He described it as progressive because the movement is pro big government and sees government as the solution to our problems even while speaking out against it to sway voters. For example: use an expanded government to implement tariffs, to use an expanded IRS to enforce new tax laws, to use eminent domain in order to force the common man to comply.
It was described as populist because the movement portrays a semi isolationist, inward focused policy and uses an expanded government to achieve results that are allegedly for the common man, but practically usually do not work out that way due to increased government oversight.
The end result of such a movement is the death or isolation of conservatism. Liberals are pressing for big government to achieve their own results from the left, and progressive populist, allegedly from the right, are pressing from the other end. Conservatives are isolated and minimized, and the two remaining options both depend upon expanded government to achieve results even as they rail against the very government they will expand.
Levin specifically pointed out that Pat Buchanan, Bob Dole, and Donald Trump fit like a glove into the progressive populist, bigger government model.
What say you? I think it is a sad state of affairs when our only real option this fall is between two big government candidates.
Edited to add: before anyone responds, I wanted to note that my intent in posting this isn't to discuss what we think about Levin himself, but rather the idea presented.
The Rise of the Progressive Populist
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire