Is all progress … pleasant?

By ISAAC TAYLOR

Things That Matter

“A conservative is someone who stands athwart history, yelling ‘Stop!’ at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.” – William F. Buckley

I’m not much for the neoconservative Buckley, but lately and with increasing frequency I find this quote echoing in my head when thinking about more and more things happening in our world.

Change is the natural order. Life is a process of growth. Stagnation occurs in death.

So goes the argument for progress.

But is it a good argument? Is it a conclusive argument? Are there any other factors to consider when one works to make progress?

You could say since progress is inevitable, it’s foolish to stand in the way. I disagree.

To say all progress is inevitable necessarily ignores moral questions about the development of particular instances of progress. If the concept of progress is impervious to moral judgment because progress itself is unstoppable, then “progress” must be understood as wholly correct in all cases; therefore, those who question it are by default wrong. (Or backward, uncultured, uneducated naysayers – perhaps worst of all … biased! The horror!)

What utter nonsense.

Reasonable people understand that sometimes it is preferable to preserve a thing rather than destroy it for the sake of a new thing. As it turns out, not all progress is progress.

This comic illustrates a fantastic argument against “progress for the sake of progress.” (Alex Norris / webcomicname.com)

The difficult question of when to make progress arises when a community undergoes rapid-fire change, seemingly without a previously agreed-upon plan. Suddenly, the community must hastily direct its own destiny instead of simply “letting things happen.” Of course, individuals within any community will never come into full agreement about how their community should look and the kinds of things it should provide for its members.

Put another way: is the progress of the community worth more than the interests of the individual?

Of course! Sometimes.

Of course not! Sometimes.

What does a growing city do when it has horrible traffic but no clear space to build an actual bypass to alleviate the problem? It finds the best alternative and creates a plan to bring it to life. Simple enough, right?

The politics of good decision-making is far more challenging than that of perfect decision-making. In fact, it’s so complicated it’s often not achieved. There are reasons people don’t like politics or the political class in general.

That said, to make a perfect decision in a world of nonstop conflicting interests is literally impossible. Political perfection can only come about in an environment with no countervailing forces. Does that sound like society to you?

That’s not to excuse the decisions over the past 35 years that led to the muddied situation with Pleasant Street in Noblesville. While one can imagine we happen to live in the version of reality where the Reimagine Pleasant Street plan truly is the best of all possible plans to fix the Conner Street traffic nightmare, that’s little consolation for people who have lost or will lose their homes and businesses for the purpose of making room for “progress” – even if those folks will get some degree of compensation from their city.

We’re back to the primary purpose of politics: weighing the individual’s interests against those of the community.

I’m not sure which is the right way forward.

What I do know is this: it’s easy to demand progress when you will bear none of its costs. Those who so flippantly boast about how grand it is for those “old,” “run down,” “dilapidated” homes and businesses to be bulldozed in order to make room for a so-called reimagined Pleasant Street ought to consider how gleeful they’d be if and when a beautiful new road must pass right through their own front doors. You could say it would be a rather unpleasant experience.

I doubt they’d demand that kind of progress.

Isaac Taylor is one of the owners of the Hamilton County Reporter, as well as the Circulation Director and page designer. You won’t find him anywhere online, so don’t bother looking. However, he welcomes your comments on his columns at ReadTheReporter.com.