An opinion article from over a year ago well illustrates the tyrannical mindset of progressives, and why there will never be any peace with them.
The original is an opinion column by WND columnist Patrice Lewis, written to critique Earth Day back in 2016. Titled “Which Woman is Living ‘Sustainably’?” the article recaps a conversation between the author and an old high school friend. The author ended up living on a homestead in the American Redoubt, while her friend ended up following the typical American path and resides in Seattle.
The friend got big into “sustainable living” and ‘save-the-planet’ green movements, like reducing your carbon footprint. One thing that stands out across the article is the tone of moral superiority from the city-living progressive, and the utter cluelessness as to how anyone lives outside the city.
Here’s a synopsis of the life differences highlighted in the article, as the city-friend is boasting of her superior lifestyle.
- City girl bought a high-end washer dryer set for a top energy star rating. Country girl has an old, inefficient washer-dryer set but is drying clothes in clotheslines near a wood cook stove, heating the house with a several-years’ supply of salvaged logs bought from an independent logger in the area.
- City girl boasts of how buying the premium-priced appliances has slashed her energy bill by $80/mo. Country girl’s power bill doesn’t even reach $80/mo.
- City girl boasts of buying vintage clothes for less than she would pay at the mall. Country girl’s wardrobe mainly came from a thrift store.
- City girl is spending extra money on products made from recycled goods, like a $240 magazine rack. Country girl has furniture her husband made from scrap lumber in the barn.
- City girl bought a fitness club membership so she can walk 3 miles a day. Country girl does not go to a fitness club, but walks three miles just to go to her mailbox and back.
- City girl’s husband is using mass transit to go to work, in order to save energy and reduce pollution. Country girl’s husband walks across the yard to a home business.
- City girl is paying premium price for organic food. Country girl eats home-grown organic food for free.
- City girl is paying a premium for cruelty-free meats and feels great knowing how the meat was treated when alive. Country girl is eating meat she raised on her own farm.
- City girl is trying new, healthy recipes. Country girl eats food made from scratch on her own farm, limiting herself to ingredients she can produce on her own.
- City girl is paying a premium for products made from recycled product (i.e. towels and tissues). Country girl uses old rags for those purposes.
- City girl has joined an activist group trying to end all logging in order to have forested hillsides. Country girl lives on forested hillsides maintained by loggers for 4 generations to reduce forest fire risk, all families and economies that would be ruined if city girl’s cause succeeds.
Truth or Fiction
This is an opinion column, so is it true? Did the conversation really go as described? Did this conversation even actually occur? Are progressives really like that?
Well, there was an unpopular law in Washington state which suggests, “Yes.” If you’ve spent any time in WA, you may be familiar with the “Litterbag in Vehicle Law.” It was a law (RCW 70.93.100) that said every person is required to maintain a trash bag of some sort in their car at all times, for putting trash into instead of throwing it out the window and littering. If you ever got pulled over, a cop could ask to see your litter bag, and if you didn’t have it you’d immediately owe a $95 fine.
Obviously, the only reason anyone would throw trash out their car window is because they lacked a suitable trash bag at that moment and didn’t want to drop the trash on the floor in their car. It couldn’t possible be because some folks have no regard for public or private space, or are so irresponsible in nature they think when they throw trash out the window, it is gone, and they are okay with it becoming someone else’s problem.
When I was on the East Coast, my driveway opened onto a two-lane residential road and a “No Littering” sign was posted along the edge of my yard by the city. Yet every week I had to clean up litter prior to mowing so I didn’t mulch all that trash into my grass. Chip bags, beer cans, fast food soda cups, candy bar wrappers; it normally filled a plastic grocery bag. If that east coast state had a vehicle-trash-bag law, then surely there would have been no litter on my lawn, right?
Further, when the WA law was first implemented, it required the state to provide suitable litter bags to every driver at time of license renewal, at no cost to the driver. So who’s paying for all those bags being given away for free? Everyone who pays taxes.
The law was repealed in 2003, but only because cops were complaining about it. Their issue was that citizens found the wording vague (and therefore difficult to enforce), that citizens who were simply not littering met the intent of the law even without a vehicle trash bag, and that the law was a misdemeanor which – automatically required a court appearance. Because the cops were complaining (who cared about citizen complaints?), the law was finally repealed.
The progressives refuse to accept basic observable facts about the evil present in human nature. Murderers are going to kill whether they have a gun or not. They don’t suddenly go from normal folk to murderers by putting a gun in their hand. Litterbugs are going to litter because they never learned as a young child that it is wrong to leave a mess for others to clean up. They don’t suddenly become litter bugs because they forgot to bring a trash bag in their car that day.
Go back to the article summary and think about how laws implemented by city-dwelling progressive folks would effect everyone else. In WA, policy for the state is set by voters in King County (Seattle).
What would happen to country-girl and her family if city-girl and friends voted in large enough numbers to pass the following binding laws on all people in the state?
- Stores are only allowed to sell premium energy star appliances, or people or only allowed to purchase those premium appliances (akin to the recent federal light bulb law mandating only energy-efficient light bulbs be sold in stores)?
- A law that goods may only be made from recycled or repurposed waste, thus boosting the price of goods considerably?
- Laws requiring use of mass transit, or restricting personal vehicle use?
- Laws requiring that all food sold must meet organic standards, or laws requiring that all meat sold in stores must meet cruelty-free standards, thus raising the price of all food considerably?
- Laws that favor city-girl’s vintage store, such that thrift stores are driven out of business?
- Laws brining an end to use of natural resources, bankrupting all the rural economies which subsist on harvesting natural resources?
- Laws mandating a fitness club membership? (Don’t laugh. The feds mandated health insurance for all. With obesity such a large (heh) and costly problem, how long before they mandate other purchases in order to “deal with” obesity?)
But I’ve often run into that tone present in the article: city-progressives who are so focused on themselves and their virtue-signaling, they never ask how anyone else lives and are more than willing to force everybody to live according to their own “superior” values. So long as that sort of narcissism and solipsism are rampant in our culture, we will always be at risk of progressives passing laws to force everyone to live to their “superior” code, no matter the expense.