tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post3249201017412848546..comments2024-03-29T03:19:09.227-04:00Comments on The Philosopher's Stone: SCRATCH ONERobert Paul Wolffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11970360952872431856noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-26947138640153194222011-04-26T10:13:49.270-04:002011-04-26T10:13:49.270-04:00I'm basically rehashing the question of how do...I'm basically rehashing the question of how do you rectify your leftism, with the fact your individualist anarchist text can also speak to those of the far right. Some members of the far right being equally as intelligent, and rational, in their morality decisions.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08250295324149056708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-31850084500774572132011-04-26T10:09:24.831-04:002011-04-26T10:09:24.831-04:00Professor,
I was wondering if you could elaborate ...Professor,<br />I was wondering if you could elaborate on how you, in your own eyes, comfortable reach Marxism from your In Defense of Anarchism. So far as I can tell Karl Marx political prescription, which he hardly writes about, are quite in line with Rousseau's Social Contract. But your book sanctifies individual moral autonomy above all state coercion. However there's not doubt Marx and Marxist consistently use the state in the struggle against exploitation and capitalism. In so doing, they are bound to drag alone morally autonomous individuals into policies - like Rousseau's general will - that the individual rationally doesn't agree with, albeit it really is "good" for the people (in the general will since).<br /><br />Thank you,<br />-Chris ByronChrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08250295324149056708noreply@blogger.com