Search results

You do know what the respective bases of the American populist movement and its opposition are, right?

IIRC Germany had universal male suffrage before the UK.

But you have to see, don't you! There's no reason to second-guess the ideal absolute monarch as envisioned by Thomas Carlyle! He needs no restraint or limitation on his powers because he's morally impeccable and he's an omnicompetent wunderkind and he's awake 24/7/365 and he can multi-task...

Attacking the historical record of the USSR or Venezuela, say, isn't as important as attacking the theoretical basis for communism.

I mean, taking your line of logic to its conclusion, that all affairs must be locally organised and no higher authority has the inherent right to intervene in them for any reason, leads to sheer anarchism.

He's certainly going full Thrasymachus. You never go full Thrasymachus!

Another issue here is also that by his own logic he has no real reason to find fault with whatever he's complaining about. "New York" and "Missouri" fought a local political conflict within the USA - "Missouri" lost. Vae victis.

The Founders' political theories were also derived extensively from Classical thinkers: http://www.mlloyd.org/mdl-indx/polybius/intro.htm

Nobody relevant today even believes in nominalism. Unless you have people arguing that one tree of the same species has absolutely nothing to do with another, we just find it convenient to mentally lump them together; which is what the medieval nominalists argued.