The corollary to that: Why not conduct any atrocities you deem necessary?
It's not like the left's plan is co-existence with an honourably-defeated enemy, but rather the ideological extermination or a bunch of dangerous heretics.
It's not a necessity, it's a categorical imperative.
Rosseau explicitly stated that a reign of terror to coerce the rest of the population into compliance with "The General Will" is a moral good. From their perspective, atrocities are moral.
It's funny, isn't it, how this "General Will" always seems to align itself with communists?
Remarkably consistent, that, isn't it?
Mind you, it's not like the rest of communist literature isn't "Yeah, it's perfectly fine to genocide your enemies - if they didn't deserve it, they'd have submitted to you already!"
Rousseau did something weird and said, "well, if there's one vote and it wins 50.0000001% of the vote, then that is The General Will, and therefore that's moral to use terror."
Why one vote is iron clad, I have no idea. He's kind of a lunatic.
well, if there's one vote and it wins 50.0000001% of the vote, then that is The General Will, and therefore that's moral to use terror.
Interesting. You know more Rosseau than I do, I think, do you know how he rationalises plugging along with the subversion when communism inevitably doesn't win the necessary votes?
The corollary to that: Why not conduct any atrocities you deem necessary?
It's not like the left's plan is co-existence with an honourably-defeated enemy, but rather the ideological extermination or a bunch of dangerous heretics.
It's not a necessity, it's a categorical imperative.
Rosseau explicitly stated that a reign of terror to coerce the rest of the population into compliance with "The General Will" is a moral good. From their perspective, atrocities are moral.
It's funny, isn't it, how this "General Will" always seems to align itself with communists?
Remarkably consistent, that, isn't it?
Mind you, it's not like the rest of communist literature isn't "Yeah, it's perfectly fine to genocide your enemies - if they didn't deserve it, they'd have submitted to you already!"
Pretty much.
Rousseau did something weird and said, "well, if there's one vote and it wins 50.0000001% of the vote, then that is The General Will, and therefore that's moral to use terror."
Why one vote is iron clad, I have no idea. He's kind of a lunatic.
Interesting. You know more Rosseau than I do, I think, do you know how he rationalises plugging along with the subversion when communism inevitably doesn't win the necessary votes?