The biggest problem with progressive change is that we’ve learned that it is all too easily rolled back. Since the 1970’s many progressive programs and policies have been either substantially diminished or completely reversed including expanding the democratic franchise to people who had been previously excluded; waging a “war” on poverty with increased spending on public housing and social welfare programs; educational programs like project headstart; free and low cost access to higher education; criminal justice reform and educational opportunities for incarcerated persons; and the national legalization of a woman’s right to choose.
The retreat from progressive policies isn’t the result of new knowledge about the human experience, in fact, quite the opposite – the rollbacks occurred because our basic beliefs about human nature and what causes us to behave as we do did not change.
The traditional view of human nature is that we are selfish, greedy, and unwilling to contribute unless coerced. Given this widely held belief it’s no wonder that even the miserly social safety net that was briefly offered would ultimately be gutted. If people are inherently selfish, lazy, and anti-social, how can a generous social safety net be justified? It cannot – a generous social safety net would reward people for being selfish and lazy.
The traditional belief to which most people subscribe regarding what motivates our behavior is that anyone can change their life by exercising their free will should they choose to. This also supports a conservative agenda. If being successful in life is just a matter of individual choice how could significant social intervention make any sense? It does not. According to traditional thinking, those who want to change, will do so on their own, and for those who don’t, all of the government checks in the world won’t help.
Ensuring that the progressive changes that are being fought for today aren’t again easily undone requires a new understanding of our human experience based on evidence and reason.