So you don't want to believe me.    How about Eric Alterman?  
For the purposes of defining liberalism today, the most common 
objection to the Rawlsian pardigm comes from the communitarians, who 
borrow considerably from the same republican precepts of America's 
founders that come into conflict with the more liberal ideas popular at 
the time of America's origins more than two hundred years ago.  To what 
degree, asks the political philosopher Michael Sandel, are our liberal 
virtues fashioned in relative isolation, and to what extent can they be 
found embedded in relations with others?   Are we, ultimately, 
atomistic, individual beings or members of various interlocking 
communities?   "Rawlsian liberalism defines certain actions as beyond 
the bounds of a decent society,"  Sandel complains, "but wherein lies 
its commitment to the good, the noble of purpose, the meaning, as it 
were, of life?"
For guidance in these intractable liberal positions,  the 
historian James T. Kloppenberg suggests we turn to one of civilizations 
oldest moral traditions, and one whose roots are shared by most 
Americans:  Christianity.  Conceptually,  Kloppenberg notes, the central
 virtues of liberalism descend directly from the cardinal virtues of 
early Christianity:  "prudence, temperance, fortitude, and justice."   
He adds that "the liberal virtues of tolerance, respect, generosity, and
 benevolence likewise extend St. Paul's admonition to the Colossians 
that they should practice forbearance, patience, kindness and charity." 
This view is reinforced by the arguments of Jurgen Habermas, post 
war Europe's most significant liberal philosopher and perhaps the last 
great voice of the once preeminent (and neo-Marxist) Frankfurt School. 
"Christianity, and nothing else, is the ultimate foundation of liberty,
 conscience, human rights, and democracy, the benchmarks of Western 
civiliaztion,"  Habermas told then cardinal Joseph Ratinger, now Pope 
Benedict, during a January 2004 conversation,  "To this day, we have no 
other option [than Christianity].  We continue to nourish ourselves from
 this source.  Everything else is postmodern chatter."  No one 
understood this better than Franklin Delano Roosevelt.   Asked by a 
reporter about his political philosophy,  FDR replied, "Philosophy?  I 
am a Christian and a Democrat -  that is all."
Why We're Liberals: A Political Handbook for Post-Bush America
 By Eric Alterman
Note, he doesn't only cite Jurgen Habermas, agreeing with me about what Habermas said,  he also cites the historian  James Kloppenberg saying the same thing.  
You know, I posted this quote on this very blog four and a half years ago.  I believe you were trolling me then, I know Stupy was, you guys never, ever listen, you're ineducable.   That was one of the huge surprises I got when encountering you guys online, you're as much a bunch of ignorant, static loci of predigested prejudices as any identifiable group on the right.  I grew up believing atheists were intellectuals, they turn out to be largely untellectuals. 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment