When woke mobs began chasing off guest speakers from college campuses and elite institutions started investigating scientists over minor infractions against gender orthodoxy, a certain class of moderate progressives realized its reign was ending.
Roughly half the founders liked Christianity only in the Petersonian sense... I suppose you could say "Deism is ok, Atheism not ok" which was unironically the line even Robespierre drew, but go any further and you'll be subverting your own faith with a flood of fake believers.
The best line to draw for "classical liberalism" is the Civil Rights Act.
Of course, I'd say that cause I am not a Christian.
The population was 98% Protestant at 1776, that was the nation. Doesn’t matter if all the Founders were atheists, the nation would still have been Christian. https://files.catbox.moe/dh3g0y.png
All 13 states at the founding of America either had established state churches or required their officeholders to profess a certain denominational faith.
To be fair I suspect they are really thinking of the liberalism of John Stuart Mill which did not require religion and did place a premium on free speech.
A classical liberal should realize that Natural Law emanates from St. Thomas Aquinas's writings, or am I gauche for reminding people of that pesky detail? It's amazing how divorced our concept of liberty is from a concept of God in today's world.
Our right's were observed in God's natural world, we were to align ourself with that order. Classical liberal ideas about the rights of man emerge in Christendom for good reason. The movement to end slavery, the so called 'Great Awakening' of the 18th century was in full fervor over 100 years before the Civil War and was born of Christian ethics.
“Is it good for married middle class white* normie families?”
If you’re on the right, this is basically the only question you should be asking. One could go down a list of issues and why the right believes what it believes in answering that question, but that’s the question they are trying to answer.
Many of these left wing cast offs are not answering that question. Most are only interested in themselves, and you’re correct to note that their conversion is almost entirely related to suffering personal setbacks vis a vis the left. What most want is a re-negotiation with the left to get better terms, not to become right wing.
*many policies that are good for married middle class white families are also good for married middle class non-whites, so there is some spillover, but on issues like affirmative action, immigration, and culture there is conflict and the right sides with whites
Yes indeed. This is one more reason that the ‘progressives’ must be -
- investigated
- if warranted, charged (treason)
- arrested
- prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law
- if found guilty, punished to the fullest extent of the law.
Justice and progress demands this.
Roughly half the founders liked Christianity only in the Petersonian sense... I suppose you could say "Deism is ok, Atheism not ok" which was unironically the line even Robespierre drew, but go any further and you'll be subverting your own faith with a flood of fake believers.
The best line to draw for "classical liberalism" is the Civil Rights Act.
Of course, I'd say that cause I am not a Christian.
The population was 98% Protestant at 1776, that was the nation. Doesn’t matter if all the Founders were atheists, the nation would still have been Christian. https://files.catbox.moe/dh3g0y.png
All 13 states at the founding of America either had established state churches or required their officeholders to profess a certain denominational faith.
https://files.catbox.moe/iqsruy.jpg
This really needed to be said. Well done!
It’s funny how YOU try to define liberalism by quoting Locke’s realpolitik texts like it’s the Quran. This is all just a projection.
To be fair I suspect they are really thinking of the liberalism of John Stuart Mill which did not require religion and did place a premium on free speech.
A classical liberal should realize that Natural Law emanates from St. Thomas Aquinas's writings, or am I gauche for reminding people of that pesky detail? It's amazing how divorced our concept of liberty is from a concept of God in today's world.
Our right's were observed in God's natural world, we were to align ourself with that order. Classical liberal ideas about the rights of man emerge in Christendom for good reason. The movement to end slavery, the so called 'Great Awakening' of the 18th century was in full fervor over 100 years before the Civil War and was born of Christian ethics.
Don’t use garbage AI images like this, there’s an infinite amount of good art in the public domain
“They didn’t oppose the revolution. They led it — until the mob turned on the parts they still cherished, like feminism or science.”
You forgot to add Jewish supremacy, Auron. And a lot of us know why you intentionally left it out. Good grief.
“Is it good for married middle class white* normie families?”
If you’re on the right, this is basically the only question you should be asking. One could go down a list of issues and why the right believes what it believes in answering that question, but that’s the question they are trying to answer.
Many of these left wing cast offs are not answering that question. Most are only interested in themselves, and you’re correct to note that their conversion is almost entirely related to suffering personal setbacks vis a vis the left. What most want is a re-negotiation with the left to get better terms, not to become right wing.
*many policies that are good for married middle class white families are also good for married middle class non-whites, so there is some spillover, but on issues like affirmative action, immigration, and culture there is conflict and the right sides with whites