If progressive thought has made a colossal blunder in its calculations, it is to focus on differentiating itself from the Right strictly in terms of content of thought and utterly ignoring the structure of thought, making the content always be hypocritical because progressive content with a binary, patriarchal, and autocratic structure is merely form of deception. People may have used religion to moral and manipulate others thirty years ago, but when it was exposed as a sham, they jumped shipped, swam to the Left, and now pay the same game, but merely changed what they preach…but still preach.
But when your focus is strictly on content, but not structure, odd things start to happen. You become contrarian and increasingly extreme in some bid to differentiate yourself from an opposing ideology. A little is good, but an overdose is divine. The natural feel of knowing that your place isn’t the default “opposite”, but somewhere unexplored becomes lost. We can no longer navigate away from the old ideologies. We merely go full circle from the opposite direction.
But if the Progressive brand of prepackaged thought has provided no change in structure, we can see what happens:
Progressive is not defined on its own merits, but must be compared to its enemy. It sees the world as Us versus Them; or worse, expecting a They to come in and do all the work to make the changes. However, there is no Them, only Us. And it is Us, not They. Hypothetical divides are illusionary. It is one thing to break away and show why it was necessary, but sooner or later, you must be measured on your own merits. That the Left and Right always trigger one another to pick fights and then create a pecking order where they are rigged to come out victorious should be no surprise.
In order to recruit and convert as many people into the ideology, there is an overemphasis on rights with no balance of responsibilities. We sell our ideas as having a good time with no strings attached, attracting those who do not wish to look inward or take any blame or responsibility for their own failures. Yet, there are no rights unless there are responsibilities. Even governments are made of people; thus it is an all-encompassing bargain: both have rights, and both have responsibilities, but when it is mention of one, while downplaying the other, you can expect not to get as many rights as the seller reaps perks and power.
Journalism never actually did much to explore structures of thought, nor truly challenge our lack of intellectual and emotional progress. These days, they blame one or two people for everything, and offer nothing substantial themselves.
The National Post had a peculiar column about that Ontario premier that won a majority without Toronto. It is a typical column of this day and age where everyone blames and decrees without much foresight or introspection:
Consider: a man with a shady past and disgraceful record is able to seize control of the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario without the support of even a plurality of its members, still less of the caucus he then presumes to lead (and whose careers he now controls). He wins a “majority” in the ensuing provincial election with 40 per cent of the vote, by means of which he proceeds to personally and unilaterally rewrite the election laws for an entirely different level of government — for besides subordinating party to leader and legislature to executive, we have also contrived to make municipal governments creatures of the province.
At no time has he mentioned any of this, in either the leadership race in which he finished second or the election campaign in which 60 per cent of the vote went to other parties.
He has no mandate from anyone, least of all the citizens affected. Yet because our system vests such extraordinary power in the office of one man, he can impose his will on cabinet, caucus, legislature, city and province, more or less by fiat.
Even the courts, the last line of defence against arbitrary rule, cannot stop him. For while we have passed a Charter of Rights, proclaiming our supposed belief in limited government, we have embedded within it a clause that allows governments to overrule those same limits. He invokes it, again imposing his will on cabinet, caucus etc, validating by fiat what he had earlier decreed by fiat.
And he does all this in the name of “democracy.”
The same can be said about the entire profession of journalism.
They do everything in the name of this “democracy.” They have no empirical training. They were not elected nor licensed. They do not speak or represent the majority. It is all based on fiat and shoddy and dubious methods of gathering and verifying information. They conduct no studies. They do not tell their audiences who their sources are, that they liberally depend on PR and publicists for information, nor do they often disclose their own conflicts of interests.
They have no mandate and represent no one, and yet claim to inform the public for benevolent purposes.
They present ideology as fact; spew propaganda, rile up a public who are both misinformed and ill-informed, and otherwise pollute the information pool — also, all in the name of “democracy.”
This is a profession without any standards or regulating bodies. These are people not taught in any basic psychological methodology, from statement analysis to experimental design.
It flounders and cannot even decide how to fund itself.
Yet it claims to speak for a majority — even as their numbers tank and their outlets shut down.
The alternative is one that is aware of these double standards and ludicrous games, but while the starting point is to breakaway from journalistic lunacy, it is not to keep comparing itself to an antiquated model of information verification.
That journalism became a sham should surprise no one.
But that we have never thought to replace it with a superior model is still shocking because it means as a people, we are now not even concerning ourselves with content, let alone structure.
It is an intellectual decay, but it does not last forever: a pendulum swings one way before reality compels it to move in the opposite direction.
And F.R.E.E.D. is the system that keeps a pendulum at rest as it begins to build all around it to stabilize both the structure and the content to see the world from every direction…