« Will Duguid | Main | The Playboy Blog »

October 07, 2006

Derek Draper

This is the definition of progressive?

Progressive politics is about one simple idea: that the power of the state can be harnessed for good.

Excellent, so I am indeed correct in my self-description as a progressive. Now, if only I can get all of the other progressives to also agree that the power of the state can be harnessed for evil. As it has been repeatedly, in the past and in other countries.

Then, and only then, can we have a valid discussion about exactly which areas we should indeed harness that power to attempt to do good....even, those areas where we might so attempt but will fail, for things are more complex than many imagine, in that the intention to do good does not necessarily result in a good result. Which means that, until we have conducted this audit:

We don't believe, as John McCain says, that "the best government is the least government".

In fact, a progressive would indeed agree with McCain. Or even Milton Friedman, a fellow progressive, who most certainly believes in the possibility of harnessing the power of the state to do good, who has said that we should judge such attempts by their results, not their intentions.

How does ' Progressives for a minimal state' sound?

October 7, 2006 in Politics | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2d3e53ef00d834ef5b9469e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Derek Draper:

Comments

I would sign up!

Posted by: Jock Coats | Oct 7, 2006 12:24:29 PM

As would I, I think-details? Hard to improve on many/most of the comments to the article.

Posted by: MikeinAppalachia | Oct 7, 2006 2:25:37 PM

Derek Draper: oh, yes - kind of, sort of, a colleague:
http://www.derekdraper.net/

Posted by: James Hamilton | Oct 7, 2006 5:11:41 PM

'Progressive for a minimal state' is a reasonable enough definition for me. Count me in!

Posted by: Rob Knight | Oct 7, 2006 5:38:49 PM

"the intention to do good does not necessarily result in a good result"

Exactly. And as a parallel consideration, good intentions do not automatically grant the moral authority to intervene.

Posted by: Bernie Hughes | Oct 11, 2006 11:06:30 AM

Post a comment