Comment: I really liked the article.

(See in situ)


I really liked the article.

I agree with the below sentiment regarding "that's why slaves are slaves", because the grounds don't support the claim well. Also, equating "liberals" to "statists" is partially inaccurate because it does not account for "classical liberals" who share many libertarian small government pro civil liberties views with us. "Progressives" more accurately decribes the type of statist the author was trying to portray in my view, (Progressives for Paul might disagree though, but again, I think they/he (P4P that post here occasionally) are more classical liberal than progressive anyways. Would love to read his take.)

So, Great article! Many great points. I would share it with my liberal co-workers, except that the "that's why slaves are slaves" line is too over the top and would offend their liberal sensibilities. To the author, pls except this as constructive criticism, and consider an edit that might more clearly articulate your point in that sentance. Use logic, make your claim, and then provide grounds that support your claim in that sentence. You do a very great job of this all throughout the rest of your article. Thanks for sharring:)