Axiomatic Posted November 22, 2009 Report Share Posted November 22, 2009 Criticisms are necessary, but I want to point out an ideological alignment that I feel is important. [*] Atheism - His Book "god is not Great" is an important component in the shifting American culture right now because of the growing movements of Atheism, secularism, anti-religious fundamentalism, pro-science and reason, etc... If there is ever to be a revolution of ideas in America, religious stigmas and dogmas will have to be removed first. Now, of course flaws abound because of the aforementioned lack of integration in his belief structure. [*] He believes himself to be a "Libertarian Marxist," and believes that Das Kapital predicted many of the recent failures in the U.S. economy. This, while confessing a horrible understanding of economics also exposes a horrible understanding of the philosophical roots of Marxism and its logical end, and its necessary conflict with individual liberty. [*] As mentioned before he is a hard critic of religious dogma, but takes a pro-life position and insists that a fetus be regarded as an "unborn child." [*] Believes in an interventionist foreign policy (labeling himself a neoconservative), but criticizes the United States for employing torture techniques like water-boarding to extract life saving information from potential, or known, terrorists. The list can go on and on for his contradictions. These are by far the most blatant contradictions in this thinking and it does not help that he has a silly idea of 'innate' morality to boot. What is troubling about the man is that it is difficult to pin down completely what he stands for while he espouses elegantly what he is against. I think it is very telling that he was once quite a radical marxist whilst now he seems to have professed a respect for the principles of individual rights and of the founding fathers. A Marxist Libertarian is certainly a contradiction in terms and I wonder how he could justify such a stance. It is a tragedy how people of high intelligence can be rational in some areas of life and completely irrational in others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0096 2251 2110 8105 Posted November 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2009 (edited) A Marxist Libertarian is certainly a contradiction in terms and I wonder how he could justify such a stance.Well, he is obviously smart enough to have noticed this “error”, and many many must have pointed that out to him. I don’t know if there is any material where he addresses this question, but what he would tell you, I think, is probably what Chomsky says to anyone who asks him about his libertarian socialist position: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8USOAkQWGVY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugq86q9KyPE Which is pretty clear, and I think it's a great response. There’s also a chapter on this from his Government in the Future if you're more interested. Edited November 22, 2009 by 0096 2251 2110 8105 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEgoist Posted November 22, 2009 Report Share Posted November 22, 2009 Libertariand and Marxist are not contradictions. The word libertarian was originally used by European Anarchists, people heavily influenced by people like Marx. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softwareNerd Posted November 22, 2009 Report Share Posted November 22, 2009 Libertariand and Marxist are not contradictions. The word libertarian was originally used by European Anarchists, people heavily influenced by people like Marx.Indeed, many people who consider themselves libertarian see little difference between big government and big business. Since anarchy is non-government, it is a bit like Atheism: it is a void rather than something of substance. Communist ideologies slip in quite easily, with the typical caveat that they're talking about "real" or "ideal" communism or true equality, not about the Soviet Union. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axiomatic Posted November 22, 2009 Report Share Posted November 22, 2009 Libertariand and Marxist are not contradictions. The word libertarian was originally used by European Anarchists, people heavily influenced by people like Marx. Wow, I always thought there was something of a Marxist Utopian element in Libertarian thinking. But still, there is a contradiction of ethics and politics in thinking one can defend and advocate individual rights whilst adhering to collectivism and altruism. Whether European Anarchists wish to acknowledge this contradiction or not is another thing entirely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Wolf Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 I love how this guy scoffs at Ayn Rand for preaching selfishness, essentially, because according to him, it's like teaching your grandmother to suck eggs. This is the same guy who had a beef with Mother Teresa, because SHE didn't preach selfishness for women. My only respect for this guy lies in him sticking it to folks like Mother Teresa. Although he didn't necessarily attack her altruism, he definitely attacked the notion that someone can become a figure of high benevolence simply by confirmation bias. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.