Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Imperial Russian Stout!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 140
51
Holy @#!* bro.  That's bigtime.

52
I have more anarchist blood in me than you guys. my probably great grandfather was super famous for anarchy and stuff

The state should be strong. Unstoppable. All-encompassing.

Aye Comrade!

The Dictatorship of the Proletariat, as a vanguard for the will of the people, shall usher worth a state, which will undoubtedly wither away, which will be ruthless to all enemies of the working party!

::pounds an ale and brushes his whiskers::

53
I have more anarchist blood in me than you guys. my probably great grandfather was super famous for anarchy and stuff

Really??!?!!??!!?  I'm highly interested! 

54
Well, now you're changing your argument.  I can agree with you now.

I also disagree with Chomsky's faith in the UN and International law.  I don't think the US should give a poo about them. (I don't really feel like being eloquent about expressing why)  Churchill is really into International bodies also.  Seems to be a common weakness and course advocated by the Left.  I'm an Anarcho-Capitalist, FWIW.

I probably didn't articulate that as well, but that was part of my argument.  That was my bit about the normative tone.  Also, I added a note about how meaningless international law is.

We need to talk about Churchill when we meet, I don't want to go on record of any type discussing any agreements I may or may not have with him for obvious reasons.

55
For the aristocracy!!!!!

AHHH CAPITALIST DOG!

The benevolence of the worker's revolt shall pay you tribute by extricating your heart from your chest and placing it on a stake which flies the great flag of the Proletariat!

Evil Stork!

::takes a bump of vodka from his flask::  

56
Well, now you're changing your argument.  I can agree with you now.

I also disagree with Chomsky's faith in the UN and International law.  I don't think the US should give a *&^% about them. (I don't really feel like being eloquent about expressing why)  Churchill is really into International bodies also.  Seems to be a common weakness and course advocated by the Left.  I'm an Anarcho-Capitalist, FWIW.

57
don't judge me.....i've been playing an mmorpg for a month

You dorkus!

58
I don't feel that I'm that conservative....  But in academia, I'm Jesse Helms.  There's some good conservative political scientists at UChicago and surprisingly, Berekely (at least they were there...) but that's about it.  

Again, my biggest complaint with Chomsky is that political science isn't meant to be normative.  It's supposed to describe and explain the way things are, not the way they should be.  All concepts of morality and ethics are taboo and thus, trying to paint the United States as a terrorist or rogue state has almost zero scholarly value.  It's simply, a very long opinion peace.  In other words, he's not trying to explain a phenomenon, he's accepting the phenomenon as given and is arguing its value judgement.  Not even worth reading.

See, that is the conservative academic reaction to Hegemony or Survival.  But, in my view, his conclusions are normative, but he describes what is, as in the bare bone description of the phenomena he's evaluating.  I haven't finished it completely, but so far he's describing reality, maybe in terms that make people uncomfortable.  Obviously he makes prescriptive claims and normative evaluations (in terms of those, you can quibble), but what issues do you have with the objectively factual militarism he describes and weaves together to describe an objectively provable pattern of quest for global dominance, jingoism at home, and imperial expansion?

I think Chomsky is 70% reality, 30% value judgment/leftist theory, and you're dismissing him based on the 30%.  Mind you, I don't even agree with Chomsky politically, don't accuse me of supporting him over dogma.

59
what's your opinion of Noam Chomsky's book Hegemony or Survival

Trite. It's all about David Harvey's Condition of Postmodernity and History of Neoliberalism.

Dude, I've had 5000 conversations about postmodernism, and I've heard it defined 500 times, and I still don't know what it is.  Hmmm, why?  Because it doesn't exist!

You have been indoctrinated by the Chomskites my friend.

It's essentially a nihilistic, antimodernist, absurdist perception of the world.

Your definition sheds light on my belief.  It's nothing because it's everything.  It's a hodgepodge of everything under the moon.  Anyways, I don't want to get into a debate, my cousin debates this with me at every get-together.  I'm not a Chomskites, I never even completed one of his books.

I could fasten a better overall definition of the term if you really wish.

I think the concept of postmodernity is rather simple actually. I am not wholly committed to postmodernism, but I have met plenty of naysayers as well.

PS Amp:



lol.  you'll be back.  they always come back.

60
I'm going to go play postmodern baseball.  See you guys in a bit.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 140