Tautologies, we all know, are useless; definitions, meanwhile, are useful. Yet a definition, once we get down to the brass tacks of it, is very nearly a tautology; both sides of the equation, ideally, have not only the same meaning
This is Part Two of a series (I, II) on the origination of fascism and communism within liberalism. Last week we considered the nature of philosophical-intellectual lineages, introduced the two liberalisms, and defined fascism and communism. We pick up this
I read Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism a few months ago, and the whole time I read the book, one problem with Goldberg’s position plagued me: his insistence on classical liberalism (the English version, I think, in fairness to him) as
The world of the Medieval Scholastics was shaken by a great question: nominalist, conceptualist, or realist? To many of us, these terms are strange or oddly placed. ‘Realism’ seems understandable, but what about the other two? Conceptualism and nominalism are