> so, what's the big difference between you and me? i
> still don't
> understand the criticism of providing limited,
> conditional support to
> kerry.
Yeah, well, for some people it's a shibboleth and exiles you from the land of the left. As you know.
i haven't to date seen a complete critique of
> markets that i
> understood. there is one difference: i do believe
> that patriotism is the
> resort of scoundrels (apologies to you),
Sure, scoundels will use anything. That's part of what makes them scoundels.
and i do
> not believe land
> belongs to anyone (but i dont think you meant it in
> the sense of
> ownership/property-rights anyway).
You are right that I wasn't articulating a theory of property rights. The quote is from Woody Guthrie's This Land Is Your Land, which he wrote as an outraged response to Irving Berlin's God Bless America. Guthrie considered himself a patriot too -- he also considered himself a Communist.
oh, also, i
> believe adding "western"
> to "liberal democracy" is, at heart, often
> gratuitous. not only do these
> structures arise out of an intermingling of cultures
> and ideas, but it
> would be very difficult (impossible) to prove that
> such structures did
> not exist in antiquity or in the present in other
> cultures.
Well, it's hard to know what "Western" means today, with Japan being a G-7 western liberal democracy -- however, to be precise, that mainly courtesy of Gernal MacArthur. Nonetheless liberal democracy doesn't "belong" to the west (if that means Europe and North America), it just started here. I don't insist on the term; I was just quoting somehere here; I've used it in print, but I'd prefer to say constitutional or (where appropriate) parliamentary liberal democracy. As for the ancient world -- well Rome used tto be a sort of Republic with an effective legislature, and there were democratic slaveowning city-states in the ancient Greek world.
>
> the thing with vegetarian diet: a) careful
> construction is what
> evolution accomplishes and there are vegetarian
> populations that survive
> on a healthy diet without needing advanced degrees
> in nutrition. b)
> people rarely just state "a fact". there is almost
> always an opinion
> attached. in this instance, your addition of
> "carefully constructed"
> (which is a bit redundant, in the sense of (a)) is
> the thing missing
> from "the fact" that was presented about vegetarian
> diets.
>
I don't know who said what. I know that you do fine on a veggie diet and you don't need a degree in physiology to do so. You just have to be careful. You can learn that through indigenous traditions. A lot of the world is involuntarily vegetarian, even today. Evolutionarily, I believe the evidence is overwhelming that humns were evolved as carniverous omnivores, and that the longest stable mode of human life is hunter-gathering. Which doesn't mean that we should eat meat or be hunter-gatherers. of course. It's just another fact.
> there is a difference perhaps: my leftism is
> probably a bit more
> "religious" i.e., i believe less in reducing leftism
> to a science, than
> in the axiomatic importance of certain virtues, ways
> of looking at
> things and constructing ideas and carrying out
> dialogue, (kindness,
> tolerance, etc). insofar as it is faith-based, it is
> more open to
> analytical hole-poking (but it can be argued that my
> hard-nosed
> analytical critics have nothing significant,
> including their theoretical
> consistency, to offer in exchange).
I dunno what "reducing leftism to a science" would be.
I think any hope for the future is faith based these days.
jks
> > Let me
> > tell you this is not the profile that you find on
> the
> > Mises or Hayek lists, much less lower-brow right
> wing
> > lists.
>
>
> perhaps not. but mailing lists are only a slice of
> the populace.
>
> --ravi
--- ravi <lbo at kreise.org> wrote:
> andie nachgeborenen wrote:
> >
> > I may be the in the neighborhood of the closest
> thing
> > to a real right winger who regularly contributes
> -- I
> > have two cheers for western liberal democracy,
> > consider myself an American patriot (no ("God
> Bless
> > America" magnets on the car, but if they made one
> that
> > said "This Land Belongs To You and Me," I'd use
> it.),
> > I like markets, I unhappily campaigned for Kerry.
> I
> > believe that unless you're pretty careful about
> your
> > proteins a vegetarian diet does stunt your growth
> > (hey, that's just a fact -- though what it has to
> do
> > with politics I am not clear). I defend big
> > corporations for a living. I am, however, a
> socialist
> > who wanys to abolsih wage labor, can't abide
> > discrimination on any of the usual laundry list
> bases,
> > and am a staunch defender of gay and lesbian
> (etc.)
> > rights. Nathan is probably several steps to ther
> right
> > of me, he avidly likes the Democratic Party, but
> he is
> > still (last time I checked) a socialist, I
> believe.
>
>
> so, what's the big difference between you and me? i
> still don't
> understand the criticism of providing limited,
> conditional support to
> kerry. i haven't to date seen a complete critique of
> markets that i
> understood. there is one difference: i do believe
> that patriotism is the
> resort of scoundrels (apologies to you), and i do
> not believe land
> belongs to anyone (but i dont think you meant it in
> the sense of
> ownership/property-rights anyway). oh, also, i
> believe adding "western"
> to "liberal democracy" is, at heart, often
> gratuitous. not only do these
> structures arise out of an intermingling of cultures
> and ideas, but it
> would be very difficult (impossible) to prove that
> such structures did
> not exist in antiquity or in the present in other
> cultures.
>
> the thing with vegetarian diet: a) careful
> construction is what
> evolution accomplishes and there are vegetarian
> populations that survive
> on a healthy diet without needing advanced degrees
> in nutrition. b)
> people rarely just state "a fact". there is almost
> always an opinion
> attached. in this instance, your addition of
> "carefully constructed"
> (which is a bit redundant, in the sense of (a)) is
> the thing missing
> from "the fact" that was presented about vegetarian
> diets.
>
> there is a difference perhaps: my leftism is
> probably a bit more
> "religious" i.e., i believe less in reducing leftism
> to a science, than
> in the axiomatic importance of certain virtues, ways
> of looking at
> things and constructing ideas and carrying out
> dialogue, (kindness,
> tolerance, etc). insofar as it is faith-based, it is
> more open to
> analytical hole-poking (but it can be argued that my
> hard-nosed
> analytical critics have nothing significant,
> including their theoretical
> consistency, to offer in exchange).
>
>
> > Let me
> > tell you this is not the profile that you find on
> the
> > Mises or Hayek lists, much less lower-brow right
> wing
> > lists.
>
>
> perhaps not. but mailing lists are only a slice of
> the populace.
>
> --ravi
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail