Posted on 06/22/2012 8:30:21 AM PDT by ProgressingAmerica
In "Democracy and Social Ethics", Jane Addams wrote the following: (page 275)
The power to distinguish between the genuine effort and the adventitious mistakes is perhaps the most difficult test which comes to our fallible intelligence. In the range of individual morals, we have learned to distrust him who would reach spirituality by simply renouncing the world, or by merely speculating upon its evils. The result, as well as the process of virtues attained by repression, has become distasteful to us. When the entire moral energy of an individual goes into the cultivation of personal integrity, we all know how unlovely the result may become; the character is upright, of course, but too coated over with the result of its own endeavor to be attractive. In this effort toward a higher morality in our social relations, we must demand that the individual shall be willing to lose the sense of personal achievement, and shall be content to realize his activity only in connection with the activity of the many.
So first off, all of you who reach higher to be better people, you're ugly.
Second, individuals must surrender to the collective - "the activity of the many".
This is pure poison. But it's a consistent refrain from those who believe in progressive ideals, that the individual doesn't matter. Only the group matters.
There goes the spirit of invention. Once there are no more capitalist inventors to steal ideas from, what then?
People who espouse the philosophy that murdered hundreds of millions of people in the last century and enslaved over two billion more are, IMHO, so dangerous that they should be hunted down and exterminated with extreme prejudice as the threat to individual safety and liberty that they are.
What a blowbag. My head hurts from “reading for meaning” just that one paragraph.
If I were forced to choose between reading her whole damn book or performing a lobotomy on myself with a knitting needle... bring me the needle.
One Fifth Grade Classroom in Texas: (Example)
Whole tables of students are rewarded with points, by the correct answer of one student. The points accumulate for spending those points in the “gift shop”.
Used to be a time that such ideologues would be automatically defined as enemy combatants. But now . . .
Goes to prove - if a guy wants to get laid, he should hang out with leftists...
Like so many other things (e.g., carbon footprints), this is only for the ‘little people’. The libs themselves still want their own individual achievement.
‘Onion’??
Sheer lunacy!
Live Free Or Die
Just a great comment. Love your tagline too! How succinct.
What a load of gibberish. You can’t objectivly define a single term she uses. She lays out vague, undefinable premises and still can’t come with a conclusion that could be logically inferred. She sounds like a college freshman five minutes after smoking her first joint.
And the points may be spent on a selection of gifts of condoms, adult toys and manuals on sexual positions.
Abolish public schools.
These idiots sound more and more like Hitler every day. Too bad the republicans are too cowardly to force an honest evaluation of this evil and achieve some justice for this country before it is too late for us all.
Gobbledegook!
No. If he want meaningless sex without strings (other than STDs...) he should hang out with leftists. This is why a lot of guys hang out with leftists, feminists, etc.; they’re easy.
If he wants to get married, he should go to church. Or find somebody at work (way it happened to me). That way you can find women with whom you can actually live.
People who espouse the philosophy that murdered hundreds of millions of people in the last century and enslaved over two billion more are, IMHO, so dangerous that they should be hunted down and exterminated with extreme prejudice as the threat to individual safety and liberty that they are.
Such people aid and abet the monsters I've called killers without conscience. They vote, clap and cheer them into the power they subsequently use to slaughter millions for their own satisfaction.
Those who want slavery should have the grace to name it by its proper name. They must face the full meaning of that which they are advocating or condemning; the full, exact, specific meaning of collectivism, of its logical implications, of the principles upon which it is based, and of the ultimate consequences to which these principles will lead. The greatest guilt today is that of people who accept collectivism by moral default; the people who seek protection from the necessity of taking a stand, by refusing to admit to themselves the nature of that which they are accepting; the people who support plans specifically designed to achieve serfdom, but hide behind the empty assertion that they are lovers of freedom, with no concrete meaning attached to the word; the people who believe that the content of ideas need not be examined, that principles need not be defined, and that facts can be eliminated by keeping one's eyes shut. They expect, when they find themselves in a world of bloody ruins and concentration camps, to escape moral responsibility by wailing: "But I didn't mean this!"
-- Ayn Rand
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.