The Lost Legacy of Progressivism

Why Today's Advocates Are Distant from Their Predecessors

Imagine Theodore Roosevelt standing at the podium today, his voice booming as he champions the regulation of colossal corporations. Picture Upton Sinclair, pen in hand, exposing the harsh realities faced by workers in the gig economy. Close your eyes and envision Eugene Debs rallying for labor rights in an age of automation, Jane Addams advocating for social reform in our urban centers, and Louis Brandeis fighting against monopolies in the tech industry. These giants of early 20th-century progressivism laid the groundwork for social justice and government intervention. Yet, fast forward to today, and the modern progressives, led by figures like Cenk Uygur, seem to tread a different path. Uygur, a prominent voice of The Young Turks, promotes policies that lean towards a Small Government approach, starkly contrasting with the extensive governmental roles endorsed by his historical counterparts. This article delves into the evolving definition of progressivism and questions whether today's self-identified progressives truly uphold the legacy of their ideological forebears.

The modern progressives, represented by figures like Cenk Uygur, have different views than their early 20th-century counterparts, such as Theodore Roosevelt, Upton Sinclair, Eugene Debs, Jane Addams, and Louis Brandeis. These historical figures, known for their essential reform and social justice efforts, would be more closely aligned with Democratic Socialism or Socialism by today's standards. On the other hand, contemporary self-identified progressives like Uygur support policies that resemble a Small Government approach, which contradicts the extensive government intervention supported by their predecessors. This article argues that the current progressive movement, represented by voices like Uygur, needs to adhere to the foundational principles of early 20th-century progressivism.

Historical Progressives and Their Ideologies

Theodore Roosevelt

Theodore Roosevelt, a key figure in the early 20th-century progressive movement, was a vocal proponent of government regulation of businesses. He firmly believed that the government was vital in safeguarding society's welfare. His presidency was marked by implementing policies to curb monopolistic corporations' power through stringent antitrust legislation and regulatory reforms. Roosevelt's belief in a robust governmental presence is best captured in his famous assertion:

"The government must be a powerful leader of the people, a leader in the cause of human welfare."

Theodore Roosevelt, "Square Deal," September 7, 1903

This conviction materialized through landmark policies such as the Pure Food and Drug Act and the Hepburn Act, which significantly expanded federal regulatory powers over industries and transportation. Roosevelt's actions and statements reflect a profound commitment to the principles of social justice and government intervention, which were central to early 20th-century progressivism.

Upton Sinclair

Upton Sinclair's novel "The Jungle" vividly exposed the unsanitary conditions and brutal exploitation of workers in the meatpacking industry. His harrowing depiction of the industry's dark underbelly sparked significant public outcry, leading to the enactment of the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act in 1906. These landmark legislations aimed to improve food safety and labor conditions, marking a significant victory for progressive reformers of the era.

Sinclair worked tirelessly to make his mark in literature and advocate for workers' rights and social justice. He allied himself with progressive movements that aimed to empower laborers and challenge corporate abuses. His efforts were crucial in bringing attention to the working class's struggles and pushing for more substantial labor rights, which reflected the Progressive Era's critical values.

"I aimed at the public’s heart, and by accident I hit it in the stomach."

"I don’t know whether anyone will care to examine my heart, but if they do, they will find two words there- ‘social justice.’ For that is what I have believed in and fought for."

Eugene Debs

Eugene Debs was a central figure in the American labor movement. He was well-known for his essential role in organizing labor unions and as a strong advocate for workers' rights. As a founding member of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), Debs united workers across different industries, fighting for fair wages, better working conditions, and the right to form unions. Debs expanded his leadership to something other than union activities. He also entered presidential politics as a candidate for the Socialist Party of America five times. Compared to Cenk, Debs was eligible to be president, meaning his attempts were not simply a means to drum up publicity for himself. They were genuine attempts to better the average person’s life. Throughout his campaigns, he focused on economic reform and social justice, aiming to address the economic inequalities of his time.

Debs was committed to democratic socialism, advocating for policies that would restructure economic power dynamics. He proposed the establishment of workers' cooperatives and supported public ownership of major industries to ensure economic justice and equality. His vision aimed to empower workers and communities, advocating for a socioeconomic system that prioritizes collective welfare and minimizes the influence of concentrated wealth and corporate interests.

"Years ago I recognized my kinship with all living things, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on the earth. I said then and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it; while there is a criminal element, I am of it; while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."

"The class which has the power to rob upon a large scale has also the power to control the government and legalize their robbery."

Jane Addams

Jane Addams, the co-founder of Hull House in Chicago, made significant contributions to social work by establishing a settlement house that offered vital services to immigrant communities. Her efforts focused on enhancing public health, education, and housing conditions for people experiencing poverty. Hull House became a model for similar social service agencies nationwide, illustrating the importance of community-based support and intervention.

In her advocacy for social reform, Addams championed the need for government intervention to tackle social inequalities and uplift marginalized communities. She was crucial in promoting child labor laws and women's suffrage, working tirelessly to align these causes with the broader progressive movement for social change. Her efforts highlighted the importance of legislative action in achieving social justice and protecting vulnerable populations.

"The good we secure for ourselves is precarious and uncertain until it is secured for all of us and incorporated into our common life."

"The essence of immorality is the tendency to make an exception of myself."

Louis Brandeis

As a lawyer and later a Supreme Court Justice, Louis Brandeis strongly advocated against monopolies and concentrated economic power. His passionate legal arguments and influential writings played a crucial role in shaping antitrust laws and enhancing regulatory oversight in the United States. Brandeis's commitment to curbing corporate dominance and fostering fair competition resonated deeply within the progressive ethos of his time, positioning him as a critical figure in the fight against economic injustices.

Brandeis strongly believed in the importance of government oversight to protect individual rights and maintain fairness in the marketplace. His judicial philosophy focused on the state's crucial role in balancing economic freedom with public welfare. Through his rulings and writings, Brandeis advocated for vigorous government intervention to shield citizens from the adverse effects of uncontrolled capitalism, promoting social justice and economic fairness.

"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both."

"Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman."

Modern Progressive Movement

Cenk Uygur and The Young Turks

Cenk Uygur is a well-known figure in modern progressive media, and he has gained a significant platform through his show, The Young Turks. With a law background and network co-founder background, Uygur has become a notable voice in contemporary political discussions. He is known for his outspoken and sometimes controversial opinions, advocating for various policy positions that differ significantly from the extensive government intervention championed by early 20th-century progressives. His approach to governance emphasizes limited government intervention and individual autonomy, representing a significant departure from the progressive ideals of his historical predecessors.

Uygur's platform is centered around advocating for a "Small Government" approach. He is skeptical of expansive government programs and regulations, believing that reducing governmental control can lead to more efficient and innovative outcomes. His perspective contrasts with the comprehensive regulatory and social welfare policies promoted by earlier progressives, positioning him as a reformist with a distinct vision for the government's role in society.

Uygur's statements on progressive identity suggest that he often defines progressive credentials based on his policy preferences. He makes strong claims about what true progressivism entails, implying that agreement with his views is essential to be considered a genuine progressive. This self-identification approach has sparked a vigorous debate about the limits of progressivism and whether modern figures like Uygur uphold the core principles of earlier reformers.

Comparison of Policy Positions

When we look at modern progressive policies, like universal healthcare, free education, and better labor rights, we see that these initiatives represent a broader and more inclusive vision of government intervention than Uygur's advocacy. In the early 20th century, progressives such as Roosevelt, Sinclair, and Debs supported substantial government involvement in regulating industries, improving labor conditions, and promoting social justice through direct legislative action and comprehensive reforms.

However, while contemporary progressives still support some of these goals, there is a significant shift towards advocating for smaller government and market-based solutions in some circles. This change in policy approach indicates a transformation like progressivism. Modern interpretations may now include elements of free-market thinking alongside traditional social reform agendas. This shift also signifies a departure from the extensive government intervention characteristic of early 20th-century progressivism, highlighting the differences between the two periods. It is also a trend that should be addressed, as the Small Goverment mantra best suits Trickle Down Economics, which was an utter failure.

Inconsistencies and Contradictions

The modern progressive movement is quite different from the early 20th-century progressives. Historically, figures like Theodore Roosevelt and Upton Sinclair advocated for extensive government intervention to address social injustices and restrain the power of big corporations. For example, Roosevelt's administration implemented aggressive antitrust policies to break up monopolies and increase federal regulatory oversight. Sinclair's famous work "The Jungle" directly contributed to significant regulatory reforms, including the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act.

In contrast to early progressives, modern progressives, such as prominent figures like Cenk Uygur, often advocate for a smaller government role. They emphasize reduced regulatory oversight and advocate for market-based solutions. Uygur’s support for policies that lean towards limited government intervention differs significantly from the extensive regulatory frameworks endorsed by early progressives. While early progressives supported robust federal interventions to rectify market failures and social inequities, Uygur and others often argue for reducing government influence in favor of market-driven solutions. This shift indicates a fundamental divergence in achieving social justice and economic equity.

In addition, contemporary figures like Uygur have criticized large-scale government interventions as inefficient or counterproductive. This differs from the early 20th-century progressives, who viewed government intervention as necessary for social reform and economic regulation. This shift in ideology reflects a broader trend within contemporary progressivism, where market-oriented solutions increasingly replace historically favored comprehensive government reforms.

"The government should be the steward of the public welfare. It should ensure that the rights of the people are protected and that the powerful do not exploit the weak. The government must intervene to secure the public good, including unadulterated food, safer workplaces, decent housing, and fair business practices."

~Theodore Roosevelt, “Square Deal,” September 7, 1903

Teddy was not an advocate for Small Government. He viewed government as the tool of the average person to shield themselves from the Industrialists, or what we now call the Corporatists, which is simply a different term for Capitalist. I’m not one to split hairs.

The conflicts between the modern progressives' preference for smaller government and the early progressives' support for extensive government intervention affect the credibility and effectiveness of today's progressive movement. This ideological difference can lead to confusion about progressivism's core principles and weaken its impact on social reform. Prioritizing market-based solutions over government regulation may hinder efforts to address systemic inequalities and social injustices.

Modern Stances of Historical Progressives

If Theodore Roosevelt were to navigate today's political landscape, his policies would likely resonate with modern Democratic Socialism or Socialism. Roosevelt's commitment to extensive government intervention and regulation would align with contemporary views advocating for robust regulatory frameworks to address corporate power and economic inequalities. Modern Democratic Socialism emphasizes comprehensive welfare programs, robust labor protections, and regulations on corporate practices—principles that mirror Roosevelt's historic push for regulatory reform and consumer protection. For instance, Roosevelt's support for the Pure Food and Drug Act and the Hepburn Act showcases his belief in the government's role in safeguarding public welfare and curbing monopolistic excesses. His policies today might advocate for similar regulatory oversight over modern industries, including technology and pharmaceuticals, reflecting his enduring belief in government as a protector of societal interests.

Upton Sinclair's advocacy for workers' rights and social justice resonates with the past and aligns with contemporary socialist policies. His critical exposure to exploitation and calls for labor reforms suggest he would support modern policies to improve working conditions, increase the minimum wage, and enhance workers' rights. Today's socialist frameworks, prioritizing universal healthcare, free education, and strong labor protections, align with Sinclair's goals of addressing systemic inequalities and corporate abuses. Sinclair's emphasis on labor reforms would likely extend to contemporary movements advocating for stronger unions and improved worker protections, reassuring the audience about the continuity of social justice efforts.

Eugene Debs, a staunch advocate of democratic socialism, would not just align but significantly contribute to modern socialist movements advocating for public ownership of key industries and cooperative economic models. His commitment to restructuring economic power dynamics and advocating for workers' cooperatives is a testament to the strength of the socialist tradition. Debs would support contemporary initiatives to reduce income inequality and enhance workers' control over their labor conditions, further strengthening the socialist tradition.

Jane Addams' focus on social reform, including public health and housing improvements, would align with modern progressive and social justice movements. Her advocacy for child labor laws and women's suffrage suggests she would support contemporary policies addressing systemic issues such as affordable housing, healthcare access, and educational equity.

Louis Brandeis' emphasis on curbing monopolistic power and ensuring fair competition would likely translate into support for modern antitrust measures and regulatory reforms targeting corporate dominance. His judicial philosophy advocating for balanced economic power and public welfare would align with contemporary efforts to regulate major tech companies and ensure fair market practices.

These historical figures would likely advocate for policies reflecting their original commitments to social justice, economic equity, and robust government intervention if they were active today. They are significantly different from prominent figures such as Uygur. Cenk is no Muckraker.

Final Thoughts

In revisiting the legacies of Theodore Roosevelt, Upton Sinclair, Eugene Debs, Jane Addams, and Louis Brandeis, we see a clear commitment to expansive government intervention to achieve social justice and economic equity. Roosevelt championed regulatory reform to curb corporate power, Sinclair exposed labor exploitation, Debs advocated for workers' cooperatives and public ownership, Addams focused on social reform and public welfare, and Brandeis fought against monopolistic practices to ensure fair competition.

These historical figures collectively underscore the foundational principles of early 20th-century progressivism: a belief in robust government action to address systemic injustices and protect the public from the excesses of unchecked capitalism. Their advocacy for comprehensive welfare programs, labor protections, and regulatory oversight set a high standard for what progressivism sought to achieve.

However, the modern progressive movement, as represented by figures like Cenk Uygur, has increasingly embraced a different ideology. Uygur's Small Government approach contrasts sharply with the extensive governmental roles supported by his early 20th-century counterparts. His emphasis on reduced government intervention and market-based solutions represents a significant departure from the progressive ideals of comprehensive reform and social justice.

This divergence underscores a troubling inconsistency within the contemporary progressive movement. While modern progressives still champion some of the same goals, the shift towards smaller government and market-oriented solutions significantly departs from the historical commitment to active government involvement. This transformation blurs the definition of progressivism and weakens its impact on addressing today's social and economic challenges. This concern should be shared by all who value the progressive movement.

To honor the legacy of Roosevelt, Sinclair, Debs, Addams, and Brandeis, we must reaffirm the foundational principles of progressivism. Today's progressives should seek to realign their policies with the robust government intervention and comprehensive reform advocated by their historical predecessors. By doing so, they can better address systemic inequalities and ensure that the movement remains rooted in promoting social justice and economic equity. It is time to return to the principles that defined the great progressives of the past, a return that promises a hopeful and transformative future for the progressive movement.

I’ll end with another quote from Theodore Roosevelt:

"The object of government is the welfare of the people. The material progress and prosperity of a nation are desirable chiefly so far as they lead to the moral and material welfare of all good citizens. The prime problem of our nation is to get the right type of good citizenship, and, above all, to train the rising generation, the children who are to be the men and women of the next generation, so that they shall be able to hold their own and to hold it well in the keen competition of life. We must have a genuine and permanent moral awakening, without which no wisdom of legislation or administration really means anything, and such an awakening can only come when the average man and woman in their average everyday duties feel the moral responsibility of citizenship."

Theodore Roosevelt, “New Nationalism,” August 31, 1910

Remember to like and share. Leave a comment to let me know what you think. Please consider that I model myself off of the no-nonsense Theodore Roosevelt in that I speak softly and carry a big stick.

A quick note: While I am discussing Cenk Uygur, he is only an example. As a pillar of the modern Progressive Movement, it is difficult to discuss the topic without bringing Uygur into the conversation, especially as his network, The Young Turks, calls itself "The Home of Progressives."

I'm for scrutiny, even from people on my side. See my post Call Me Zaphod.

I also write fiction stories! Check those out here.