Political philosophy[ edit ] In her own words[ edit ] In her book It Takes a VillageClinton writes, "Most of us would describe ourselves as 'middle of the road'—liberal in some areas, conservative in others, moderate in most, neither exclusively pro- nor anti-government. So I consider myself a proud modern American progressive, and I think that's the kind of philosophy and practice that we need to bring back to American politics.
I no longer endorse all the statements in this document. I think many of the conclusions are still correct, but especially section 1 is weaker than it should be, and many reactionaries complain I am pigeonholing all of them as agreeing with Michael Anissimov, which they do not; this complaint seems reasonable.
This document needs extensive revision to stay fair and correct, but such revision is currently lower priority than other major projects. Until then, I apologize for any inaccuracies or misrepresentations. What is this FAQ? It is meant to rebut some common beliefs held by the political movement called Reaction or Neoreaction.
What are the common beliefs of the political movement called Reaction or Neoreaction? Neoreaction is a political ideology supporting a return to traditional ideas of government and society, especially traditional monarchy and an ethno-nationalist state.
It sees itself opposed to modern ideas like democracy, human rights, multiculturalism, and secularism. Will this FAQ be a rebuttal the arguments in that summary?
Some but not all. I worry I may have done too good a job of steelmanning Reactionary positions in that post, emphasizing what I thought were strong arguments, sometimes even correct arguments, but not really the arguments Reactionaries believed or considered most important.
Some of them seem really dumb to me and I excluded them from the previous piece, but they make it in here. Other points from the previous post are real Reactionary beliefs and make it in here as well.
Do all Reactionaries believe the same things? Even more confusingly, sometimes the same people seem to switch among the three without giving any indication they are aware that they are doing so. In particular the difference between feudal monarchies and divine-right-of-kings monarchies seems to be sort of lost on many of them.
Mencius is probably the most famous Reactionary, one of the founders of the movement, and an exceptionally far-thinking and knowledgeable writer.
Michael is also quite smart, very prolific, and best of all for my purposes unusually willing to state Reactionary theories plainly and explicitly in so many words and detail the evidence that he thinks supports them.
Mencius usually supports a state-as-corporation model and Michael seems to be more to the feudal monarchy side, with both occasionally paying lip service to divine-right-of-kings absolutism as well. Are you going to treat Reaction and Progressivism as real things?
One of the problems in exercises like this is how much to take political labels seriously. Both combine many very diverse ideas, and sometimes exactly who falls on what side will be exactly the point at issue.
Although debating the meaning of category words is almost never productive, I feel like in that case I have more than enough excuse.
Is everything getting worse? It is a staple of Reactionary thought that everything is getting gradually worse. As traditional ideas cede to their Progressive replacements, the fabric of society tears apart on measurable ways.Jefferson Davis, former President of the Confederate States of America, following the Civil War described the “systematic and persistent struggle to deprive the Southern States of equality in the Union which constituted the intolerable grievance which led to the secession of .
This article may be too long to read and navigate plombier-nemours.com readable prose size is kilobytes. Please consider splitting content into sub-articles, condensing it, or adding or removing subheadings.
(January ) This article is part of a series about Hillary Clinton. Get the latest international news and world events from Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and more. See world news photos and videos at plombier-nemours.com As a follow-up to Tuesday’s post about the majority-minority public schools in Oslo, the following brief account reports the latest statistics on the cultural enrichment of schools in Austria.
Vienna is the most fully enriched location, and seems to be in roughly the same situation as Oslo. Many thanks to Hermes for the translation from plombier-nemours.com Latest breaking news, including politics, crime and celebrity. Find stories, updates and expert opinion. [Edit 3/ I no longer endorse all the statements in this document.
I think many of the conclusions are still correct, but especially section 1 is weaker than it should be, and many reactionaries complain I am pigeonholing all of them as agreeing with Michael Anissimov, which they do .