re: #492 Van Helsing

First time I’ve been asked to do so - congratulations. I’m sure you’ll be hated for it later.

From observation it seems that progressives think that an enlightened, omnipotent government can solve problems better than a localized, more accountable government entity can.
My view is the opposite.

Further, as an anti-progressive myself, problems can best be solved at at more local level.

Boots on the ground only count if they are on the CORRECT ground.

Local control is easier for people to keep track of as opposed to a Federal Behemoth (not slumbering) that is impossible to keep track.

Most people that I know who identify as ‘progressive’ are all about local. Local food, local government, local economy etc etc, to the point where the main thing they focus on activist wise are local issues. Local food economies and security around basic human resources like water and land health and usage are big issues. Most ‘progressives’ I know think the federal levels of control while useful to a point they tend to be a hinderance on a lot of issues rather then a help. They work at either changing these methods of control or at least work the political pressure points to get particular things accomplished. The federal levels of control are good or bad depending on whatever issue is being talked about. There isn’t just one carte blanche ‘fed’ bad sort of philosphy. Pragmatism is the word of the day. If anything the progressives I know don’t much care about those sort of philosophies at all, or at least not in some sort of homogenous way that everyone agrees on. They just do shit with whatever tools are available to their situation and work at creating tools they need.