Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
‘A Vision of the Impossible’: Taft on Progressives and Panaceas
‘A Vision of the Impossible’: Taft on Progressives and Panaceas
Jan 28, 2026 6:39 PM

In a wide-ranging discussion of the Progressive Era in her new biography of Calvin Coolidge, Amity Shlaes quotes a striking excerpt from a little-known speech by President William Howard Taft.

Given in the middle of the 1912 election, in which peted (poorly) against Woodrow Wilson and former President Teddy Roosevelt, the speech focuses on the predominant themes and schemes of his opponents, handily highlighting their limits.

In a particularly snappy swipe at Roosevelt, who had just recently split from the Republican Party, Taft notes that despite various efforts to form new parties, any rumbling therein is largely driven by the “promise of a panacea,” a top-down fantasy “in which the rich are to be made reasonably poor and the poor reasonably rich, by law.” Instead, Taft argues, we should seek solutions that “bring plete equality of opportunity,” unleashing individuals munities to work, create, and collaborate. The bones of civilization are not built, first and foremost, by the bidding of the policymaker’s baton.

Shlaes quotes the speech in passing, but the full text (or audio!) is well worth taking in:

We are living in an age in which by exaggeration of the defects of our present condition, by false charges and responsibility for it against individuals and classes, by holding up to the feverish imagination of the less fortunate and the discontented the possibilities of a millenium, a condition of popular unrest has been produced.

New parties are being formed with the proposed purpose of satisfying this unrest by promising a panacea. Insofar as inequality of condition can be lessened and equality of opportunity can be promoted by improvement of our educational systems, the betterment of the laws to ensure the quick administration of justice, and by the prevention of the acquisition of privilege without pensation—insofar as the adoption of the legislation above recited and laws of a similar character may aid the less fortunate in their struggle with the hardships of life—all are in sympathy with the continued effort to remedy injustice and to aid the weak. And I venture to say, that there’s no national administration in which more real steps of such progress have been taken than in the present one. But insofar as the propaganda for the satisfaction of unrest involves the promise of a millenium—a condition in which the rich are to be made reasonably poor and the poor reasonably rich, by law — we are chasing a phantom. We are holding out to those whose unrest we fear, a prospect and a dream, a vision of the impossible.

After we have changed all the governmental machinery, so as to permit instantaneous expression of the people in constitutional amendments, in statutes, and in recall of public agents, what then? Votes are not bread, constitutional amendments are not work, referendums do not pay rent or furnish houses, recalls do not furnish clothing, initiatives do not supply employment or relieve inequalities of condition or of opportunity. We still ought to have set before us the definite plans to bring plete equality of opportunity, and to abolish hardship and evil for humanity. We listen for them in vain.

Taft clearly understands the bottom-up nature of human flourishing and the destructive potential of top-down planners and levelers.Given the modern mushrooming of “governmental machinery,” the continuous sapping of “popular unrest” by today’s Planning Class, and the overlap of this and that between today’s Left and the Right, there would appear to be a lesson here somewhere.

Our challenges and divides are certainly distinct from those in Taft’s time, but the laws of men still have their limits and, alas, the Great Progressive Prospect is still, as Taft calls it, “a vision of the impossible.”

[product sku=”1028″]

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Kaarlgard Declares ‘Failure of Morality, Not Capitalism’
In a Forbes blog post titled “Failure of Morality, Not Capitalism,” Rich Kaarlgard counters the critics of supply-side capitalism by pointing to an absence of morality. Kaarlgard declares: Many people do blame capitalism for bringing us to this low moment in the economy. Do they have a point? They do if capitalism, as they define it, is devoid of any underlying morality. True enough, it is hard to see any underlying morality when one surveys the present carnage caused by...
Acton Commentary: Choosing a Prosperous Future
“Focusing on education is not a distraction from the pressing business of economic recovery,” Kevin Schmiesing writes. “It is vital to ensuring it.” This focus should advance school choice and a reduction of administrative red tape. Read mentary at the Acton website, and share ments below. ...
PBR: A Genuine Challenge to Religious Liberty
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” Jordan Ballor kindly asked me to offer a few words in response to this question, as I made it an area of expertise during the previous Administration. I’ve been working up to writing something more formal, but I’ll begin by thinking aloud here, as well as at my my home blog. Without further ado, here’s what I posted over there: By now, you’ve probably heard about the...
America’s Secular Challenge
I’ve been reading America’s Secular Challenge by NYU professor and president of the Hudson Institute Herb London. The book is essentially an extended essay about how elite, left-wing secularism undercuts America’s traditional strengths of patriotism and religious faith during a time when the nation can ill afford it. The assault on public religion and love of es in a period when America faces enemies who have no such crisis of identity and lack the degree of doubt that leaves us...
Debunking the New Deal
It’s long been my contention that the mythology surrounding the New Deal in large swaths of the popular imagination plays an ongoing, important, and harmful role in politics and policy debate. For that reason, I e periodic attempts to debunk the myth. Jonah Goldberg offers a perceptive and enlightening perspective on New Deal historiography and its current uses and abuses. Unlike Daniel Gross (cited by Goldberg), I don’t care whether the analyst is an historian, economist, policy wonk, or journalist,...
Dr. Andrew Abela Receives 2009 Novak Award
Maltese-American marketing professor, Dr. Andrew Abela, is the winner of the Acton Institute’s 2009 Novak Award. Dr. Abela’s main research areas include consumerism, marketing ethics, Catholic Social Teaching, and internal munication. Believing that anti-free market perspectives seem to dominate discussion about the social impact of business, Dr. Abela is working to explore Christian ethics further to show how these issues can be resolved more humanely and effectively through market-oriented approaches. To aid this work, Dr. Abela is currently preparing a...
Acton Commentary: Race Alarmists Hijack Black History Month
Ignore those racial disparity studies that point to the “resegregation” of America’s educational system. They advance the lie that minorities cannot survive without whites. “What is best for e black and Latino students is what is best for all students: stable and supportive families, parental options, and high achieving schools with stellar teachers,” Bradley writes. Read mentary at the Acton website, and then discuss it here. ...
PBR: On Faith
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” Perhaps taking a cue from this week’s PBR question (or perhaps not), the On Faith roster of bloggers have been asked to weigh in on the following question this week: “Should the Obama Administration let faith-based programs that receive government grants discriminate against those they hire or serve?” Notable responses include those from Chuck Colson, Al Mohler, and Susan Brooks Thistlewaite, the latter of whom has these...
PBR: Public Good and the Faith-Based Initiative
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” I have little confidence in the future of the faith-based initiative because conservatives who gain office are unwilling to take any fire at all in order to advance the cause beyond concept. At the same time, liberals will be unable to make productive use of the idea because of giant fissures regarding public religion in their movement. In theory, President Obama would make an ideal person to...
PBR: Monsma and Carlton-Thies Speak Out
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” As part of Christianity Today’s Speaking Out (web-only) feature, Stephen V. Monsma and Stanley Carlson-Thies, of Calvin College’s Henry Institute and the Center for Public Justice respectively, address the future of the faith-based initiative under President Obama. Monsma and Carlton-Thies outline five “encouraging signs” and one “major concern.” The encouraging signs include the naming of the office executive director (Joshua DuBois) and advisory council (including “recognized evangelicals”...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved