In a 21st century world where the power of multinational corporations and centralized governments rule in tandem, grassroots movements in opposition to this kind of global authoritarianism are springing up across the political spectrum.  Traditional rivals on the left and right are increasingly finding themselves unified against new revelations of institutional corruption, government secrecy, domestic surveillance, erosion of civil liberties, suppression of journalism, collusion of international trade, dismantling of internet freedom, and the expansion of state-sponsored militarism.

It’s agreed, they really don’t like corporatism.

These strange bedfellows are lefty progressives and righty libertarians, who both share some reluctance over their unexpected alliance.  That hesitance is quite understandable considering their philosophical antipathy over issues like the size, scope, and purpose of the federal government.  However, their disagreements are more often theoretical than material.  Put a progressive and a libertarian in a room and you’ll likely get an hours-long debate about the nature of humanity, the function of capitalism, and differing utopian visions for society.  But ask them a specific question – like “Does money corrupt politics?” – and you’ll probably get similar answers.

So, what do you get when you cross a progressive with a libertarian?  A progtarian?

The Progtarian

This fledgling political species is an unloved newborn adrift in a sea of danger.  The liberal and conservative establishments, which unintentionally gave it birth, will act swiftly to cull the bastard child from the evolutionary tree.  Populism, in any form that upsets the status quo, will not be tolerated in the new world order.  There’s only one problem.  The corruption of corporatism is nourishing the progtarian, and he is growing.

6 thoughts on “What do you get when you cross a Progressive with a Libertarian?

  1. The problem is there are two types of progtarian, and while they agree on the problem, their solutions are on opposite sides of the spectrum. On the left, we have the ‘we need to regulate’ crowd. On the right, we have the ‘we have regulatory capture’ crowd. Cannot reconcile those two solutions in the same policy, hence both sides remain more on the fringe than represent a majority view. In other words, OWS and the TP cancel one another out on their policy prescriptions for W$, while the neo-cons and neo-libs in Congress are closely aligned.


  2. Reblogged this on Cantankerous Gentlemen and commented:
    The aversion to “corporatism” is found in all ideological streams and both major parties; however, the K ST interests involved in regulatory capture has occurred on a grand scale to the detriment of everyone else. Its not about money in politics it is about access.


Comments are closed.