> [Jos to Platt] > would you not agree that the explosion of a vast > indiscriminate and degenerate media is a function > of the push towards greater personal freedom and > not away from it? You can't honestly think this > drift into base doltish-mediafrenzy-cult-of- > celebrity-dross has stemmed from the push factors > of latent embedded Marxism? Can you? > > [Arlo] > And that's just the point I had tried to make > with the Qutb passage. Ironically, both Qutb and > Leo Strauss (the father of neoconservatism) > bemoaned the degeneracy the inevitably flows from > so-called "individual freedom". > > "Strauss believed that the liberal idea of > individual freedom led people to question > everything—all values, all moral truths. Instead, > people were led by their own selfish desires. And > this threatened to tear apart the shared values > which held society together. But there was a way > to stop this, Strauss believed. It was for > politicians to assert powerful and inspiring > myths that everyone could believe in. They might > not be true, but they were necessary illusions. > One of these was religion; the other was the myth of the nation." (BBC)
[Platt] This distortion of the views of Leo Straus could be expected from the BBC whose left-wing bias was conclusively determined this June by a year-long investigation commissioned by the BBC itself. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1942948.ece A more balanced and accurate account of Straus' view is from Wikipedia: "While modern liberalism had stressed the pursuit of individual liberty as its highest goal, Strauss felt that there should be a greater interest in the problem of human excellence and political virtue. Through his writings, Strauss constantly raised the question of how, and to what extent, freedom and excellence can coexist. Without deciding this issue, Strauss refused to make do with any simplistic or one-sided resolutions of the Socratic question: What is the good for the city and man? "Strauss taught that liberalism in its modern form contained within it an intrinsic tendency towards relativism, which in turn led to two types of nihilism ("Epilogue").[2] The first was a "brutal" nihilism, expressed in Nazi and Marxist regimes. These ideologies, both descendants of Enlightenment thought, tried to destroy all traditions, history, ethics and moral standards and replace it by force with a supreme authority from which nature and mankind are subjugated and conquered.[4] The second type - the "gentle" nihilism expressed in Western liberal democracies - was a kind of value-free aimlessness and hedonism, which he saw as permeating the fabric of contemporary American society.[5] In the belief that 20th century relativism, scientism, historicism, and nihilism were all implicated in the deterioration of modern society and philosophy, Strauss sought to uncover the philosophical pathways that had led to this situation. The resultant study led him to revive classical political philosophy as a source by which political action could be judged." Those familiar with Pirsig's writing know that he also saw a "deterioration of modern society and philosophy and sought to uncover the philosophical pathways that had led to this situation" What follows is Arlo's usual diatribe against me personally. Nothing new here. [Arlo] > This is the fundamental paradox of modern > neoconservatism, and why there is such a > vociferous demand for obedience to the Myth of > the Nation, alongside the pandering to > Christianity (even though the core meaning of > Christianity is outright abandoned). This is why > Platt sees no contradiction in professing to be a > bastion for "individual liberty", all the while > moving against liberty through the guises of > prudery, fear and the age-old cry of "the good > old days". But that is just a rhetorical game, > along with acting all "anti-taxation" rather than > acknowledging first that taxation is necessary > (military, for one example) and beneficial > (public parks, for example) and then second being > against certain tax-funded programs. From there > we could dialogue. From the rhetoric of > "commie-you versus Liberty-Me" its all talk-radio blowhardism. > > Same with the perennial nonsense about "leftist > media" (its more accurately the "commercial > media", as it is driven by advertising and > profit) and "political correctness" (remember, > for fun, that this same person was in favor of > banning the hijab but decried when some > threatened the use of the word "nigger"). As for > the "leftist academy" dribble, that's "just > right-wing politics", as the radical professor > Pirsig points out. All these are Limbaughisms, > talking points they wrap themselves around and > dole out at every opportunity, but when examined are simply empty words. [Platt] In summary, the usual smoke-blowing distortive rhetoric and personal animus. > [Jos] > Funny how our usage of language has us calling > liberalism something that restricts and conservatism something that frees? > > [Arlo] > This usurption of words leads us to forget that > it was liberalism that gave us the liberty we enjoy today. > > "Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes > individual rights and equality of opportunity. A > liberal society is characterized by freedom of > thought for individuals, limitations on power, > the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a > market economy, free private enterprise, and a > transparent system of government in which the > rights of all citizens are protected. In the 21st > century, this usually means liberal democracy > with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law. > > Liberalism rejected many foundational assumptions > that dominated most earlier theories of > government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, > hereditary status, and established religion. > Social progressivism, the belief that traditions > do not carry any inherit value and social > pratices ought to be continously adjusted for the > greater benefit of humanity, is a common > component of liberal ideology. Fundamental human > rights that all liberals support include the > right to life, liberty, and property." (Wikipedia) [Platt} Of course, the self-proclaimed academic "critical thinker" has omitted how the meaning of the word liberal has changed in modern America, as clearly explained in the same Wikipedia article: "Today the word "liberalism" is used differently in different countries. (See Liberalism worldwide.) One of the greatest contrasts is between the usage in the United States and usage in Continental Europe.[17] In the US, liberalism is usually understood to refer to modern liberalism, as contrasted with conservatism. American liberals endorse regulation for business, a limited social welfare state, and support broad racial, ethnic, sexual and religious tolerance, and thus more readily embrace pluralism, and affirmative action. In Europe, on the other hand, liberalism is not only contrasted with conservatism and Christian Democracy, but also with socialism and social democracy. In some countries, European liberals share common positions with Christian Democrats." [Arlo] > But this is part and parcel of the fear campaign. > Evil "libs" that seek to take away your basic > freedoms, "libs" that lie, cheat, insult and > malign, "libs" that side with terrorists and are > anti-American, pro-surrender, "libs" that want > American soldiers to die. Fear them! For they are > the enemy of pure and noble conservatives, who > are honest and forthwith, who seek open dialogue > and who safeguard your liberties. Its all vile > political rhetoric, and its embarassing it has > found its way into this forum. By the way, you > could reverse this and end up with something just > as vile, a war where "evil conservatives" battle > "noble liberals". Its the same thing. Shameful. And evil. [Platt] What's embarrassing and evil is for someone posing as a "critical thinker" should exhibit such egregious distortion, intolerance and bias. Platt moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
