The Paradox of Progressivism

State Violence is at the Core of their Utopian Philosophy

Interesting how the people who regularly withhold support from and scapegoat police pivot so quickly when there are allegations of sexual assault or there’s a new green energy initiative or a ‘hate crime’ has been committed. All of these social reforms require police activity, and plenty of it, and pretending this isn’t the case or ignoring this reality doesn’t make it vanish. This is a glaring paradox…

From Reason:

Three teenagers were arrested last week for allegedly vandalizing a Pride crosswalk in Spokane, Washington, by running scooters over the mural to create skid marks.

Ruslan V.V. Turko, 19, and two unnamed minors were each charged with first degree malicious mischief, a felony.

(Above) The FELONY vandals, and a photo of the vandalism… which seems pretty minimal to me.

Incidentally, it seems that vandalism of Pride crosswalks is a somewhat regular thing. When I searched for a better photo, certain that there must be MORE in the way of damage (there isn’t) I found a myriad of additional examples. My favorite is below:

This is not an essay about teenagers doing burnouts on or spray-painting crosswalks. Regardless of your views these seem to be fairly minor public policy concerns. All that one would have to do to fully address them is: stop creating Pride displays on the ground at busy intersections. Since these displays are no longer necessarily tied to the LGB community but have often been co-opted by more fringe groups who are NOT simply fighting for decency and civil rights this seems to be a matter of civil neutrality. I make the same argument for public school curriculums. Even if you conceive of gender identity as an important and ethically salient concept many people do not. It arouses suspicion and passionate hostility among millions of Americans (many of them also gay) and so it shouldn’t be taught, at least not to children. If you want to make your arguments as to why it’s a crucial and useful concept then do so in adult society and if you get 70-80% support then we can introduce it into lessons. Trying to make an end-run around the debate and say that gender identity “isn’t political” simply because it’s important to YOUR worldview won’t fly. It is political if it’s a matter of political debate and politically controversial ideas and themes should be taught to children only rarely, and with caution. I would make the same argument about government-sponsored Pride displays. The government should represent the will of the people, and while the vast majority of Americans support equal rights for gay and trans folks they are stridently opposed to the activists and programs which have adopted the Pride flag as a symbol, especially in its newer (and weird, and constantly mutating) incarnation. The idea that two-spirit people or asexuals are identities which need visual representation in the public square is not one with a great deal of mainstream popular support.

But this essay isn’t about Pride flags or crosswalks. It’s about the choice to prosecute these young idiots at the FELONY level, which has been made and supported by the same constituencies which tend to look with suspicion at greater police funding or harsh prison sentences, especially of young men and nonviolent offenses. If these young men had stolen a great deal of merchandise or assaulted a store owner or been caught with unregistered firearms many of the same people arguing for their arrest and prosecution would favor that they be released without bail (especially if they were NOT white… but that’s a different topic).

The inconsistency goes deeper than noting that the Left seems to deprioritize the kinds of crimes which makes business more expensive and travel more dangerous and life more difficult, in favor of crimes which offend political sensibilities. The (black) NY man-a computer programmer, I believe-who makes guns as a hobby who was sentenced to TEN YEARS for gunsmithing in a state which routinely releases dangerous repeat offenders accused of serious felonies (one of the most astounding statements made on record by any judge was made by his sentencing judge, Abena Darkeh: “The Second Amendment doesn’t exist in my courtroom.”) is an excellent example of this kind of ideological prosecution. There are countless others.

The fact is that nearly ALL of the Left’s programs, ideas, and reforms require MASSIVE government power and government power requires force, or the threat of force. This is a fact which is curiously omitted from their vision. If you want to raise taxes that will only be possible with a large contingent of armed enforcers willing to arrest and imprison people for NOT paying taxes. If you want to stop gun crime (or any crime) you must arrest people who break your gun laws. This is one of the strange facts of our age: the party which argues strenuously for gun control has, in many places, stopped regularly enforcing gun possession laws… and so gun crime has risen apace in those areas and, since most of those people caught with illegal handguns are not property owners out patrolling their property line, but are actually young men engaged in, or adjacent to, criminal activity, shootings and deaths have risen as well. Everyone knows these things. Everyone knows that a young man who’s officially unemployed in a dangerous neighborhood in DC who is caught with a weapon is probably not that distant from an actual or potential crime, and everyone knows (or should know) that reducing penalties for tempting and antisocial behaviors will probably lead to a rise in those behaviors. The Left tries to do an end-run around this paradox and blame gun manufacturers. They even blame car manufacturers for vehicle thefts. Yet ANY legal change in these areas, whether they’re levied upon the citizens or industry, require force or the threat of force to bring into being. Without the threat of arrest and prosecution laws become toothless and dead. They might remain in the statues but they are ignored by all. There are no voluntary laws or friendly suggestions when it comes to regulations or taxes or restrictions. EVERY statute and every regulation is a dictate from the state with the power of the state behind it, and that power is ultimately built on a foundation of cops and jails and guns. You can advocate a voluntarist society without government laws or federal taxes or national business regulations which will also (probably) require far less police (anarchists have been writing for centuries about how such societies might look but they would certainly not look like ours) OR you can advocate a forceful and regimented society with high taxes and an active central government and the constant threat of police… but you can’t mix and match these attributes.

A state with a huge and complicated regime of laws which are rarely or selectively enforced is the worst of both worlds. It doesn’t maintain safety or protect commerce or association… yet the laws technically exist as tools for the powerful to use against enemies or marginalized individuals. These teenagers, with their unfashionable adolescent hostilities, are now targets of the media and the prosecutors and politicians and police, all on behalf of a vague category which assumes the title of ‘marginalized’ when convenient-but how can a group which commands the media and prosecutors and politicians and police be marginalized? In reality, the people routinely targeted by the power of the state are marginalized, regardless of history or incomes or political narratives. This is another paradox, and it is one that is slowly filtering into the public consciousness: when an agenda becomes the guiding raison d’etre of the state and corporate power its clients and ideas are no longer marginalized. Their targets and opponents are.

In a society with many laws which are spottily enforced, there’s a pervading sense of insecurity and fear, and no perception of fairness or impartiality. A democratic and republican legal system REQUIRES at least a modicum of objectivity in its prosecution. The wealthy have always existed under a radically different legal standard. It is possible that political affiliation or political implication are now being used (behind the scenes) to decide who will be broken and who will be freed and this is a dangerous and toxic recipe. The fact remains, though, that ANYONE arrested and prosecuted by the government has been a victim of force. Those actions always require a huge capacity for state violence and this fact must be acknowledged.

Anyone who favors high taxes and green energy initiatives and mandatory public education and blanket regulations on businesses also favors more and more active police, and that entails arrests and prisons and guns. The two things are inextricably linked. Anyone who ignores or denies this connection is either mistaken (ignorant/naïve)… or lying. Many citizens fall into the first category. Our politicians are in the second.

Thanks for reading! Please like, comment, subscribe, and SHARE.