Still mulling this stuff over. What's remarkable about 1848 is how intelligible the politics are. Like--maybe it was the first time today's Western political factions erupted in conflict. Radicals, liberals, conservatives.
-
-
(iii) is the norm everywhere that has a de facto republican government. So, maybe a good narrative is this: The 1848 liberals won broadly. Conservatism was ultimately crushed. What we have today are ongoing skirmishes between liberals and radicals, the latter . . .
Show this thread -
being split left and right, where the left cares about the 1848 radical preoccupation with economic redistribution, and the right cares about 1848 radical preoccupation with nationalism. Hmmmm. (?????) Anyway back to work, thanks for reading my incipient model.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Whereas liberalism had an end state that it achieved (often through radical means), being a radical (or progressive) means perpetual progress, what that progress is towards isn’t important, but the process and perpetual mobilization are.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.