[lit-ideas] Re: Iran (1), The Revolutionary Imperative

  • From: Robert Paul <robert.paul@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 20:25:21 -0800

Lawrence writes, in an interesting post:

I also note that in Fukuyama’s definition of Liberal Democracy, he embraces it in all its forms. He doesn’t exclude the European Welfare state. Beyond that I recognize that we in America have been influenced by Marx for the better. The 8 hour day, medical and old age insurance and many other benefits derive from Marx. But the American Liberal-Democratic ideal resists government control. Our constitution and bill of rights were oriented against the tyranny the founding fathers broke away from. They didn’t trust big government.

One would like to see a distinction between Socialism and Marxism. One would also like to see how the eight hour day, medical insurance, and 'old age insurance,' whatever that is, are Marxist notions, or that those who first advocated them in this country were Marxists—especially the Noble and Holy Order of the Knights of Labor. It's certainly true that in the 1920s and 30s, the American Labor movement had socialist strains. But Socialism and Marxism are two different things.

The only 'old age insurance' (which I forgot to buy before it became too late) I know of in this country is Social Security. Perhaps FDR was a Marxist dupe. In Steward Machine Company vs. Davis (1937), the Supreme Court held that, given the extremity of the economic conditions of the time, the Social Security legislation was Constitutional, because it promoted the general welfare. The justices were not, one supposes, Marxists any more than were the authors of the Constitution.

Robert Paul
Reed College
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 02-2006