Evidently, cam. When ever liberals, (oh, that's right, they're progressives now) are unable to defend their position with reason, they resort to the
line of primary defense, victimhood.
Since the liberal/progressive derives their foundation from basically an emotive, rather than reasoned process, it is hard for them to escape the limitations of expounding feelings over facts.
For instance, while the Marxist dictum of "from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs" (spread the wealth) sounds quite good and very fair, it's untenable in the realm of human nature. It presupposes an egalitarianism that only exists in spirit, not in reality. The primal urge of enjoying life is based on a standard that is unique to each individual and the effort they will put forth to achieve THEIR standard, will also be unique to each individual.
In the dogma of the liberal/progressive, the group is supreme and requires the subordination of the individual. While conservatives believe the individual has primacy. And this, is the basic difference between the two philosophies. When there is no reward, of a tangible nature, for individual achievement, there is no motivation to put forth an effort beyond that of the least effort of one's peers. (Who hasn't been in a situation where you work your butt off, while other's slide, letting you take up the slack, yet, you both take home the same paycheck? Is that how you want to live?)
Sans individual initiative, progress becomes a matter of happenstance, rather than of stretching beyond one's limits. Nor, is there any sense of leadership to exhort or inspire pushing past the existing boundaries. In point of fact, there is no concept of leadership, for all are equal.
It is only by the complete and total surrender, freely and willingly, of all individuality, that the liberal/progressive world can be realized. A world not of equal masters, but of equal slaves to each other.
