the mind of progressives is based in the thought that we need government to push societal progress
The very purpose of our government, as even acknowledged by our own Constitution, is to promote the general welfare. Having said that, your gross generalization about the mind of "progressives" is no different from the minds of everyone else: you think roads and bridges are socially advantageous so you want them built by government, you think armies are socially protective so you want them maintained by government, you see abortions as socially destructive so you want them banned by government, you see guns as socially necessary so you want them revered by government, you see religion as beneficial so you want it coddled by government, etc., etc., etc. Your own view of government playing a necessary role is no different from mine; the difference is only in the details.
they see certain policies as possibly affecting the direct goal of that policy, and since it may work, it's worth trying.
Again, your motivations are no different, thus the constant calls for prohibitions against sexual privacy, free speech, marriage equality, artistic expression, etc., etc.
unintended consequences aren't discussed because they have tunnel vision on particular issues
That's just a false generalization and a ridiculous insult not worthy of discussion.
one of the ironies of progressives is that they OFTEN see boogeymen in big, powerful organizations that direct human behavior (namely, evil corporations or churches). they do not seem to find the same evil in equivalent bodies, as long as those bodies are working towards the progress that they believe in
That's a pretty odd statement for a non-"progressive" to make, considering his easy proclivity to hypocritically rail against the dangers of our own government while insisting on its mandates for his preferred policies, as already described, or considering the often vile condemnations of institutions such as the ACLU, FFRF, Planned Parenthood, etc., whose missions are the protection of personal liberties.
it's a similar situation to hating religion or being a "boring corporate drone" for handing down ideologies or expectations of behavior,
Your own motivations are no different. The non-religious "hate" religion as false for its doctrines and its desired policies, just as the religious hate the opposite. In fact, religious expectations of behavior are far more dogmatic and restrictive than are those of the non-religious.
while they fully accept the ideologies and expectations of behaviors of those who create progressive policies
At this point I'm only repeating myself. Your own motivations are no different. It's a self-evident proposition to state that to do otherwise than accept your own social desires would be insane bipolarism.