Posted on my blog Mercenary Scribblings
http://liberalvichy.blogspot.com/2010/04/atheistic-calvinism.html
I wanted to put up a post of mine from the Mises.org forum where we are discussing the use of the term 'legitemacy':

Quote:

They don't want to give up the language for the same reason they try so hard to defend the most incoherent and outright goofy philosophical positions in the name of Libertarian morality: they want libertarianism to be all-inclusive and required of everybody, leaving only the Righteous and the Fools. This is because Libertarianism is a species of Progressivism, which is a species of Liberalism, which is the dominant strain of Atheistic Calvinism, which is to say evangelical Christianity with political pretensions. There is a direct line of descent from this stuff, and their language hasn't really changed at all; they just bicker among their various denominations for the 'rights' to their sacred terminology. Communism and libertarianism, whatever their differences, have more in common than not.

This is basically my position on why Libertarianism is, whatever its economic associations, philosophically retarded and inane.

Edit:
ALSO Porn is Awesome for Technology
http://www.coordinationproblem.org/2010/04/pornography-as-the-cutting-edge-where-technology-meets-commerce.html

This is so interesting. I'm curious to know others' thinking on this---why are there no replies?

How are you, Vichy?

How are you, Vichy?
Better. Been keeping myself busy with reading and whatnot.

Good to see you back on th' internets,

I agree for the most part. If you look at Calvin's writings alongside Lysander Spooner's you can see a lot of resemblance; probably because both were trained as lawyers and applied this to their respective fields theology and political science, by taking a few postulates as "the truth," and drawing out all sorts of inferences and implications to weave a dogma and cover the entire universe with it.

That does beg the question, if you're willing to tar so many disparate belief systems with the same brush-- what worldview isn't tainted with "Atheistic Calvinism"? And what is the core quality in common amongst them.

I would say that just as Christianity is universalist or anti-particularist (whichever you prefer to emphasize). Other philosophies may simply claim to be "my way," or "our way," and aware of their own imperfection, malleability, inherent limitedness-- whether it be nihilism or egoism: designed for application to a specific individual; Nationalism intended for members of a specific nation, or a legal system designed to apply to citizens of a specific state. Of course, some of these examples may brush up against universalism and claims of transcendence, but would tend to be less so.

Calvinism: Universalism, egalitarianism, moralism, theologizing politics and war, political democratism, evangelical and obsessed with thought-crimes. With the later Enlightenment we see this transformed into 'natural religion' and 'civil philosophy', replacing supernatural creeds with secular 'rights'; the 'chosen people' with 'the people'.

Hmm, didn't that ReignofRadness dude state that pretty much all of philosophy is language games.

I dunno... even if it is, I'll still do it if it's fun.