{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/878",
    "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it.  Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.",
    "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'"
  },
  "archive": "urth",
  "thread": {
    "id": 878,
    "subject": "politics",
    "messages": 1,
    "voices": 1,
    "first": "1998-07-01T07:58:29+00:00",
    "last": "1998-07-01T07:58:29+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0015-0049@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "Dan Parmenter",
        "address": "dan at lec.com"
      },
      "date": "1998-07-01T07:58:29+00:00",
      "subject": "(urth) politics",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "From: Jim Jordan <jbjordan at gnt.net>\n4. He is fully capable of sympathizing with anti-establishment movements,\nas we see in \"Hour of Trial.\" But notice that while Gene Wolfe marches with\nthe radicals, he does so praying the Lord's Prayer!"
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "Which is of course well within the traditions of \"radicalism\" here, as\nin the civil rights movement."
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "5. The whole PC movement is so incredibly bigoted and anti-intellectual\nthat it is hard to see why anyone, conservative or liberal, would credit it!"
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "I think the value of what is loosely described as the \"PC movement\"\nmight be that despite the examples you gave of conservatives opposed\nto colonialism, it seems harder to find such critiques among today's\nmainstream conservatives, though Pat Buchanan occasionally goes in\nthat direction.  Of course Buchanan seems like a pretty marginal\nfigure among mainstream conservatives these days, despite his\ndemonization by the \"PC\" crowd.  The severest critiques of American\ncolonialism these days seem to come out of the left.  Consider Noam\nChomsky who, despite calling himself an anarchist is pretty clearly in\nthe leftist tradition.  His critiques of American corporations and\nforeign policy and in particular, his views on how the media\nwhitewashes these things are extremely influential in the academic\nlefty world.  And of course, not all academic lefties are particularly\nhardcore \"PC\" on quite a range of other issues.  But that's part of\nthe problem with the straw-man called \"PC\".  People who believe in\nreal affirmative action, which much like Catholicism bears little\nresemblence to what is often called \"affirmative action\", end up\ngetting tarred with same brush as those who insist on calling\noverweight people \"vertically challenged\"."
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "From: Miles Goosens <outdoorminer at mindspring.com>\nNot to go entirely off-topic, but what Jim is talking about serves to\nhighlight the radical disjuncture between what most people think\n\"conservative\" means vs. what academics usually mean by the same term.  As\nJim points out in #1, philosophical conservatism often questions the\nmorality of a \"laissez-faire\" market-driven economy, whereas those\npopularly identified with \"conservatism\" usually fetishize \"free markets\"\nand, in at least this sense, embrace liberalism just as heartily as\n\"liberals\"!  \nBut if you tell people that their \"conservatives\" are really liberals,\nyou'll get nothing but puzzled stares."
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "I believe what you are talking about what is generally known as\n\"classical liberalism\" of the sort that Milton Friedman articulates\nrather well.  I think that this is just a semantic game and is best\navoided; however, the essential point is taken that these labels are\nindeed quite slippery.  One of the real annoyances of modern life is\nwhen one is asked to characterize one's \"politics\", as if this could\nbe as easily summed up in a few short conversational nuggets.\n\nD"
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}