What's wrong with Liberals (Progressives?)

It is a legitimate question to ask why Liberals (or Progressives, as they now choose to be called) always get everything wrong.   Could it be they have never read, understood, or cared what Adam Smith revealed to the world in his treatise, The Wealth of Nations? Or for that matter what other 18th century philosophers like Locke and Hume said about the then modern world, the rights of individuals, the evolution of free market and the limitations of the central government in the lives of citizens in nation states?  As far as liberals/progressives are concerned, it's as though the Age of Enlightenment never occurred and we simply skipped from The Middle Ages and Feudalism directly to the isms -- communism, fascism, socialism, totalitarianism -- of the 19th and 20th centuries.  Surely the lib/prog collectivist world view is much more aligned with that of all the isms than with freedom of the individual to pursue his own self interest and the attendant benefits accruing to everyone in the free enterprise system as it has evolved over time.

Smith's book was published in 1775, just as things were heating up between the English and their colonists over in America.  Most people associate Smith with the "Law of Supply and Demand", but in truth his tract covered much more than that simple but important aspect of human behavior.  Smith was a spirited critic of mercantilism, the reigning economic theory of his times, devoting many chapters of his book to debunking the perceived benefits of this practice by the nation-states of 18th century Europe.  He was an ardent proponent of free markets and free trade, at a time when there wasn't much of either, even proposing the dissolution of the colonial ties between England and the Americas was inevitable and would benefit all parties when indeed it occurred.  Smith, and the others, believed in and promoted the individual citizen as the prime mover of economies, debunking excessive taxation and governmental control of economic activities in general, all the while acknowledging the importance of the government in its proper role as level field playmaker, and as a defender of the safety of the individuals in their property and physical being.

Perhaps Smith's biggest contribution to the development of the world's economies was his promotion of self interest as an important motivator, along with free markets  in generating economic growth and the creation of wealth in societies.  His was a message of limited but effective central government doing things it could do well to promote private enterprise and then getting out of the way (sound like Reaganism?).  Development and construction of roads and canals for efficient movement of goods, a legal system that protected the rights of property owners, a rational banking system and a strong navy and military to defend citizens from predators were the essential functions of central authorities. Pointing to the failure of autocracies throughout Europe and the near east to improve living standards for their populations by over regulating and controlling all aspects of economic life it was Smith's view that the growth of the economy and the generation of wealth to benefit the entire population was best left to the invisible hand of self interest and free markets.  Ultimately his was a simple message: the freer individuals are to pursue their own self interest, the better it was for the nation state.