Most people are familiar with the famous quote by the philosopher George Santanya “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it” but I have learned that those who do not know history often do not have a clue as to why the world they live in is the way it is. People without an historical context just as those without a moral foundation tend to be susceptible to manipulation by those who seek followers for their agendas.
This is why I have a strong belief in the Tea Party Movement, despite vast differences in personalities, demographics, age etc the Tea Party has one abiding belief that the entire movement supports and agrees upon, the Constitution as the foundation for our nations greatness. Tea Party members not only have a better grasp of how our government is supposed to work than the average citizen, they have a greater knowledge of our nations history than most Americans.
Not so the Progressives, those progressives that are not actively distorting our history have for the most part no historical context upon which to establish their belief structure. This is true even of the history of their own movement. Most modern progressives have not a clue as to the history of their own beliefs. They tend to blindly follow whatever their opinion makers cook up for their digestion.
The initial Progressive Era which began near the end of the nineteenth century and was ended with an overwhelming rejection by the American public in 1920 was in fact a time of many reforms. Some of these were good and necessary reforms such as child labor laws but many if not most were fraught with unintended consequences and some were the product of outright immorality such as Margaret Sanger and the Eugenics Movement to rid society of the "less desirable". Of course they Progressive proponents did not see it for the evil that it was, it was just another in a long line of progressive schemes to improve humanity at least as they deemed it should be improved.
The lack of knowledge about the foundation of their movement is the reason that progressives are so malleable and prone to be used. As an example of how uninformed the progressive movement is on history one needs take only one issue that the Occupy Movement, a progressive formed group is up in arms about, the Federal Reserve and the collusion between the government and banks. Of course the progressive narrative is that banks control government for their own greedy purposes a Cheered on by progressive politicians the Occupy Wall Street Movement succeeded in occupying the parks of our nation's cities and basically making childish pest of themselves.
But why is their such collusion between our financial institutions and our Federal Government? Why in deed do we have such a thing as a Federal Reserve System? Although I seldom like to use Wikipedia especially when it comes to historical information because often it has been edited towards a progressive view of history, in this case I found it to be both extremely accurate and descriptive.
Under the Progressive Era regarding progressive reforms they inform us:
When Democrat Woodrow Wilson was elected President with a Democratic Congress in 1912 he implemented a series of progressive policies in economics. In 1913, the Sixteenth Amendment was ratified, and a small income tax was imposed on high incomes. The Democrats lowered tariffs with the Underwood Tariff in 1913, though its effects were overwhelmed by the changes in trade cause by the World War that broke out in 1914. Wilson proved especially effective in mobilizing public opinion behind tariff changes by denouncing corporate lobbyists, addressing Congress in person in highly dramatic fashion, and staging an elaborate ceremony when he signed the bill into law. Wilson helped end the long battles over the trusts with the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914. He managed to convince lawmakers on the issues of money and banking by the creation in 1913 of the Federal Reserve System, a complex business-government partnership that to this day dominates the financial world. (emphasis added)
I wonder how many Americans realize that there were no income taxes prior to the intervention of the progressives in 1913. Or that it was sold to the trusting public as a "a small income tax... imposed on high incomes" You know the rich people who would pay for all the new goodies that were to be given to the "masses", Sound familiar? But I digress.
So while our Occupiers are out demonstrating against Wall Street they are in fact protesting against the policies given to them, and us, by their founding fathers egged on by Progressive politicians of this generation. To anyone who knows the history of Progressives in American politics this is not shocking at all. The one thing Progressives are very good at doing is creating a mess (with the best of intentions) then turning it around and blaming the failures which their ill conceived policies unleash on the nation on others.
Consider that statement from Wikipedia "a complex business-government partnership that to this day dominates the financial world" would that not be the very definition of crony capitalism? And if this model is used throughout a nations economy such as energy, manufacturing and oh let's throw in health care wouldn't that be the very definition of Fascism?
Knowing that the progressives themselves, fined tuned over the past century , are responsible for this "complex business-government partnership" you would think they would show a little humility and remorse for the devastating affects they have wrought on America, but the fact is that most progressives have not a clue as to the true history of their movement “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it” They are in fact the very definition of "useful idiots"
Note too that despite convenient Progressive political narrative it was not the buisness interests that were responsible for this collusion, it was the government itself which forced these so called "complex" reforms on business. If indeed business and government create an alliance which screws the "little people" it is always government that is the dominant partner in the relationship. Lobbyist may influence government but only because government has set the table in order to feed themselves. Since politicians depend on the structures of government for their power it is in their best interest to sell the public on the idea that nefarious entities are always striving to corrupt the system, the system which they control. Corporations play the whipping boy since they are in fact slaves to the dictates of Big Government and more and more due to regulations and subsidies are beholding to government for their existence and profitability. The "useful idiots" of the progressive movement are unleashed on one "Big Business" or another in order to distract blame from its true source "Big Government".
So it is not surprising when you come across an article like this from US NEWS with the appropriate title of "The Federal Reserve, Now Bailing Out Politicians" well why not after all the progressives created "a complex business-government partnership that to this day dominates the financial world" Why shouldn't the Federal Reserve bailout its parent?
From the article (emphasis added)
The bank bailouts in 2008 and 2009 stabilized the U.S. financial system, but they also added to the "moral hazard" that contributed to the problem in the first place. By making it clear that the government wouldn't let big banks fail, the bailouts signaled that bankers can get away with risky moves, since the feds will always provide a safety net. The Federal Reserve and its compatriots in Europe and Japan are now basically creating political moral hazard, by letting elected officials know that if they can't get the job done, the central banks will step in to prevent a full-blown disaster. It's an invitation to further recklessness that politicians don't need.So the Federal Reserve is protecting politicians from their own irresponsibility. The article goes on to show how this is all unfolding and the term "moral hazard" is a common theme. Progressive solutions seem always to lead to this conclusion "moral hazards" simply because they tend always to seek paths which ignore moral foundations. But as the article concludes a day of reckoning is near.
The Fed is running out of tricks, however. And besides, it's not the Fed's job to oversee the government's spending, taxing and borrowing. That's up to Congress and the president.
The Fed and its equivalent in other countries can delay some of the pain—for awhile—but eventually, politicians will need to do the job they were elected to do. Giving them an excuse to do nothing, until there's no other choice, could make the job that much harder when they finally get around to it.
So while the the progressive Occupy Movement is out demonstrating against financial institutions, the true fault lies with the politicians which perpetuate a system that was created by the progressive's own founding fathers. A system which is leading to an economic Armageddon which generations of Progressive politicians have inflicted on American society.
But have no fear the Progressives are nothing if not manipulative, they will find a boogeyman to distract the attention of the masses away from the blame they so richly deserve.