What? Much French food is mostly dreadful and Italian food is usually served lukewarm.
Italian food is a lot better when it comes via America in my opinion.

I was. What of it?

True, that's a fair enough point. I might feel that 'my take' on it is closer but essentially it's right that any modern description of 'classical liberalism' is an appropriation.

Mill was writing long before we have the scientific knowledge on the biological differences between men and women which leads to different behaviours (a minority excepted).

Mill was talking at a time where the social constructionist argument could be made without that knowledge. He's also talking from within a time where the constraints on women were far in excesses of what most of us would agree with.

As we know, there are no two individuals who would agree on everything. That's why having a set of priciples written down on which a group can agree is so useful for both themselves and their opponents.

The principles on the website aren't fully fleshed out yet but I think I can answer this based upon my knowledge of the views of the main leaders.

I think you believe in a more egalitarian liberalism 'take on classical liberalism. The liberalist 'take' does include 'nationalism'. Call it 'civic nationalism' if you like.....I definitely find it unfortunate that the concept of 'liberalism' has become overly associated with....what in truth is more socialist internationalist ideology.

It works upon the idea of the social contract. Each individual has a social contract between them and the state. This social contract does not exist between the state and people outside the state.

The state provides and protects these freedoms for an individual emcompassing all the priciples that you can read there. And the individual has responsibilities towards the state also. Some of those can be read in those principles.

This is an area where the conservatives have it about right. The best 'help' you can provide is to provide aid in the affected places. Not to move very culturally different people into this country.

You seem to be implying what this country should do about climate change. If the outcomes were as bad as some envisage I would support the accommodating of peoples into countries with similar cultures. But ideally these problems can be resolved in their own countries.

I do support a principle of helping a set number of refugees. But only those who 'fit' our definitions not the 'open door' head in the clouds mentality of some others.

Edited by Stirlingsays (13 Feb 2018 5.51pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

This is idealistic though, you are right.

The concept of a social contract between state and individual is functional when both sides can maintain their side of the agreement. But when extraordinary phenomena such as environmental disaster, drought or famine hits, and the state cannot fulfill its function, you are condemning millions of citizens to a status of outcasts, without protection or rights, and often to lives of extreme destitution.

Now with climate change, the double, triple, quadruple irony is that those nations who are worse affected - the non-'culturally similar' ones like Bangladesh, Syria, or sub-Saharan Africa - have often had corporations from the West enter their country, set up resource extraction centres, polluted the area, repressed any forms of dissent, driven indigenous communities away and shipped the oil, minerals, food etc back to us, with little or none of it ever reaching the local communities.

In other words, it is these countries which have seen alien cultures to their own enter, ruin their societies, tear up the social contract and now, indirectly, leave thousands if not millions as outcasts.

To my mind liberals - modern or classical - only assert the significance of the nation because most of them are privileged enough to live in countries not under threat from great distress. The key difference with Climate Change is that it will probably affect countries like Britain France and the US too. It will be interesting to see if you think the conservatives have it right should you yourself be one of the millions displaced.

If punk ever happened I'd be preaching the law, instead of listenin to Lydon lecture BBC4

Couldn’t tell you what britain was like in the 70’s because i wouldn’t have been born for another 20 years. But i do know that every country has a distinct culture, which in many cases is being watered down at an unprecedented rate. I agree, cultures shift and are constantly evolving. It’s the rate of change that is objectionable. And i am no more in support of the british affectation of indian culture during the colonial period. But an eye for an eye seems unfair

When you’re knocked on your back and your life’s a flop...

Yes, we have covered all that on a previous thread.