RF's definition of communism is exactly 180-degrees off (as he'd know if he ever spoke to communists).
-
-
Stuart rule didn't justify itself through Mole-Rat social totalitarianism.
-
Were the 'enlightened absolutist' kings 'totalitarian' ?
-
Frederick II wasn't -- but then he was basically an authoritarian liberal (and thus a 'communist' for RF).
-
I think there's a confusion here between the structure of the society/state 'absolutist' vs some use of it.
-
RF's theory is that absolutism would infact result in massive decentralization and 'freedom' (as we define it)
-
He counts HK as part of his model as well.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.