Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Point of Narcisisism, am I too Liberal?

  1. #1
    Senior Member AJBIGJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    988
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Point of Narcisisism, am I too Liberal?

    I have to relent, "Classical Liberalism" has taken on entirely different definitions in this day and age. In fact, many of those who laid out the groundwork of this philosophy could very easily speak for me. I try to raise independent thought (and occasionally succeed) but the precursors made a lot of sense!


    Yet I can't say the original philosophy lacks merit (especially since I indulge in its tenets).
    http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tm...iberalism.html
    By the definition at hand, do you agree with it in principle or disagree, why?
    "The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." ~ Thomas Jefferson

    It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood.
    James Madison

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    everywhere
    Posts
    699
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Point of Narcisisism, am I too Liberal?

    The originators of the philosophy, Locke, Kant, Say, and others, were motived by a keen interest in justice, defining what a "just government" would be, deep concerns about individual morality and what equality founded on individual soveriegnty would look like. They were writing and thinking about societies with deep inequalities and "divine kings" and the like. For my part, I lean toward Kant rather than Locke with the expected consequences regarding modern ideas of liberalism.

  3. #3
    Senior Member AJBIGJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    988
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Point of Narcisisism, am I too Liberal?

    Quote Originally Posted by imnohero View Post
    The originators of the philosophy, Locke, Kant, Say, and others, were motived by a keen interest in justice, defining what a "just government" would be, deep concerns about individual morality and what equality founded on individual soveriegnty would look like. They were writing and thinking about societies with deep inequalities and "divine kings" and the like. For my part, I lean toward Kant rather than Locke with the expected consequences regarding modern ideas of liberalism.
    I tend to float more in the direction of Locke and quite a bit of Adams, if such makes sense.
    "The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." ~ Thomas Jefferson

    It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood.
    James Madison

Similar Threads

  1. Liberal non-sense.
    By imported_WILDJOKER5 in forum In the News
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: 03-17-2014, 03:16 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •