Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Nation’s Top “Progressives”
Crisis Magazine ^ | June 13, 2012 | Paul Kengor

Posted on 06/13/2012 3:07:40 PM PDT by NYer

The left-leaning magazine The Nation has published a list of what it deems America’s all-time, most influential progressives. The list, which you can review for yourself, is very revealing.

For starters, it’s fascinating that The Nation leads with Eugene Debs at number 1. Debs was a socialist. It was 100 years ago this year, in 1912, that Debs ran for president on the Socialist Party ticket.

Today’s progressives get annoyed if you call them socialists. Well, why is a pure socialist the no. 1 “progressive” on The Nation’s list?

Of course, progressives really get annoyed if you suggest they bear any sympathies to communism. That being the case, two other “progressives” on The Nation’s list are quite intriguing: Paul Robeson and I. F. Stone.

Paul Robeson was a proud recipient of the “Stalin Prize.” Even the New York Times concedes Robeson was “an outspoken admirer of the Soviet Union.” When Robeson in 1934 returned from his initial pilgrimage to the Motherland, the Daily Worker thrust a microphone in his face. The Daily Worker rushed its interview into print, running it in the January 15, 1935 issue under the headline, “‘I Am at Home,’ Says Robeson at Reception in Soviet Union.”

The Bolsheviks, explained Robeson, were new men. He was bowled over by the “feeling of safety and abundance and freedom” he found “wherever I turn.” He discovered sheer equality under Joseph Stalin.

When asked about Stalin’s purges, Robeson retorted: “From what I have already seen of the workings of the Soviet Government, I can only say that anybody who lifts his hand against it ought to be shot!”

Yes, Robeson was deadly serious.

Robeson told the Daily Worker that he felt a “kinship” with the USSR. So much so that he moved his family there.

He also joined Communist Party USA. In May 1998, the centennial of Robeson’s birth, longtime CPUSA head Gus Hall hailed Robeson as a man of communist “conviction,” who “never forgot he was a communist.”

None of this is mentioned in The Nation’s profile, which blasts anyone who dared consider Robeson a communist. Instead, The Nation insists that Comrade Paul was a “progressive.”

And that brings me to I. F. Stone.

Stone is listed at number 26 on The Nation’s list. Stone has been hailed by liberals for decades as the literal “conscience” of journalism—a hero of impeccable honesty. In fact, we now know that Stone, at one time, was a paid Soviet agent.

In their latest Yale University Press work, historians John Earl Haynes, Harvey Klehr, and Alexander Vassiliev conclude that Stone (from 1936-39) was a “Soviet spy.” Also closely studying Stone’s case is Herb Romerstein. In The Venona Secrets, Romerstein likewise concluded that “Stone was indeed a Soviet agent.” One of the stronger confirmations from the Soviet side is retired KGB general Oleg Kalugin, who reported: “He [Stone] was a KGB agent since 1938. His code name was ‘Blin.’ When I resumed relations with him in 1966, it was on Moscow’s instructions. Stone was a devoted communist.”

None of this appears at Stone’s “progressive” profile at The Nation.

And speaking of progressives with communist sympathies, also on The Nation’s list is Margaret Sanger. The Planned Parenthood matron sojourned to Stalin’s Potemkin villages in 1934. “We could well take example from Russia,” Sanger advised Americans upon her return, “where birth control instruction is part of the regular welfare service of the government.”

The Planned Parenthood founder was stunned by the explosion in abortions once legalized by the Bolsheviks. No fear, though. Sanger offered this confident prediction: “All the [Bolshevik] officials with whom I discussed the matter stated that as soon as the economic and social plans of Soviet Russia are realized, neither abortions nor contraception will be necessary or desired. A functioning Communistic society will assure the happiness of every child, and will assume the full responsibility for its welfare and education.”

This was pure progressive utopianism, an absolute faith in central planners.

Overall, the socialists, communists, and Soviet sympathizers on The Nation’s list are dizzying: Upton Sinclair, Henry Wallace, W. E. B. DuBois, Norman Thomas, Lincoln Steffens, Woody Guthrie, Pete Seeger, Tom Hayden, Barbara Ehrenreich, and John Dewey—founding father of American public education.

Thus, I’m compelled to ask: Is this “progressivism?” Is progressivism synonymous with liberalism, or is it much further to the left and closer to communism?

I plead with progressives: This is your ideology … Could you better define it, if that’s possible? Or is the definition of progressivism always progressing? Actually, it is always progressing; that’s precisely the problem with this train-wreck of an ever-elusive ideology. The Nation’s list of leading American “progressives” is truly a teachable moment.



TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: communist; liberal; marxist; socialist

#1


Eugene Debs (1855–1926)

(1 of 51)

Through his leadership of the labor movement, his five campaigns as a Socialist candidate for president and his spellbinding and brilliant oratory, Debs popularized ideas about civil liberties, workers’ rights, peace and justice and government regulation of big business. In 1893 he organized the nation’s first industrial union, the American Railway Union, to unite all workers within one industry, and he led the Pullman Strike of 1894. He was elected city clerk of Terre Haute and served in the Indiana State Assembly in 1884. In 1900, 1904, 1908, 1912 and 1920, Debs ran for president on the Socialist Party ticket. His speeches and writing influenced popular opinion and the platforms of Democratic Party candidates. His 1920 campaign took place while he was in Atlanta’s federal prison for opposing World War I; he won nearly 1 million votes.

1 posted on 06/13/2012 3:07:54 PM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GOPJ

You may find this interesting.


2 posted on 06/13/2012 3:08:53 PM PDT by NYer (Without justice, what else is the State but a great band of robbers? - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I’ve never understood why they call themselves Progressives when they are against all forms of progress.


3 posted on 06/13/2012 3:12:17 PM PDT by TennesseeProfessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

All of them were enemies of human freedom and dignity. They have been, and through their work and reputation, continue to be the existential enemies of Western civilization.

They fully deserve, as Sidney Hooks termed it, an ‘epitaph of infamy’.


4 posted on 06/13/2012 3:16:51 PM PDT by Noumenon (If people saw socialists for what they truly are, slaughter would ensue - in self-defense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer

The usual suspects — bunch of anti-American commies for the most part.


5 posted on 06/13/2012 3:17:46 PM PDT by freedumb2003 ('RETRO' Abortions = performed on 84th trimester individuals who think killing babies is a "right.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onyx

Ping to commies . . . er . . . democrats, but I repeat myslef


6 posted on 06/13/2012 3:22:55 PM PDT by Islander7 (There is no septic system so vile, so filthy, the left won't drink from to further their agenda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Today’s progressives get annoyed if you call them socialists.

There are progressives and progressives. Nation readers might get mad if you call them socialists, but the anger isn't as sincere as it is with some others who have taken on the progressive label. If you find Nation readers willing to speak candidly some would admit that something that could be called socialism was their original ideal, though perhaps they didn't think could be realized. That doesn't necessarily go for all Democrats who've gotten tired of calling themselves liberals and have settled on calling themselves progressives.

The Socialist platforms Debs ran on had two parts. One was the far goal of collective ownership of property. The other part was the nearer political and industrial demands that fell short of the distant goal. These were things that could be done under the existing system -- things that actually have been done in the years since Debs ran. Based on these later demands, today's liberals or progresives don't have a problem with Debs, however they might feel about his belief in the class struggle or the abolition of private property.

Check it out for yourself: The Socialist Party Platform of 1912

7 posted on 06/13/2012 3:24:01 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Bookmarked - Great reference material. Thanks for posting.


8 posted on 06/13/2012 3:24:21 PM PDT by Islander7 (There is no septic system so vile, so filthy, the left won't drink from to further their agenda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TennesseeProfessor

For the same reasons they use “affirmative action” and “choice”

They can’t be honest about who they really are


9 posted on 06/13/2012 3:24:59 PM PDT by A_Former_Democrat (Free the Zimmermans. . . end this political, racist travesty of a "prosecution")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Liz; The Mayor
Didn't check it but the list should include ...

NYC HEALTH BOARD: WHY STOP AT SODA? BAN MILKSHAKES AND POPCORN, TOO

As Rush Limbaugh pointed out today, like every day, Liberals are the greatest robbers of freedom in that they impose their philosophical beliefs on the populace. They never question the purported science behind the actions they choose to ban.

10 posted on 06/13/2012 3:34:15 PM PDT by NYer (Without justice, what else is the State but a great band of robbers? - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: x

Thanks for the link. Sigh .. just lost my appetite.


11 posted on 06/13/2012 3:40:23 PM PDT by NYer (Without justice, what else is the State but a great band of robbers? - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NYer
His 1920 campaign took place while he was in Atlanta’s federal prison for opposing World War I; he won nearly 1 million votes.

He won 38% of the Jewish vote that election.

12 posted on 06/13/2012 4:08:40 PM PDT by ansel12 (Massachusetts Governors, where the GOP now goes for it's Presidential candidates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Yes - interesting. Thanks for the ping.


13 posted on 06/13/2012 8:36:10 PM PDT by GOPJ (Take your little hammer, little sickle and your scary red signs with a fist on it, and go home...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TennesseeProfessor

Because if you’re not for “progress” then you must be a reactionary. Aren’t we all for “progress”. And who’s against “choice” or “gaiety”? He who controls the language controls the debate. The Left does in this culture.

The list of supporters of mass murderers as the greatest “progressives” is not surprising, and it is a hall of shame of sorts.


14 posted on 06/13/2012 8:44:43 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Liz; NYer

Twisted NY....


15 posted on 06/14/2012 4:17:16 PM PDT by The Mayor ("If you can't make them see the light, let them feel the heat" — Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson