Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."
The Jacobins had no understanding of economic liberty, nor the responsibility that goes with it. Like many of today's so-called "progressives", they drew their support and "muscle" from the bottom of the socio-economic heap. and used the ends to justify the means -- just as with the Fascism masquerading as "Political Correctness".
Barry Goldwater's acceptance speech at the 1964 Republican Convention:
"Extremism, in the defense of liberty, is no vice."
A defining moment in the evolution of conservative ideals.
Its amazing what some people consider a good speech. Goldwater had presided over a sharply divided convention. He had run against Nelson Rockefeller who had done surprisingly well in a number of the primaries at that time. When Nelson got up to speak, the Goldwater delegates practically booed Rockefeller off the stage. Rockefeller tried to point out to the delegates what he had experienced during the campaign, but they would have none of it.
In fact, Rockefeller had been criticized by many of the right wingers, simply because he had gotten a divorce and married Happy Rockefeller. He also had the temerity to support laws like the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
So, the right got its way and Goldwater won the nomination. A wise man would have used his victory speech to try and bring his party together and reconcile with this opponents. Once again, Goldwater would have none of it. Instead, he gave the "extremism in the defense of liberty speech".
Lyndon Johnson went on to win the election in November with about 62% of the vote. The great lesson of the campaign was the candidate who captures the "middle" or "center" of the electorate is the one that wins.
As Goldwater aged, he developed something resembling a sense of moderation He ended up opposing right extremists who sought political office in his state of Arizona. He never was a social conservative and I will give him credit for that. However, the way he conducted his presidential campaign is a study in how not to run for office.
The Jacobins had no understanding of economic liberty, nor the responsibility that goes with it. Like many of today's so-called "progressives", they drew their support and "muscle" from the bottom of the socio-economic heap. and used the ends to justify the means -- just as with the Fascism masquerading as "Political Correctness".
Doesn't that quote describe exactly the Jacobin justification for the Terror? Extremism in defense of liberty? That they might have defined liberty in a manner different from Goldwater does not alter the concept of rationalizing anything in the name of that definition.
Doesn't that quote describe exactly the Jacobin justification for the Terror? Extremism in defense of liberty? That they might have defined liberty in a manner different from Goldwater does not alter the concept of rationalizing anything in the name of that definition.
I'm intrigued that Goldwater's quote interests many here. For sure the statement has great import. I'm not sure how Goldwater is looked upon today in terms of opinon but I'm pretty sure that when say the name 'Robespierre' pops up well right away we have allusions of Stalin, Pol Pot etc etc considering what happened in the French Revolution. Is he truly a destroyer of the ideals of the Revolution? Was he completely responsible for the descent into a hell?
.
I only throw it out because a biographer of a famous poet said she couldn't say who is good or bad or noble or ridiculous since the 'distinguished dead are clay in the hands of writers'. I think we can say that of some men of history. And here's Marc Bloch, one of the greatest European historians chiming in: 'Can we be so sure of ourselves and our times as we distinguish between the just and the damned among our forebears? Robespierristes, anti-Robespierristes, we beg for mercy: for pitys' sake just tell us who was Robespierre (adding Goldwater)??'
I'm intrigued that Goldwater's quote interests many here. For sure the statement has great import. I'm not sure how Goldwater is looked upon today in terms of opinon but I'm pretty sure that when say the name 'Robespierre' pops up well right away we have allusions of Stalin, Pol Pot etc etc considering what happened in the French Revolution. Is he truly a destroyer of the ideals of the Revolution? Was he completely responsible for the descent into a hell?
.
I only throw it out because a biographer of a famous poet said she couldn't say who is good or bad or noble or ridiculous since the 'distinguished dead are clay in the hands of writers'. I think we can say that of some men of history. And here's Marc Bloch, one of the greatest European historians chiming in: 'Can we be so sure of ourselves and our times as we distinguish between the just and the damned among our forebears? Robespierristes, anti-Robespierristes, we beg for mercy: for pitys' sake just tell us who was Robespierre (adding Goldwater)??'
Let me add one admittedly non-American quote for everyone's consideration:
"O Liberty ... In thy name what crimes are committed!"
(Madame Roland -- early supporter of the French Revolution,
while on her way to the guillotine)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
