The Progressive Conservative Manifesto

An alternative model for social progress

Photo by Michael Dziedzic on Unsplash

Originally written for The Libertarian Reformist Path by TaraElla.

1. Background

In the 2010s, there was some sort of awakening to social justice concerns across the West. At first, I welcomed this awakening, because I have always been compassionate, and have always believed that society ought to be made fairer and more accommodating to disadvantaged minorities. However, as the decade went on, things became unsettling. Feminists began accusing men of 'mansplaining' and guilty of upholding the 'patriarchy' on a widespread scale. Colorblindness began to be rejected, and replaced by 'race consciousness' in some circles. The 'born this way' argument that had served LGBT rights so well for decades was increasingly being replaced by weak and unscientific paradigms like 'gender is a social construct'. Free speech was attacked, and 'safe speech' was championed instead. Later on, cancel culture would become widespread, and it would be justified on postmodernist talk about 'power dynamics'. Still later, society would go into full postmodernist mode, where activism often became about enforcing clumsy top-down linguistic changes, reinterpreting history to cast the West and its liberal institutions as irredeemably racist at their foundations, destroying statues of controversial historical figures and so on. It became clear to me that progressivism and social justice had lost their way.

I never left the ideals of social justice and progress, but the movement clearly left me behind. After several years of trying to understand what went wrong, I concluded that postmodern critical theory was to blame. I became 'anti-woke' in an attempt to cure the movement of its newfound postmodern critical theory influences, but later came to be frustrated and ultimately heartbroken by the populist-reactionary New Right's hijacking of the whole anti-woke movement. When Ron DeSantis is using 'anti-woke' to bully Disney, and when Donald Trump is using 'anti-woke' to justify his radically regressive executive orders, you know the right-wing version of 'anti-woke' has jumped the shark, and has turned into something horribly authoritarian.

I want no part of the culture war right that Trump, DeSantis and their cheerleaders represent. Frankly, that movement insults my fundamental values like compassion, freedom and objectivity. Still, I feel the need to criticize the 'woke left', which is clearly not backing down from its misguided positions. After all, the excesses of the 2010s left had created the space for a toxic, reactionary movement to rise, which is at least partly responsible for allowing Trump to return to the White House, and it has also exhausted the optimistic passion of a substantial part of two generations (Millennials and Zoomers), who are now too burnt out to engage in any meaningful movement to improve society. This is also not the first time the far-left's model of change has brought nothing but dangerously regressive backlash and exhaustion of the youth: the radicalism of the 1960s-70s gave way to three decades of right-wing dominance (the time during which my generation grew up in), while the radicalism of Europe in the early 20th century arguably paved the way for fascism.

It is clear that the far-left's model of change has failed repeatedly, and will always fail, leaving behind the people who would be harmed by the resulting backlash, and the broken passions of a generation of youth, every time. Such a faulty program must be put to a stop, period, so no more generations will be harmed in the future. The progressive conservative idea is a proposal for an alternative model for sustainable social change, one that will not result in the failures, disappointments and harms of the far-left model. (Note that 'progressive conservative' refers to a philosophy that combines the progressive impulse with classical Burkean conservative philosophy, and it certainly does not have anything to do with the reactionary right-wing political parties that like to call themselves 'conservative'.)

2. What is the Progressive Conservative Idea

The Western political landscape of 2025 is basically a wasteland. Competing far-left and far-right factions shout at each other, taking turns to one-up each other, as if to compete for who can get the more extreme. Meanwhile, most of us know that the ideas offered by both camps are not only divisive, but will lead to widespread chaos and suffering in society. The far-left insists that everything about the status quo must be seen as a product of oppressor vs oppressed power dynamics, and it must all be deconstructed. Their nihilistically radical vision has led to the division and polarization of society, confused discourse on many sensitive social issues, and burned out generations of idealistic young people. Their destructive ideology is clearly one major reason 'why we can't have good things'. Meanwhile, the far-right is being reactionary for the sake of being reactionary, with no limit in sight as to how far they want to wind things back. They hate modern society so much that some of them are even willing to cancel liberal democracy itself! The 'online right', where even being openly bigoted and attacking interracial marriage has become normalized, is the logical result of a movement that only seeks to 'own the libs', as they like to say.

The problem here is clear: the far-left doesn't believe in maintaining any part of our long-standing status quo, while the far-right doesn't believe in progressing society to make it more inclusive and equal, period. The far-left is allergic to the philosophical position of conservatism, no matter how moderate or reasonable, while the far-right is allergic to any social progress. The far-left pays lip service to progressive ideals like social justice to justify its destructive mission, while the far-right pays lip service to traditionalism to justify its reactionary posture. But it doesn't have to be this way. By embracing both the progressive impulse and the conservative temperament, and seeking a happy balance or a functional fusion between the two, we can avoid both these nihilistic and harmful extremes. After all, as Teddy Roosevelt once said, 'wise progressivism and wise conservatism go hand in hand'. It's not too late to rediscover that tradition.

3. Progressive Conservatives Support Organic, Incremental Change

The English-speaking West has long been shaped by classical liberal values, which have provided us with such important pillars of our society like free speech, freedom of thought and inquiry, freedom of conscience and free debate. These values have been crucial in allowing us to pursue the objective truth without favor or fear, and this sacred tradition must continue. Contrary to the propaganda of the populist right, there is no inherent conflict between conserving our traditions and upholding classical liberal values, rather, it is the introduction of illiberal views that goes against our long-standing traditions. Indeed, any 'conservatism' in the English-speaking West worth its name must, by definition, abide by our long-standing classical liberal values.

The 'progressive' part of progressive conservatism comes about largely due to the functions of the free marketplace of ideas. It cannot come from anywhere else, because the conservative view requires that all social change must be organic, born out of practical need, consistent with the spirit of long-standing traditions, and not primarily rooted in abstract philosophy. In contrast, the progressive conservative rejects change that is primarily justified by abstract philosophy or ideology, like the deconstructive approach of postmodernism, or the invention of new language rules justified by the abstract need for equality in the sense of linguistic philosophy. As can be observed throughout history, ideas for change generally only get adopted by a critical mass of people in the marketplace of ideas, when there is a practical demonstrable need for the change, and that the change does not destroy important aspects of long-standing tradition. This means that the marketplace of ideas is an effective filter to filter our ideologically-driven attempts at forced social change, while allowing through proposals for change that actually have a practical benefit.

Therefore, the continued upholding of classical liberal values, and the continued development and progressive application of these values more consistently, and to more parts of our lives, is entirely compatible with a progressive conservative vision, as long as these changes come about as a result of gradualist, practical reform, rather than radical transformation based on abstract philosophy. This is to say that, progressive conservatism is entirely compatible with libertarian reformism, even though it is incompatible with libertarian immediatism, not because of the 'libertarian' part, but because of the 'immediatist' part.

4. Progressive Conservatives Must Reject Reactionary Populism

It is regrettable to say that, right now, there is an increasingly popular brand of politics that often masquerades as a form of 'conservatism', that draws its support and power from fomenting moral panics, encouraging emotionally charged responses to delicate issues, and generally supporting a reactionary approach to controversial social issues. Progressive conservatives reject this kind of politics because it centers political activity not around the pursuit of truth, but around the will to power. This inevitably leads to the disrespect and distortion of our collective understanding of the objective truth, with deleterious consequences on both individuals and society as a whole flowing from that.

The fact is, we must have an open society that welcomes the input of new ideas, if we are to 'progress' in any way. As previously described, given the progressive conservative's insistence that any change must be organic, the input of new ideas into society's collective conscience and the fair consideration of these ideas would represent the only way to acceptably bring about social change. The reactionary right's promotion of moral panics and tribalism prevents this from happening in a healthy way, and is hence incompatible with the progressive conservative project.

Moreover, the reactionary right's disrespect towards long-standing liberal-democratic institutions, particularly guardrails and checks and balances on power, in their pursuit of their political goals, is inherently incompatible with the conservative temperament, and the reasons why this temperament provides the necessary checks and balances on misguided radical designs. Indeed, reactionary populism is one such misguided radical design, that genuine conservatism needs to work to keep in check. Therefore, progressive conservatives must call out reactionary populism masquerading as 'conservatism', and oppose its radical excesses on principle.

Like all other classical liberals and conservatives, we value what is objectively, morally correct to do, and entirely reject the oppressor vs oppressed worldview and the general worldview of social constructionism and deconstructionism that is rooted in postmodern critical theory. Our grounds for rejecting postmodern critical theory in its entirety are strong, and we must continue to argue on those grounds. However, rejection of postmodern critical theory must be done in a rational and intellectual way, and must not be allowed to become an excuse for an anti-intellectual reactionary politics, which would defeat the whole point of progressive conservatism.

5. Answering Criticisms of Progressive Conservatism

Critics of the left, particularly the far-left, often charge progressive conservatism, or ideologies similar to it, with being ineffective in actually bringing about needed change that would benefit the disadvantaged. However, a fair examination of history would show that it is the tireless reformers who work on society's existing foundations, and gradually push it in the direction of more freedom and equality over time, who achieved the most when it came to actual beneficial change. Radicals generally talked a big game, but only ended up generating big waves of reactionary sentiment that sometimes produced dangerous outcomes. (In fact, I would argue that we are living through one now.)

The populist right often contend that progressive conservatism is not real conservatism because it is just 'progressivism driving at the speed limit'. We agree that progressive conservatism is indeed 'progressivism driving at the speed limit'. Conservatism is what gives us this speed limit, and prevents us from veering off course and down a cliff, and is therefore much needed and appreciated. What the populist right gets wrong is the definition and role of 'conservatism'. To be conservative is to apply the brakes on radical, unjustified change, by insisting that change occurs as a result of practical need, rational deliberation and broad-based consensus. It is not to reject all change outright. And it is certainly not to run scare campaigns and moral panics against any and all proposals for change. Furthermore, and it bears repeating, romanticizing the past and justifying the use of extensive state power to bring back the 'glorious' past is not conservatism, it is more like fascism, which genuine conservatives should reject.

Originally written for The Libertarian Reformist Path by TaraElla. Available (free download) at Smashwords, Apple books, Barnes and Noble and other outlets.

---

TaraElla is a singer-songwriter and author, who is the author of the Progressive Conservative Manifesto, the Moral Libertarian Manifesto and the Moral Libertarian book series. She is also the author of her autobiography The TaraElla Story.