M. Grégoire
Listening to #CBC #Ideas, the person being interviewed says we must draw distinctions between nationalism and patriotism, between democracy and majoritarianism, between populism and anti-elitism, etc.
On the one hand she's right; on the other it seems hopeless that we'll ever resolve political or philosophical controversies if when she uses a word and I use that word it doesn't have the same meaning.
Maybe if we stop talking about abstractions and move to specifics discourse can be productive.
M. Grégoire
For instance, she proposes a society with bookshops in which one can find books that disagree with the official history. She says that is a sign of a "democratic" society. To me on the other hand, that is the sign of a "liberal" society [0]. It seems obvious to me that a democratic society can have legal censorship or stifling conformity; and that a non-democracy could have a very open discourse.
[0] Though #liberal has other meanings as well, with less connection to freedom of speech.
M. Grégoire
As Frederick the Great said, "My people and I have come to an agreement which satisfied us both. They are to say what they please, and I am to do what I please."
Jonkman Microblog is a social network, courtesy of SOBAC Microcomputer Services. It runs on GNU social, version 1.2.0-beta5, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All Jonkman Microblog content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.