Every qualifier you add to "republic" seems to be an indicator of how brutal the regime is. Avoid "People's Democratic Republic"s at all costs.
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *David R. Block > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 11, 2012 9:39 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [RC] Thoughts on this tenet? ***** > > ** ** > > Never have liked the Commies. Particularly since they got "smart" and > started naming things with the word "Democratic" in there, like German > Democratic Republic, when it was everything BUT Democratic. Notorious word > thieves, those Commies. > > David > **** > > “A society that does not recognize that each individual has values of his > own which he is entitled to follow can have no respect for the dignity of > the individual and cannot really know freedom.”*—Fredrich August von Hayek > * **** > > **** > > > On 1/11/2012 12:33 AM, [email protected] wrote: **** > > **** > > Yeah. About the word "liberal," that is kind of hard to completely > demonize since**** > > there are the Liberal Arts --and in common speech, not questions of > politics,**** > > about various things someone can be more liberal or more conservative,**** > > maybe about tastes in clothes or attitude toward modern art, etc, so you** > ** > > are right about that. Still "liberal" often is used as a cuss word by the > Right**** > > and when it is so used the Left seems to have conceded.**** > > **** > > "Socialist" is another matter and precisely because of the old USSR.**** > > But in my case, and a lot of other vintage Democratic Socialists of yore,* > *** > > we would have loved to have driven Saabs or Volvos if we could have**** > > afforded to do so, we always were angry at the Commies for stealing**** > > the word Socialist since they weren't Socialists at all, they were > Stalinists**** > > or Marxist-Leninist Bolsheviks, or etc. **** > > **** > > Those years are long gone but I have never forgiven the Commies for**** > > their word theft and still fight that fight. Especially since the concept > and**** > > the word predate Marx by a good 25 years and the original "Socialists" *** > * > > include one of my heroes, Saint-Simon. **** > > **** > > Don't fret about now knowing too much about him, hell, most historians > don't**** > > know jack squat about him either. **** > > **** > > Humor me , OK ? I'll return the favor some day when you need it most.**** > > **** > > Muchos Gracias,**** > > **** > > Guillermo **** > > **** > > ------------------------------------------------------------**** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > 1/10/2012 10:18:36 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, > [email protected]: > **** > > Covered Socialist and Liberal elsewhere. Hope you find that. > > I don't like losing words either, but we don't want anyone to think that > TR is one of today's progressives. > > David **** > > “A society that does not recognize that each individual has values of his > own which he is entitled to follow can have no respect for the dignity of > the individual and cannot really know freedom.”*—Fredrich August von Hayek > * **** > > **** > > > On 1/10/2012 11:16 PM, [email protected] wrote: **** > > 1/10/2012 9:00:34 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected]: > **** > > You don't like language "corruption." Fine. Then what are we to do with > the KJV in which Paul's vision has Jesus telling him "it is hard for thee > to kicketh against the pricks." Does anyone today know what that means? > Without an Old English dictionary, I doubt it. Throw out the KJV? The > Fighting Fundies are going to be after you! :-) **** > > Actually this is anything but a problem for me. Most of the time I read > the NEB, sometimes**** > > the New Jerusalem or Oxford. These are the best scholarly translations, > and they are**** > > well done, at least the editions before about 1985 or so. The KJV is > strictly**** > > for language as far as I am concerned. It is like Shakespeare. Simply > inspirational.**** > > Otherwise I read the 3 translations, usually the NEB, well over 98 % of > the time.**** > > > > Take back the language? Great idea, how is that done? We didn't quite get > here overnight. We aren't going back overnight. **** > > **** > > We are now on the verge of losing two perfectly good words to the > Right, "Socialism"**** > > and "Liberal." I feel like fighting to save those words also. On grounds > of historical **** > > meaning and cultural relevance. But now it is the Left that has pretty > much given up**** > > on the fight. If that's what they want to do, OK, I am anti-today's-Left > anyway.**** > > But the classical US Left of the era 1900 - 1930 I feel like fighting for. > Today's Left**** > > hates *that Left* and regards those people as backward and unenlightened.* > *** > > **** > > Being an historian means that some issues that draw blank stares from most > people**** > > are burning issues to me --and to many members of the AHA ( American > Historical**** > > Association ). **** > > **** > > But you're right, " We didn't quite get here overnight. We aren't going > back overnight."**** > > That is absolutely correct. **** > > **** > > Its like SMU, no football program for decades, and now they're baaaack.*** > * > > **** > > Things like that can happen if you work at it.**** > > **** > > Billy**** > > **** > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > **** > > > > David**** > > “A society that does not recognize that each individual has values of his > own which he is entitled to follow can have no respect for the dignity of > the individual and cannot really know freedom.”*—Fredrich August von Hayek > * **** > > **** > > > On 1/10/2012 11:37 AM, [email protected] wrote: **** > > Hrummmmph.**** > > **** > > There are advantages to the word "progressivism." If we are serious about* > *** > > assuming the mantle of Teddy Roosevelt then we need to find some way**** > > to work with the word and, in the process, break the identification the > term**** > > now has with ( the sad excuse for ) today's Left. **** > > **** > > That is, partly what we have going-on is a word war, or "War of the > Words."**** > > Creatures from Mars arrive in UFOs to teach us how to use language better* > *** > > and to provide Earthlings with better conceptual and communications > skills.**** > > **** > > We are those creatures from Mars.**** > > **** > > Little Green Radical Centrists.**** > > **** > > So, let's not surrender any "heritage vocabulary." It can only be a fight* > *** > > but let's, win back all the good words that others have tried to > appropriate**** > > for nefarious purposes.**** > > **** > > If you were an historian you might well be sensitive to this. Read texts > written**** > > in previous decades ( historians read history just about every day ) and > that may **** > > make absurd sense if we define words in them in modern-day ways. **** > > **** > > "Don we now our gay apparel," the Christmas carol ( one of about 20 with > this problem ) **** > > sounds bizarre now. Solution, fight to discredit homosexual use of > "gay." Similarly, **** > > in the era of the Korean war, the USAF referred to Mig jets as "fagots" * > *** > > ( can be spelled with one or two Gs ). **** > > **** > > Republicans like to demonize "liberal" and socialist." Why should we > accept**** > > such word poisoning ? Both words have entirely good and noble meanings.** > ** > > **** > > All of this said, I also like your list of alternatives, evolutionary > centrism,**** > > activist centrism, scientific centrism, etc, each of which can be used**** > > in the right context to very goof effect.**** > > **** > > **** > > Billy**** > > **** > > ===============================================**** > > **** > > 1/10/2012 9:16:13 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > [email protected]: > **** > > ** ** > > On Jan 10, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Chris Hahn wrote:**** > > a rational progressivism that supports testable change to improve the > lot of the entire populace, rather than the traditional American > progressivism which moves toward some moralistic utopia.**** > > I like your concepts, but I don’t like the word progressivism. It will > be too easily be confused with American progressivism which already has a > meaning. Instead of rational progressivism, how about “rational > improvement” or “rational evolvement”?**** > > ** ** > > I'm with Chris; great insight, but potentially confusing terminology.**** > > ** ** > > How about:**** > > ** ** > > - scientific centrism**** > > ** ** > > - progressive centrism (adjective instead of noun)**** > > ** ** > > - progressive design**** > > ** ** > > - evolutionary centrism**** > > ** ** > > - activist centrism**** > > ** ** > > - improvisationalism**** > > ** ** > > Not quite there yet, but worth working on. As usual, I prefer a name that > is oxymoronic and paradoxical in order to inspire cognitive dissonance. A > good test would be whether it infuriates Solomon. :-)**** > > ** ** > > -- Ernie P.**** > > ** ** > > > > **** > > **** > > Chris**** > > **** > > **** > > *From:* [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]> > ] *On Behalf Of *Mike Gonzalez > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 10, 2012 9:32 AM > *To:* radicalcentrism > *Subject:* [RC] Thoughts on this tenet?**** > > **** > > I want to home-in on this particular tenet and get to the heart of the > point (tempered optimism + our brand of centrism = rational progressivism): > > When pessimism infects centrism, it becomes angry populism. When apathy > blends with centrism, it creates the traditional view of the lazy, > valueless independent. What is needed, instead, is a tempered positivity in > scientific centrism, channeling the best aspects of an ideology that > believes in the application of workable solutions in individual, piecemeal > fashion to civil society. Consequently, a rejection of pessimism and apathy > in favor of sober belief in a society's ability to improve itself is an > essential aspect of centrism. The result of this is a rational > progressivism that supports testable change to improve the lot of the > entire populace, rather than the traditional American progressivism which > moves toward some moralistic utopia.**** > > -- > Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community < > [email protected]> > Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism > Radical Centrism website and blog: > http://RadicalCentrism.org<http://radicalcentrism.org/> > **** > > ** ** > > **** > > -- **** > > **** > > **** > > > > -- > Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community < > [email protected]> > Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism > Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org > -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
