Book Offer
This will close in 10 seconds
Over the past two decades, progressive ideas have become increasingly influential across universities, the media, public institutions, multinational corporations and many areas of Western cultural life. With influence comes the responsibility to withstand critical examination. Supporters argue that progressivism has created a more equal, compassionate and inclusive society. Critics contend that many of its principles are applied inconsistently. The issue is not the intent behind progressive goals, but the asymmetry in how its standards are applied.
The following examples summarise twenty recurring criticisms of modern progressive politics. They do not suggest that every progressive person holds every one of these views. Rather, they highlight tensions that deserve the same level of scrutiny that progressives have long applied to other ideologies and institutions.
Progressives celebrate diversity of race, gender, sexuality and culture, arguing that different backgrounds enrich society. Critics argue that ideological diversity often receives far less protection. Conservative, religious or otherwise dissenting views are sometimes portrayed not merely as mistaken but as unacceptable and hateful.
If diversity strengthens society because different perspectives improve discussion, critics argue that this principle should also apply to political ideas.
Examples
Equality before the law is one of progressivism’s central principles. Yet critics argue that policies such as affirmative action, quotas and identity-based recruitment sometimes require treating individuals differently because of race or sex.
Supporters argue these policies correct historical disadvantages. Critics reply that discrimination does not become fair simply because its intended purpose is different. They argue that equality should mean judging individuals according to merit rather than group identity.
Examples
Modern progressivism promotes acceptance of different identities, religions and lifestyles. Critics argue, however, that this tolerance often ends where political disagreement begins.
People expressing views that were widely accepted only a few years ago may now face campaigns for dismissal, de-platforming or social exclusion. Critics argue that disagreement is increasingly interpreted as prejudice rather than a legitimate difference of opinion.
Examples
The civil rights movement sought a society in which people would be judged “by the content of their character, not the colour of their skin.” Critics argue that modern progressive politics has shifted towards placing race, sex, gender and sexuality at the centre of political and institutional life.
Supporters argue that identity remains important because social experiences differ between groups. Critics accept this but argue that reducing individuals to immutable categories inherently destroys the baseline of universal equality.
Examples
Progressives have often defended robust freedom of expression when challenging established institutions such as governments, the Catholic Church or traditional social norms. Critics argue that support becomes less consistent when speech is considered offensive toward protected groups or conflicts with progressive values.
Supporters distinguish between free speech and freedom from consequences. Critics respond that expanding the definition of harmful speech risks discouraging open debate and encouraging self-censorship.
Examples
Progressives rightly oppose prejudice against minorities. Critics argue, however, that broad generalisations about men, white people or wealthy individuals are often considered acceptable.
Supporters argue that these groups possess greater social power. Critics reply that judging people according to group identity remains inconsistent with the principle that individuals should be assessed on their own character.
Examples
Progressivism has played a major role in advancing women’s rights. Critics argue that tensions have emerged between protecting women’s sex-based rights and recognising gender identity.
Supporters emphasise inclusion for transgender people. Critics argue that biological sex remains relevant in areas such as sport, prisons and female-only spaces, creating conflicts between two progressive objectives.
Examples
Progressives frequently criticise capitalism for creating inequality, corporate power and environmental damage. Critics argue that this often overlooks capitalism’s role in generating unprecedented prosperity, innovation and rising living standards.
They contend that while capitalism deserves criticism where necessary, its achievements should receive equal recognition.
Examples
Progressives often highlight Western history’s darker chapters, including colonialism and slavery. Critics argue that they sometimes give less attention to Western civilisation’s contributions to democracy, science, human rights and constitutional government.
The criticism is not that history should ignore injustice, but that it should be presented in a balanced manner.
Examples
Progressives frequently argue that public debate should be based on accurate information and oppose misinformation. Critics argue that facts considered politically sensitive—particularly those relating to immigration, crime or ethnicity—are sometimes omitted or downplayed in official communications or media reporting. Supporters respond that editorial judgment is necessary to avoid inflaming prejudice. Critics reply that withholding relevant facts can itself distort public understanding.
Examples
Progressives often insist that public policy should follow scientific evidence rather than ideology. Critics argue, however, that scientific findings are sometimes embraced selectively. Research supporting progressive positions is frequently presented as settled, while findings that challenge prevailing assumptions may be dismissed as controversial or politically problematic.
The criticism is not that science should never be questioned—science advances through questioning—but that the same standard of scepticism should apply to all evidence.
Examples
Progressives generally view immigration as economically, culturally and morally beneficial. Critics agree that immigration has enriched many societies but argue that legitimate concerns about integration infrastructure, housing supply, and overstretched public services are reflexively dismissed as prejudice.
Supporters rightly warn against xenophobia. Critics respond that questioning immigration policy is not the same as opposing immigrants themselves.
Examples
Progressivism has traditionally championed peaceful protest and opposition to violence. Critics argue, however, that violence committed in pursuit of progressive causes is sometimes described as understandable or contextualised more sympathetically than violence committed by ideological opponents.
They argue that the rule of law requires consistent moral standards regardless of political objectives.
Examples
Progressives seek to reduce inequalities based on wealth, race or inherited privilege. Critics argue that this has sometimes been replaced by a new hierarchy based upon identity, lived experience or perceived oppression.
Supporters argue that historically marginalised voices deserve greater attention. Critics agree but contend that evidence and reason should remain more important than identity itself.
Examples
Progressivism often presents itself as challenging powerful institutions. Critics argue that this description has become increasingly outdated. Progressive ideas are now widely represented within universities, major corporations, the media, charities and many public bodies.
Movements that become culturally influential, critics argue, should expect the same scrutiny they once directed at traditional institutions.
Examples
Progressives frequently explain differences in educational attainment, income or career choice through social and cultural influences. Critics argue that this reasoning is applied inconsistently when discussing gender identity.
They contend that if society influences many aspects of human behaviour, it should not automatically be assumed incapable of influencing another simply because the conclusion is politically uncomfortable.
Examples
Protecting vulnerable people is central to progressive politics. Critics argue that support for abortion and assisted dying sits uneasily alongside this principle because unborn children and vulnerable elderly people are also dependent on legal protection.
Supporters argue that these issues concern bodily autonomy, dignity and personal choice. Critics respond that the question illustrates a genuine moral tension rather than an easy answer.
Examples
Progressives frequently challenge religious beliefs they regard as incompatible with modern liberal values. Critics argue that Christianity—particularly the Catholic Church—is criticised far more openly than Islam, even where conservative teachings are similar.
Supporters argue that Muslims, as a minority in many Western countries, require protection from discrimination. Critics respond that protecting people from prejudice should not mean protecting ideas from criticism.
Examples
Progressives argue that people should not be judged by the actions of others who share their race, religion or ethnicity. Critics argue that this principle is not always applied consistently, pointing to broad generalisations about groups such as men or white people that are sometimes considered acceptable.
Examples
Progressives often criticise European colonialism and missionary movements for imposing Western moral, religious and cultural values on other societies. Critics argue that, while rejecting those historical practices, modern progressive movements increasingly use governments, universities and public institutions to promote their own social values as conditions for participation, accreditation or funding.
Examples
No political philosophy should be exempt from scrutiny. As progressive ideas have become increasingly influential across education, business, the media and public policy, they have acquired the same responsibility to defend their assumptions and withstand criticism as any other dominant worldview.
The twenty examples presented here do not claim that every progressive holds identical views, nor that progressivism has no virtues. Rather, they highlight recurring criticisms concerning the consistency with which progressive principles are applied. In many cases, the disagreement is not about the underlying values—such as equality, justice or compassion—but about whether those values are applied universally or selectively.
A healthy democracy depends upon open debate rather than ideological certainty. Every political movement benefits from questioning its own assumptions, acknowledging trade-offs and accepting that reasonable people can disagree. No ideology, whether conservative, liberal or progressive, possesses a monopoly on truth. The willingness to examine our own beliefs with the same rigour we apply to those of our opponents remains one of the strongest foundations of a free and democratic society.
1. Education and Academic Freedom
2. Legislation & Public Policy
3. Public Controversies, Social Movements & Crime
This will close in 10 seconds