0027 The personal is the political.

In the progressive agenda, the content-level actuality_2a is a dyad, group [subsumes] individual_2a.

The word, “individual”, no longer means a person who stands before God.   The individual reduces to someone carrying a group identification tag.

Similarly, identity_1a potentiates group affiliation_3a, not the person that I call “me”.

0028 Michaud calls this, “depersonalization”.

With this in mind, I consider the virtual nested form in the realm of possibility for the progressive interscope.

0029 The normal context of social justice_1c virtually brings the actualities of ideological apparatuses (such as state education, justice system and corporate media, to name a few)_1b into relation with the possibilities inherent in identity_1a.

If “justice” is a virtue for traditional folk, then “social justice_1c” is a hegemonic, demiurgic alternative.  Social justice_1ccontextualizes the actuality of economics [transforming] morals [&] culture_2b and answers the question, “When is justice (in the traditional frame) injustice (in the progressive frame)?” 

0030 Here is one of the resulting twists.

The category-based nested form for the traditional view appears below.

The arrows, however, depict trans-categorical flows from the progressive point of view.

0031 Is this a misperception?  Or, is this an accusation?

To the progressive, there is one deterministic flow to the traditional schema.  Religion₃ flows through morality and culture₂ and pours into alienating political systems and exploitative economic arrangements₁.

To the traditionalist, there are two transcategorical flows.  Religion₃ flows into morality₂. Politics and economics₁ enliven culture₂, through cooperative and laborious human action.

0032 According to progressive doctrine, traditional morals and culture₂ yield economic and political structures₁ that inherently victimize groups that do not adhere to the morals and the cultural expectations of the dominant tradition.  That is, religion₃ promulgates a morality₂, that sustains a culture₂, bent on victimizing those who are “not religious”.  The victimization occurs through political and economic means₁.

0033 In response, progressives encourage the sovereign state to expand in every fashion.  According to How To Define The Word “Religion”, progressive institutions are infrasovereign religions calling on sovereign power in order to implement their objectives.  They call on the sovereign to regulate the organization tier, through economic interventions.  They also call on the sovereign to fund ideological apparatuses_1b that promote the doctrine of social justice_1c and popularize the necessity of possessing an identity_1a (as a badge of group subsumption_2a).

0034 Consequently, the progressive (situation-level) category-based nested form has the same flows as the original, traditional category-based nested form.

In the original, religion₃ flows into morality₂, morality₂ sustains culture₂, and the potential of ‘politics and economics’₁underlies the dynamism of culture₂.  In terms of Adam Smith’s model, the first transcategorical flow corresponds to “moral sentiments” and the second transcategorical flow associates to the so-called “invisible hand”.  So, the arrows go from normal context₃ and potential₁ towards actuality₂.

In the progressive, politics₃ flows into economic interventions₂, economics₂ transforms (traditional) morals [&] culture₂.  At the same time, the potential of ‘ideological apparatuses’₁ undermines (traditional) morals [&] culture₂ and reinforces (progressive) morals [&] culture₂.

0035 Here is a picture.

0036 In sum, the progressive misrepresents the transcategorical flows for the traditional schema, while practicing the identical transcategorical flows as the traditional schema.

0037 Michaud concludes that the progressive revolution hinges on redefining the human person.

Can “subsumption_2a” be the sine qua non of the permanent revolution_2c?

Does “subsumption_2a” characterize infrasovereign religions?

Michaud writes, “The progressive revolution aims to change the way people understand themselves, understand their very humanity as collective beings.”

These category-based re-articulations picture the relational dynamics of Michaud’s argument.

There is much more to ponder in these diagrams.

But, these considerations are left to the readers.

0038 I conclude with the virtual nested form in the realm of normal context.

0039 A “not religious” normal context_3c virtually brings the actuality of politics_3b into relation with the possibility of group affiliation_3a.

Surely, this “not religious” normal context_3c fits the definition of the term, “religion”.

Plus, this normal context_3c grasps for sovereign power in order to implement its objectives.

0040 I thank Thomas Michaud for his excellent essay.

Perhaps, this brief examination will lead to a more profound understanding of the nature of our current Lebenswelt.