itself said that), and public programs would still be functional. The ones who live off the income tax would probably just reduce funding for them for a time to "prove their point," but they would have to bring it back to normal level again. The truth is, with all the tax money the government is given, it should be able to educate every child and send them through a public college.

I'm not saying the government should give handouts to college students, but the ones who need help should get it. That is effective governing, in my eyes. Not giving random handouts to lazy bums, not giving politicians bribe money from the tax collections, but ACTUALLY GOVERNING.

The government is also ineffective with its means of punishment. We put drug addicts in jail. They don't need to be there; they should be in rehab programs. Jails make people more violent than they were in the first place because they have to become violent to survive in that environment. Part of this is the overpopulation-- there's more people, less resources to go around, therefore more competition among prisoners, many of whom were actually violent. But druggies? No way do they belong in jail. Drug dealers, maybe, depending on the drug, but not the ones who just use them. Removing them from the jail community would reduce the jail population by (probably) millions. That alone would help tremendously.

On the topic of personal freedom, though, I do think that another aspect of this is social liberty. Everyone has the freedom to do what they want by default. But that does NOT mean that they are socially equal. Social equality and justice are very important to me. Social liberty is not just personal freedom. Though they tie in together, social liberty is being able to shop somewhere regardless of skin color, sexuality, etc. It is being able to live the way you want to without the interference of other people. It's about equal rights for everyone.

Last but not least is Better Future. This is certainly something important to dwell on. We have all thought about what the future will be like. With our failing economies and schools that aren't far behind, not to mention natural crises, it does not seem that good. So of course, this blogging topic is specific to entries which relate to improving life for future generations. Most progressive blogs, regardless of people's individual views, involve that topic, so I think it's almost redundant to have it there.

So, those are my definitions. Besides my responsibility and social liberty shpiels, I did not talk about any problems. That is because, those aside, I think that most of them do cover progressive topics well. Most progressive topics that come to my mind fall under one of the five, except for the two others that I mentioned. But I'm happy with it as it is, honestly.