One of the most frustrating things about being a modern leftist political theorist is dealing with the legacy of John Rawls. [[Hobby horse alert! Sorry! Hear those chairs scraping the floor? I’ll just wait while 95% of my readership heads back to Facebook.]] Ok. For those of you still here—let’s get to it. Rawls is … Continue reading
The dissertation is about 50% done at this point. The following is one in a series of posts which you can find here. It’s a good chunk of the closing section of my chapter on John Dewey and Michael Oakeshott’s assessment of history’s place in modern politics. Pretty dull, right? Well, perhaps, but it’s also … Continue reading
Ron Paul makes no secret of his admiration for the “Austrian School” of political and economic thought—especially F.A. Hayek’s work. To most Americans, though, he might as well keep it a secret. Who is this Austrian guy Paul likes so well? What about him do conservatives find so sexy? As an academic familiar with Hayek’s work, I … Continue reading
American pragmatic philosopher Richard Rorty, in sight of his death, wrote [h/t WKJ]: I now wish that I had spent somewhat more of my life with verse. This is not because I fear having missed out on truths that are incapable of statement in prose. There are no such truths; there is nothing about … Continue reading
More thoughts from the dissertation (working along similar lines to this earlier post): – While this is not a knockout argument proving the objective worth of democratic institutions, it suggests that they are appropriate matches for the times in which we live, an apt constellation of political ideals to match the state of modern material … Continue reading
I’ve been surprised by how many page views these dissertation excerpts get, so here’s another one, for all the dorks out there. This is part of the continuing argument I’m building between Dewey’s and Oakeshott’s views on science and politics… Here’s another way of putting this: Dewey admits that inquiry is “only” a response to … Continue reading
The Washington Post‘s (birthday boy) Dana Milbank “explains” Obama’s subtlety: The political right is befuddled as it tries to explain him: First, Obama was a tyrant and a socialist; now he’s a weakling who refuses to lead. The political left is almost as confused, demanding to know why Obama gave away so much on health … Continue reading
Less an excerpt, and more an interesting parallel from Dewey’s and Tocqueville’s work. Compare: “The current has set steadily in one direction: toward democratic forms. That government exists to serve its community, and that this purpose cannot be achieved unless the community itself shares in selecting its governors and determining their policies, are a deposit … Continue reading
Compare. Newt Gingrich, on Saturday: “I’m here to tell you that if you don’t start with values and you don’t start by establishing who we are as Americans, the rest of it doesn’t matter. Life is not just about money.” Democracy, A Journal (No. 20, Spring 11, p. 8): “No debate is more fundamental in … Continue reading
No! Wait! Don’t go! I promise it’s not as boring as it sounds! Sure, it’s a little bit political theory shop-talk-ish, but only a little. My students have a paper due in a few weeks, and one of them asked me recently to clarify what we meant by “modernity.” There’s a standard political theory … Continue reading
