Comments on: George Mason and anti-Federalism http://davecole.org/blog/2007/05/28/george-mason-and-anti-federalism/ Thoughts, notes and comments Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:53:36 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: El Dave. http://davecole.org/blog/2007/05/28/george-mason-and-anti-federalism/#comment-243 El Dave. Thu, 31 May 2007 15:45:00 +0000 http://davecole.org/blog/?p=270#comment-243 It also depends which doctrine of socialism you adhere to, what you think of communism and where you stand on foreign interventions and East of Suez. It also depends which doctrine of socialism you adhere to, what you think of communism and where you stand on foreign interventions and East of Suez.

]]> By: El Dave. http://davecole.org/blog/2007/05/28/george-mason-and-anti-federalism/#comment-242 El Dave. Thu, 31 May 2007 15:40:00 +0000 http://davecole.org/blog/?p=270#comment-242 It wasn't the class so much as the quality of the argument. Whether Tony gave you that or not, you did it well and it stuck.<br/><br/>I hope to see you running for deputy leadership before then, Comrade. It wasn’t the class so much as the quality of the argument. Whether Tony gave you that or not, you did it well and it stuck.

I hope to see you running for deputy leadership before then, Comrade.

]]> By: Jo Kibble http://davecole.org/blog/2007/05/28/george-mason-and-anti-federalism/#comment-241 Jo Kibble Thu, 31 May 2007 14:30:00 +0000 http://davecole.org/blog/?p=270#comment-241 Aren't Google alerts great? Otherwise I'd never have known that you had such an impressive memory for a highly forgettable class. I do feel I should defend my good name here, however. I think I was advocating the 'socialism is what a Labour government does' thesis because that was what I was told to do by Mr Amatrudo (sp? Can't be bothered to look it up!). After all, my usual position on these things is that socialism is what a Labour government can (and very occassionaly does) do. In fact, I turned the arguments I made in class round in an essay to demolish the idea, albeit in regard to the Attlee governments rather than the Wilson ones. Even by their own stated definition of socialism, the Attlee government could not be said to have implemented a doctrinally socialistic agenda - interventionist social democratic maybe. Sorry to go on at some length on something I realise is tangental to your interesting post, but I have to protect my ideological purity for when I run for the deputy leadership in 2048 :). All the best, Jo Aren’t Google alerts great? Otherwise I’d never have known that you had such an impressive memory for a highly forgettable class. I do feel I should defend my good name here, however. I think I was advocating the ’socialism is what a Labour government does’ thesis because that was what I was told to do by Mr Amatrudo (sp? Can’t be bothered to look it up!). After all, my usual position on these things is that socialism is what a Labour government can (and very occassionaly does) do. In fact, I turned the arguments I made in class round in an essay to demolish the idea, albeit in regard to the Attlee governments rather than the Wilson ones. Even by their own stated definition of socialism, the Attlee government could not be said to have implemented a doctrinally socialistic agenda - interventionist social democratic maybe. Sorry to go on at some length on something I realise is tangental to your interesting post, but I have to protect my ideological purity for when I run for the deputy leadership in 2048 :). All the best, Jo

]]>