Total Posts:19|Showing Posts:1-19
Jump to topic:

What do you think of this?

Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2010 6:07:45 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/15/2010 5:57:10 PM, comoncents wrote:
http://www.commondreams.org...


I know many will agree with this crazy guy, but why, and anyone disagree?

I agree with the general idea that we should not idolize individuals simply because everyone else does. Though I disagree with his views of who to idolize and some of his "history" ideas.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2010 6:15:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/15/2010 6:07:45 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 2/15/2010 5:57:10 PM, comoncents wrote:
http://www.commondreams.org...


I know many will agree with this crazy guy, but why, and anyone disagree?

I agree with the general idea that we should not idolize individuals simply because everyone else does. Though I disagree with his views of who to idolize and some of his "history" ideas.

Yeah, but i have a problem with it b/c i look to G. Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and others for political guides into what is good.

I mean John Locke, The Father of Liberalism, played a huge role into that as well.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2010 6:16:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
There are two types of libertarians.

Those who miss Howard Zinn and those who do not.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2010 6:25:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/15/2010 6:16:32 PM, Reasoning wrote:
There are two types of libertarians.

Those who miss Howard Zinn and those who do not.

Libertarians aren't divided into libertarian socialists, and non libertarian socialists.

So, yeah, that isn't accurate.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2010 6:26:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/15/2010 6:15:44 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 2/15/2010 6:07:45 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 2/15/2010 5:57:10 PM, comoncents wrote:
http://www.commondreams.org...


I know many will agree with this crazy guy, but why, and anyone disagree?

I agree with the general idea that we should not idolize individuals simply because everyone else does. Though I disagree with his views of who to idolize and some of his "history" ideas.


Yeah, but i have a problem with it b/c i look to G. Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and others for political guides into what is good.

I mean John Locke, The Father of Liberalism, played a huge role into that as well.

True, but they have faults, everyone does. No one is perfect and so, if you look hard enough you can find not so good things about anyone. Heck, superman was retarded, he put his underwear on the outside.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2010 6:27:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/15/2010 6:26:10 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 2/15/2010 6:15:44 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 2/15/2010 6:07:45 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 2/15/2010 5:57:10 PM, comoncents wrote:
http://www.commondreams.org...


I know many will agree with this crazy guy, but why, and anyone disagree?

I agree with the general idea that we should not idolize individuals simply because everyone else does. Though I disagree with his views of who to idolize and some of his "history" ideas.


Yeah, but i have a problem with it b/c i look to G. Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and others for political guides into what is good.

I mean John Locke, The Father of Liberalism, played a huge role into that as well.

True, but they have faults, everyone does. No one is perfect and so, if you look hard enough you can find not so good things about anyone. Heck, superman was retarded, he put his underwear on the outside.

I concede with that.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2010 6:33:38 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/15/2010 6:27:28 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 2/15/2010 6:26:10 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 2/15/2010 6:15:44 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 2/15/2010 6:07:45 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 2/15/2010 5:57:10 PM, comoncents wrote:
http://www.commondreams.org...


I know many will agree with this crazy guy, but why, and anyone disagree?

I agree with the general idea that we should not idolize individuals simply because everyone else does. Though I disagree with his views of who to idolize and some of his "history" ideas.


Yeah, but i have a problem with it b/c i look to G. Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and others for political guides into what is good.

I mean John Locke, The Father of Liberalism, played a huge role into that as well.

True, but they have faults, everyone does. No one is perfect and so, if you look hard enough you can find not so good things about anyone. Heck, superman was retarded, he put his underwear on the outside.

I concede with that.

I declare victory.

And do a little dance that makes everyone slightly ashamed to even be on the same website as me.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2010 8:32:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/15/2010 6:25:37 PM, Nags wrote:
Libertarians aren't divided into libertarian socialists, and non libertarian socialists.

So, yeah, that isn't accurate.

"Zinn was an anarchist. He opposed war and imperial violence. He rejected corporate privilege. He highlighted the absurdity and injustice of telling the story of a society from the vantage point of the people atop its pyramid of power.

Libertarians should have no time for the view that history ought to be narrated from the perspective of kings and presidents and generals and their aristocratic and corporate compatriots. One need not agree with every aspect of Zinn's reading of history to agree that those who employ "the political means" of acquiring wealth, those Comte and Dunoyer and Rothbard and Long and Konkin would all, in their different ways, have identified as the members of the power elite, are not history's heroes, and that glorifying the American state with triumphalistic tales of its emergence and prowess is no task for lovers of freedom." - Gary Chartier[1]

[1] http://liberalaw.blogspot.com...
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2010 8:49:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
History is about what happened. In order to talk about what happened, you need to talk about who did it. The heroes, and the villains, mostly the latter, are the powerful, and are the object of studying history.The "common man" can best be distinguished as "He who had no particular impact on the course of history."
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2010 9:07:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
http://flag.blackened.net...
"How would you describe yourself politically? Do you consider yourself an anarchist or a libertarian socialist?

Zinn: Something of an anarchist, something of a socialist. Maybe a democratic socialist."

---

And I can google "Zinn + anarchist" or "Zinn + socialist" or "Zinn + libertarian" to get quotes favoring my argument too.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2010 9:11:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/15/2010 9:07:43 PM, Nags wrote:
http://flag.blackened.net...
"How would you describe yourself politically? Do you consider yourself an anarchist or a libertarian socialist?

Zinn: Something of an anarchist, something of a socialist. Maybe a democratic socialist."

That he was. I do not see the problem.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2010 12:15:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/15/2010 9:07:43 PM, Nags wrote:
Zinn: Something of an anarchist, something of a socialist. Maybe a democratic socialist."

http://en.wikipedia.org... - I admittedly don't know much about Howard Zinn, but he doesn't seem to be this.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2010 12:38:59 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/16/2010 12:15:27 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 2/15/2010 9:07:43 PM, Nags wrote:
Zinn: Something of an anarchist, something of a socialist. Maybe a democratic socialist."

http://en.wikipedia.org... - I admittedly don't know much about Howard Zinn, but he doesn't seem to be this.

Yeah, I'd say he's more libertarian socialist.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2010 12:42:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/16/2010 12:38:59 PM, Nags wrote:
At 2/16/2010 12:15:27 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 2/15/2010 9:07:43 PM, Nags wrote:
Zinn: Something of an anarchist, something of a socialist. Maybe a democratic socialist."

http://en.wikipedia.org... - I admittedly don't know much about Howard Zinn, but he doesn't seem to be this.

Yeah, I'd say he's more libertarian socialist.

Yeah, though I guess that would be "left-libertarian," no?

Anyways, if you scan through that article, you see names like Clement Atlee, Harold Wilson, Bernie Sanders... I don't think Zinn would fit in well with them.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2010 1:13:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/16/2010 12:42:24 PM, Volkov wrote:
Yeah, though I guess that would be "left-libertarian," no?

Anyways, if you scan through that article, you see names like Clement Atlee, Harold Wilson, Bernie Sanders... I don't think Zinn would fit in well with them.

Howard Zinn was a democratic socialist who was sympathetic to anarchism.

"From socialism I would take what I just described, and that is the use of the government, the democratically elected government, to equalize resources and help people. I would take from anarchism the suspicion of authority, the suspicion of all governments, the readiness to criticize and rebel against any government." - Howard Zinn[1]

[1] http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org...
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2010 1:20:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/16/2010 1:13:47 PM, Reasoning wrote:
Howard Zinn was a democratic socialist who was sympathetic to anarchism.

... So he was a socialist who wanted to build his system based on anarchist principles (question of authority, readiness to rebel, etc.)... 'kay.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2010 1:20:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Canada is an example of a country that adheres to democratic socialism. Zinn does not follow democratic socialism. He calls for a blend of socialism, communism, and anarchy; which is left-libertarian. He mis-labels himself.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2010 1:23:51 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/16/2010 1:20:37 PM, Volkov wrote:
... So he was a socialist who wanted to build his system based on anarchist principles (question of authority, readiness to rebel, etc.)... 'kay.

He was a pro-government socialist who was sympathetic to the anarchist mistrust of authority.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran