01-11-2013, 06:49 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-11-2013, 07:04 PM by FireIceTalon.)
@shoju
This is what I've been saying all along....words like freedom and tyranny are completely subjective and thus completely contextual. For example, during slavery, southerners had the freedom to own slaves - and it resulted in a civil war over the retaining of that "freedom" (there were other, perhaps even more important factors, but you know what I mean). One mans freedom is another mans tyranny, simple as that, and that is why I generally avoid using such emotive, and loaded terms. African slaves didn't even have basic HUMAN RIGHTS, let alone many of the civil rights we enjoy today (even if the rights today are kind of a hoax since we live in a class antagonist society).
It isn't just conservatives though that shouldn't be using such terms in any objective discussion, it also applies to any and all leftists as well. I'm a Marxist, but if I hear another Marxist say "capitalism is anti-freedom", I would slap him silly. Capitalism isn't anti "freedom", nor is it pro "freedom". Because the ruling class does have "freedom" under capitalism, much more so than the working class - but class relationships are an objective and sociological condition that result naturally under it. It is perfectly possible to be a Marxist, and still be pro-capitalist. It isn't a logical result, but it's certainly possible. Those who own private property and the means to production have an interest they want to protect, therefore it is in their objective class interest to maintain the status quo, even if they agree with Marx 100%. When a socialist uses the word freedom, I know it has a very different meaning from what a conservative means, but it is still a word that should avoid being used in any objective discourse, regardless of your political views or class position.
We are humans, and I understand that all political debate is bound to spark some sort of emotion. But it is important to be as objective as possible, and using loaded terms like "freedom", "tyranny", "liberty" defeats the purpose.
This is what I've been saying all along....words like freedom and tyranny are completely subjective and thus completely contextual. For example, during slavery, southerners had the freedom to own slaves - and it resulted in a civil war over the retaining of that "freedom" (there were other, perhaps even more important factors, but you know what I mean). One mans freedom is another mans tyranny, simple as that, and that is why I generally avoid using such emotive, and loaded terms. African slaves didn't even have basic HUMAN RIGHTS, let alone many of the civil rights we enjoy today (even if the rights today are kind of a hoax since we live in a class antagonist society).
It isn't just conservatives though that shouldn't be using such terms in any objective discussion, it also applies to any and all leftists as well. I'm a Marxist, but if I hear another Marxist say "capitalism is anti-freedom", I would slap him silly. Capitalism isn't anti "freedom", nor is it pro "freedom". Because the ruling class does have "freedom" under capitalism, much more so than the working class - but class relationships are an objective and sociological condition that result naturally under it. It is perfectly possible to be a Marxist, and still be pro-capitalist. It isn't a logical result, but it's certainly possible. Those who own private property and the means to production have an interest they want to protect, therefore it is in their objective class interest to maintain the status quo, even if they agree with Marx 100%. When a socialist uses the word freedom, I know it has a very different meaning from what a conservative means, but it is still a word that should avoid being used in any objective discourse, regardless of your political views or class position.
We are humans, and I understand that all political debate is bound to spark some sort of emotion. But it is important to be as objective as possible, and using loaded terms like "freedom", "tyranny", "liberty" defeats the purpose.
https://www.youtube.com/user/FireIceTalon
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (addressing the bourgeois)
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (addressing the bourgeois)