<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Stop Talking About Fascism, And You May Learn Something</title>
	<link>http://larison.org/2007/06/26/stop-talking-about-fascism-and-you-may-learn-something/</link>
	<description>n. the principle of good order "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:26:54 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: expertlaw</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2007/06/26/stop-talking-about-fascism-and-you-may-learn-something/#comment-7125</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jun 2007 19:01:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2007/06/26/stop-talking-about-fascism-and-you-may-learn-something/#comment-7125</guid>
					<description>Are you describing liberals, or are you describing David Brooks?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you describing liberals, or are you describing David Brooks?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: jorge</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2007/06/26/stop-talking-about-fascism-and-you-may-learn-something/#comment-7108</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 23:19:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2007/06/26/stop-talking-about-fascism-and-you-may-learn-something/#comment-7108</guid>
					<description>The political perspective you describe as "liberal" certainly exists, and has undeniably been ascendant on the "left" in the last quarter century, but I hate to see the word "liberal" coopted by these twits, or used solely to describe them.  The first part of your description -- that liberals view people as inherently free and rational and believe in the therapeutic use of state power -- is fair enough, but "getting everyone to think and believe the right things" (the core of "political correctness") is where late 20th-century liberalism drove itself into the ditch, and I hope that it will eventually be seen as an aberration, rather than as a defining characteristic, of liberalism.  The human tendency toward "orthodoxy" (literally, "right thinking") is an ancient one, not confined to liberals.  Before the mid-20th century, when liberalism became an entrenched aspect of the post-war order, liberals were more commonly associated with anti-orthodox views -- only the revolutionaries of the far left, who were rightly considered as hostile to liberalism, supported the replacement of the old orthodoxies with new ones.  

We live in an era when conservatives have donned the old liberal mantle of being anti-government and anti-orthodox in order to revive traditionalism, and people tagged as liberals ("radical egalitarians," more aptly) continue to promote warmed-over socialism and political correctness.  Both are sometimes called liberals, but neither really deserves the label.  Can't we save it for someone who does?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The political perspective you describe as &#8220;liberal&#8221; certainly exists, and has undeniably been ascendant on the &#8220;left&#8221; in the last quarter century, but I hate to see the word &#8220;liberal&#8221; coopted by these twits, or used solely to describe them.  The first part of your description &#8212; that liberals view people as inherently free and rational and believe in the therapeutic use of state power &#8212; is fair enough, but &#8220;getting everyone to think and believe the right things&#8221; (the core of &#8220;political correctness&#8221;) is where late 20th-century liberalism drove itself into the ditch, and I hope that it will eventually be seen as an aberration, rather than as a defining characteristic, of liberalism.  The human tendency toward &#8220;orthodoxy&#8221; (literally, &#8220;right thinking&#8221;) is an ancient one, not confined to liberals.  Before the mid-20th century, when liberalism became an entrenched aspect of the post-war order, liberals were more commonly associated with anti-orthodox views &#8212; only the revolutionaries of the far left, who were rightly considered as hostile to liberalism, supported the replacement of the old orthodoxies with new ones.  </p>
<p>We live in an era when conservatives have donned the old liberal mantle of being anti-government and anti-orthodox in order to revive traditionalism, and people tagged as liberals (&#8221;radical egalitarians,&#8221; more aptly) continue to promote warmed-over socialism and political correctness.  Both are sometimes called liberals, but neither really deserves the label.  Can&#8217;t we save it for someone who does?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: sashal</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2007/06/26/stop-talking-about-fascism-and-you-may-learn-something/#comment-7107</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 21:55:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2007/06/26/stop-talking-about-fascism-and-you-may-learn-something/#comment-7107</guid>
					<description>i am a big fan of you and your blog.
I quote or C&#38;P your articles to my liberal and conservative friends all the time( with proper attributions)
I am a little taken aback by your bashing of liberals in this post though. We all know that liberals stand for freedom, independence etc.
Now if you wanted to talk about socialists or communists, I would understand.


Your fellow orthodox</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i am a big fan of you and your blog.<br />
I quote or C&amp;P your articles to my liberal and conservative friends all the time( with proper attributions)<br />
I am a little taken aback by your bashing of liberals in this post though. We all know that liberals stand for freedom, independence etc.<br />
Now if you wanted to talk about socialists or communists, I would understand.</p>
<p>Your fellow orthodox
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

