frankj1 wrote:bet the hut that his owner Lew Rockwell has been tossing the word around.
same as with lizard peoples and other repetitive stuff.
cut and paste, baby. others do the thinking for ya.
I detect that you are offended by the term "JACOBIN" and you hate the thoughts of others (particularly by genuine libertarians and genuine conservatives) that have connected the dots, the lineage of the French revolutionaries to the modern LEFT O' CENTER.
So naturally you hate like a Jacobin from the SPLC all acclaimed Internet free speech and thought zones like LewRockwell.com that show no mercy to Jacobins of any stripe.
I know the usual story Frank repeated again and again by CBID Thought Police who claim that cut n' paste'n the thoughts of others are a sin against CBID Thought Police orthodoxy. Suck it Frank, I could care less about what the Thought Police Cult claims.
Actually, I will present you with the thoughts of another to befuddle you, reflecting on the writings of yet another, who goes one better, connecting certain self-proclaimed conservative right-wingers, called Neocons and Straussians to the Jacobin left pedigree. The evidence is laid out so you will probably hate it, maybe call it heresy or something.
America's Jacobin IdeologuesBy Thomas DiLorenzo
April 8, 2006
Quote:In his book America the Virtuous and in articles published on LewRockwell.com and elsewhere, Professor Claes Ryn has clearly defined what he calls the "Jacobin ideologues" in American society, otherwise known as Straussians and neocons. Since I consider Abraham Lincoln to have been a Jacobin, and his war a Jacobin revolution, I have been a close follower of Professor Ryn’s work and its relevance to American history. I have been struck by how Professor Ryn’s definitions fit so many of today’s Lincoln idolaters like a glove. In his writing he refers most often to Harry Jaffa and his fellow "Straussians" as the chief Jacobin ideologues and contrasts them sharply to genuine limited government conservatives. Let’s take a look at some of his definitions.
1. The Jacobin ideologue expresses no humility. I have seen this time and again with the Straussian Lincoln cult. A good example would be one humorous response to my book, The Real Lincoln, by one of Jaffa’s fellow cultists, one Ken Masugi, who announced that cult leader Jaffa had apparently "settled" all these issues 50 years ago. Of course, nothing is ever settled permanently in the social sciences, especially when it comes to something as complicated as a war. Only members of a cult, who believe that THE TRUTH comes only from the mouth of the cult leader, would believe such a thing. No one with intellectual integrity would ever make such a totalitarian-minded claim.
2. The Jacobin ideologue has no use for actual history because he claims to have special knowledge of "universal principles." This explains why so much of what the Straussians say about Lincoln and the war are flat out contradicted by real history. They don’t care about real history. All they want to do is to repeat Jaffa’s false theory that Lincoln was devoted to natural rights. The fact that Lincoln repeatedly denied that black people should be able to exercise these rights doesn’t matter. What matters is the fanciful theory put forth by the cult leader.
3. The Jacobin ideologue makes sweeping, categorical assertions as a substitute for the real complexity of the world. This is another reason why America’s Jacobins do not care about history. History is complicated. War is complicated. All wars have multiple causes and effects. But not the Jacobins’ wars. Lincoln’s war was caused by slavery and slavery alone, despite the fact that Lincoln himself — and the entire U.S. government — insisted otherwise. And the war in Iraq is a war "for democracy" and nothing else, period.
4. Jacobin ideologues have unquestioning faith in their own moral superiority. This explains why the Straussians so often behave in such a completely vulgar, mannerless, and uncivilized way whenever anyone questions any of their precepts. This is radically different from the normal state of affairs in academe where such criticism is viewed as the means of arriving at the truth through discussion and debate. It is also why the Straussians are so despised (and largely ignored) by the rest of academe.
More...
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2006/04/thomas-dilorenzo/americas-jacobin-ideologues/
