dually
dually t1_izcdmd3 wrote
Reply to How did new emerging religions succeed despite established pre-existing religions during ancient and/or pre-historic times? by matthewlee0165
Because polytheism doesn't scale, and shamanism really doesn't scale.
dually t1_itj8uqr wrote
Reply to comment by Tokishi7 in Joseon, the predecessor of modern Korea(s) - Part 3: Japan and Qing Invasions (early 17th century) by spinnybingle
Nationalism is the enlightened idea that nation-states are preferable to feudal heirarchies and dynastic empires.
dually t1_j9djrhv wrote
Reply to Did both parties adhere to classical liberalism in the early 1900s? What were the ideological differences between the parties in general and with respect to Progressivism? by Convenience21
Liberalism and classical liberalism are opposite things. A classical liberal believes in limited government and economic freedom and thus is essentially a conservative. Coolidge and Reagan were classical liberals. Nixon and Hoover not so much.
TR was not a progressive, rather he was a populist. The difference between liberals and populists is that populism could agree with either the right or left, depending on the issue, and progressive liberals are unequivocally elitist. Wilson was liberal; very high-minded, so completely out of touch that he more than anyone else caused World War II by having unrealistic expectations for how the world should work.