Was all of it in opposition to the Church. No. But was a lot of it opposed (esp the parts from outside of Italy) - yes.phil19034:
The same can be said for much of the Enlightenment. This idea that there’s this monolithic Enlightenment that stands in opposition to Catholic teaching is fallacious. The Enlightenment was a very mixed bag, with totalitarianism, conservatism, liberalism, and libertarianism all having it out.
This is like saying that Luther wasn’t Protestant because he posted his theses before Protestantism became vogue. America started the trend.
It is, like the Enlightenment, a grab-bag. Smith’s and Locke’s ideas figure prominently in the underpinnings of the American vision of government, and in conservatism.
Really, if we could just go back in time and somehow eliminate the French and German Enlightenments, we might avoid all sorts of unpleasantness. The English did yeomen’s work in that time stretch.
That’s because Republican would rather see these issues dealt with on the State or local level. Republicans do not believe the Federal govt is capable of addressing all of these issues nationwide. America is too diverse. There is no blanket approach to social issues what will work for every state.
I’m missing your point with this one.
The French and German Enlightenments were wacky totalitarian. The French Enlightenment, thanks in large part to the ideas of Rousseau, led to the world’s first totalitarian dictatorship. It was a philosophy of total integration of society and government, of the deliberate destruction of society to be rebuilt in the image of The State.HopkinsReb:
I’m missing your point with this one.
Exactly.phil19034:
The French and German Enlightenments were wacky totalitarian. The French Enlightenment, thanks in large part to the ideas of Rousseau, led to the world’s first totalitarian dictatorship. It was a philosophy of total integration of society and government, of the deliberate destruction of society to be rebuilt in the image of The State.HopkinsReb:
I’m missing your point with this one.
The German Enlightenment was based on similar ideas, which led to the development of Marxism.
Meanwhile, Locke’s up there in England writing about how people have inalienable rights and government is there to protect those rights. Burke is writing about respecting the wisdom of the people who came before us and that we shouldn’t simply throw out what they’ve given us whenever we have a shiny new idea. Adam Smith is up in Scotland laying out the fundamental principles of market economics. Not perfect by any means (Locke’s views on epistemology, for example, contradict Christian orthodoxy), but the English philosophers were generally doing work that increases man’s freedom and ability to flourish while the continental philosophers were producing the jackboots that would soon fall on Europe’s throat.
I have to say I have observed this. In my dealings with self-proclaimed liberals I have been very hurt and discriminated against (including for my gender) “for the general good”. I’m talking about illegally terminating my employment for getting pregnant because “A woman’s place is at home with a baby, not the work place. We can’t afford to have a breeding woman on our payroll” The conservatives I’ve known and worked for may have been really rough around the edges…but when it came to my personal rights as a human being, they were ALWAYS and WITHOUT QUESTION respected.
And you filed against them for these things I hope.
Wait… this was a Catholic school??? Please tell me this was not a diocesan / parochial school? Please tell me if it was Catholic, at least that it was a religious order school…?
While I hate the govt going into debt, “small govt” doesn’t always mean less spending. It means less programs.
My “little scheme”? Seriously?