Robert Milnes, a 2008 and 2012 candidate for the Libertarian, Green and (now defunct) Boston Tea Party’s presidential nominations and current 2016 Independent presidential candidate wrote the following piece that looks at the history and destiny of Progressivism and Libertarianism as steps toward Anarchy:
Let us consider the following:1. Soviet socialism → communism → anarchism.2. Progressivism → libertarianism → anarchism.#1. is a representation of the well known Marxist-Leninist working hypothesis that a government that implements a program of soviet socialism- if successful- should lead to a state of communism-which in turn is successful- should lead to a state of some form of anarchism.#2. is a representation which I have never seen before. A progressive government if successful should lead to some form/school of libertarianism which if successful should lead to some form of anarchism.To the best of my knowledge soviet socialism has been tried by a government once: Russia in 1917. That government was not voted in but rather assumed power via various street demonstrations culminating in the violent removal of the czarist/monarchist government. Several contiguous governments followed suit forming the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. There was some claims of having achieved communism, however there never was any credible claim of having achieved anarchism. The entire USSR failed in 1989. So somewhere in between if this working hypothesis is accurate, the soviet revolution failed.There have been many attempts at socialist and communist governments. Some were voted in, notably Chile 1970. Since none has ever achieved anarchism, we must conclude that all have failed.On the other hand, there has evidently never been a progressive government. There was a Progressive Era from the late 1800’s to about 1925 in the USA. The Republican Party was in power. It evidently cooperated with progressive Democrats to implement various progressive policies. A Progressive Party was formed in 1912 by Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican. It came in second having split the Republican Party allowing the Democrat, a progressive, Wilson, to win. However progressive policies of Wilson were blocked by reactionary Democrats and Republicans. Another Progressive Party was attempted in 1924 by Robert LaFollette. It also failed to win.One might wonder if Wilson had split from the Democratic Party and joined the new Progressive Party whether it could have pulled enough votes to make the difference; the Progressive Party could have won in a close three way race plurality. But no, he chose the politically expedient route of taking advantage of the split Republican Party.One might conjecture that the progressive republicans like Roosevelt and LaFollette were the libertarians of their time. That a progressive Republican then would be a libertarian now. Further, a progressive Democrat/progressive Republican ticket in 1912, Wilson/Roosevelt, would be a green/libertarian ticket in 2012. A Progressive party election victory and nonviolent movement would have been in contrast to the violence of the Bolshevik Revolution.It is noteworthy that all these stages, soviet socialism, communism, progressivism, libertarianism, are beneficial hierarchies as defined in The Radical Therapist, Claude Steiner et al. A hierarchy of necessity to transfer some skill, experience or set of knowledge from one to another. A temporary situation with its own unnecessariness as its goal. Further, anarchism is not a hierarchy and the ultimate ideal human situation.Therefore we can conclude that the destiny of libertarianism is to help the progressive movement with nonviolent election victory and successful movement through libertarianism to anarchism.