The Black Progerssive Establishment Viewpoint = Lampblack View Encapsulated In "The Nation" And Other Leftist Entities

Per my research on "What Makes The Black Progressive Establishment Tick" I have been watching a wide array of "left wing" media sources and web pages.  I have also been purchasing various magazines.

In summary - if you want to understand the "Black Progressive Establishment" go to sources such as "The Nation" and "International Socialist Review".  This is not a slam on these publications.  Despite my ideological disagreements with them I actually believe that both of them do a good job at communicating their particular ideology.  If they were actually able to accomplish their end-game - the world would be a better place.

The main disagreement that I have with these far-left repositories is that their are built upon a model that does not match the real world and/or the true nature of man.  It seems clear to me that the only way they could ever bring their Utopia to life and sustain it is by constructing a government entity that suppresses the very people that they claim to benefit, denying them the ability express their full human dimensions.

In debating "Black Quasi-Socialist Progressive-Fundamentalist Racism Chasers" the popular claim is that the "Black Conservative" is channeling the words and messages of his "White Conservative Sponsors".  In the context of "keeping your adversaries on trial" we rarely hear an assessment of the original source of their own theories.  To those who are interested in understanding this source - look no further than "The Nation" and the "International Socialist Review" magazine. 

The key difference between these two sources and the "Black Progressive Establishment" is their absolute attachment to the Democratic Party.   The "Black Progressive Establishment" ultimately realizes that the Democratic Party must be strong for them to accomplish any of their goals.  Those who are further to the left by comparison are "unattached progressives" - including some Black activist groups.  They are "permanent revolutionaries" and thus have no interest in accomplishing anything through the system.  They are seeking to tear down the system.  Methodology is far less important to them than "ideological purity".  They can't see the contradiction in terms that they represent.

Example #1: "Color Lines"



"Color Lines" is a show that recently ran on "LinkTV" - a "progressive" cable channel (that I actually enjoy watching). The key messages in the segment are:

• The American economy is unfair
• Poor People want the same things for their family that the wealthy want but there are too many barriers in their place which prevent them from obtaining even this minimal lifestyle
• The vestiges of racism and slavery in this country are still resident in the skewed economic and employment stats between Black/Hispanic and White
• A "Living Wage" should be provided to everyone who works.  Their needs should trump any notions of VALUE that their work effort is appraised at by the private "consumer of their labor"
• The government should have redistributive policies that insure that everyone has a higher minimum existence in America
• Ronald Reagan tore away the foundations of the "Social Safety Net"
• Green Jobs will provide ample employment for those who have been left out of the mainstream economy

I have no doubt that those on the progressive-left believe every bullet item in this list.
The one thing I observe as well is that regardless of the amount of political gain and thus control over the communities that they acquire at the local level - NONE of these points will be expressed at the periphery until they are satisfied that they have sufficient control over the NATIONAL system of politics, economics, academics and law & justice.  In the ultimate "boil the ocean" meme - they actually benefit from that which non-progressives criticize them over.   You see when an outsider (non-progressive) makes note that someone has a "boil the ocean" disposition he has observed that this person has an unrealistic set of theories and ambitions and that his inability to STAKE OUT GROUND, tend to this plot of land and raise the "prize winning garden" that he aspires toward - shows that the person is detached from the methodology and pragmatism that are necessary for success.  We fail to understand that a person who is similar smitten with "boil the ocean" only needs to latch into the GRAND "MISSION FROM GOD" and thus he will be attracted to this vision.  He will agree that those who try to STOP HIM - that being the CONSERVATIVES who are more inclined to make note that the large boulder that stand in front of them is "going to hurt" if he goes charging into it - are the threat who merely seeks to derail him.   Thus the enemy are the forces who dare confront him.

The past is the enemy of the "Progressive-Fundamentalist" when it is used to bring forth accountability to him.  To be clear - he traffics in the past when he can render an indictment against this nation or a religion for their own violations of the public trust.  The key indictment that the progressive fears is to have someone show him the land that he had conquered during his last crusade and thus force him to own up to the present results that so often have fallen far short of his promises.

The primary means by which the Progressive-Fundamentalist avoids being held accountable for the conditions in the land that he now controls, you see, is to trek forth - higher up the mountain - against the next enemy that resides outside of the present domain that he controls.  Theirs is a protest milieu. 

Take this same scaffolding which the Progressive-Fundamentalist is known for, add a few interior decorating elements to give it some soul and what you have is the "Lampblack" version of the same Progressive known as the "Black Progressive Establishment".   I challenge anyone to find an area of substance where the "Black Progressive Establishment" is in disagreement with the Progressive movement.

The Network Of Progressive-Fundamentalist Friends

When I watched the "Green Jobs" portion of the video above and saw the operatives contained within "Apollo Alliance" I began to understand why Glenn Beck is such a threat - no - a "racist threat" to the Black Quasi-Socialist Progressive-Fundamentalist Racism Chaser.   Beck had already connected the dots with respect to "ACORN", the "Apollo Alliance", Van Jones, Ella Baker Center, Tides Center and People For The American Way.  Glenn Beck was able to get the message out about this network of friends who plan to leverage the "Age Of Obama" to their advantage, prior to them "self-defining" their agenda.

Now keep in mind - I don't believe in the "guilt by association" theme where even the most tenuous link is enough to discredit all of the other works of a particular person or entity.  Instead I look for far more material characteristics of a given person or entity before I render my conclusions.

For me - seeing this video which skillfully defined a problem (racial imbalance in economic outcomes) and then ended with a solution (Green Jobs funded by the government) showed the agenda of this network.  Their quasi-socialist economic reforms are inseparable from their "economic racism is the cause" meme. 

For example the claim that there is a need for more abundant child care to support mothers who desire to work never bothers to ask the "next logical question".   Why not have the "warehoused" labor within these same communities provide these needed child care services?  Instead the network of regulations that are placed upon child care facilities inject EXPENSE that must be born by the consumer of these services.  This same consumer who they purport to be seeking to help.   My general criticism with progressive thought is that they leave a large gap between their demands on the consumers versus the suppliers.   In this case the consumer is the "mother who needs child care" and the suppliers are those who could be providers of child care but who have a certain income requirement themselves.   The magic answer to get the pump primed is always the EXTERNAL GOVERNMENT who's influx of funds are needed to keep this imbalance at bay.

For the progressive - he is able to avoid the label of the "labor exploiter" because he presses upon the external government and thus the tax payer to provide the funds that his closed system is not able to provide.   A new language needs to be defined to address this conundrum.  Instead of looking at the "valiant" attempts by the labor activist to maximize the wages of all workers - because they are worthy of such a salary - more critical inspection needs to be made over the among of "warehoused" labor which is not employed.......all the while the Progressive can stand his ground and make the case that "I have never exploited any labor with sub-par wages".