While I disagree with the notions of progressivism, which is a form of collectivism, I also largely disagree with the notions of another form of collectivism which assigns the blame for the actions of a smaller set of bad actors to a larger group that had nothing to do with it. Examples include owners of guns, various religions, or hell, as we used to do - by external unalterable attributes such as skin tone. I suspect such things are merely a part of what I sometimes call our "tribal circuits", thus it is difficult to overcome, but every once in awhile I figure it i good to try. Whether it is inate or learned, mankind has built these "tribal circuits" because he had valid reasons for segregating himself from his brothers and sisters who were more prone to violence or simply wired up with an entirely different view of the world.
Just as a man can be divided within himself, doing that which he knows he shouldn't or having a different opinion on different days or sometimes at different times of the day, we also find that the collective of humanity has numerous innate and artificial barriers. In the United States, it seems that movement of factions towards one another is resulting in conflict and rioting.
Thus, in my view, a potential solution is to allow such barriers to exist and fortunately our founding fathers provided a way for that to happen via the mechanism of a limited federal government. Perhaps we have lost our way, but given what we know now of things like civil rights, if such notions were reapplied to the Constitution, I really think it would go better this time, than before.
The socialists could have their state their way, and the rednecks could have their state, their way. The system itself is gridlocked and bound by geographic constraints - we're all mixed up together - socialists and individualists alike. While Trump and his ilk may be able to undo some of the damage and return us to federalism (limited federal power, 10th amendment, no doctrine of incorporation), etc. I would suggest that there may be some alternatives which would require 'space' to expand into. I know of only 2-3 places left related to earth that would allow such an expansion - outer space, the sea, and lastly ... cyberspace.
Perhaps cyberspace itself may provide a vehicle for virtual States or virtual passports seen emerging in nations such as Estonia. If one consider such notions conceptually, we have the recent Pokemon fiasco - whereby parties from across the world joined different factions. With today's computing power, I don't think it that much of a stretch that we could develop some sort of virtual system for altering how we compete and cooperate with the available resources. Our mighty US dollar is largely already a fiction accepted as real, and we see the emergence of things like bitcoin which seem to have become self-sustaining.