Richard Dreyfuss Explains Serfdom and Liberty (Huckabee's show on FOX News)

[Knightskye]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDx7yIEBXX4
Digg: http://digg.com/political_opinion/Richard_Dreyfuss_Explains_How_We_Are_ALL_Slaves

Pretty cool.

It's a little over ten minutes. Well worth the listen.

[Pete]

Interesting.

I did some searching to see if Dreyfuss is an Obama supporter and could find no evidence to that effect. Here's another clip, from 'The View', in which he discusses the need for civics education in public schools, for preparing students to live in a 'republican democracy' (close enough):

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/richard-dreyfuss-vs-oliver-stone/

Hmm, a possible ally?

[moostraks]

really good catch...worth the time to view.

Agree with his views on schooling...Glad to hear he was not advocating "skin in the game" as public service should be a choice or it loses its effectiveness and resentment will replace goodwill.

Also like how he put Huckabee and the media in its place with the sound byte stance. It is the lack of resonable research and the buying into sound bytes which is destroying this country...

[tonesforjonesbones]

Dreyfuss is using communist hegelian dialectic right there. The founding fathers used logic...the dialectic of rational thinking: Dreyfuss wants to use Inductive reasoning (no creator only science) but Our Founding Fathers followed both Deductive REasoning and inductive reasoning...John Locke's natural law philosophy.

The scientifically based political ideas of man's natural rights to property were based on the writings of John Locke, who historically may be one of Englands most rational thinkers. He is remembered as "the intellectual father" of the U.S. Locke used both deductive and inductive reasoning, as did the Americans who inherited his ideas. Locke subscribed to the three levels of law: top-God's law, middle-Natural law, bottom-Civil Law, and he believed that each type of law must correspond up to the next level. Men believed that while God's law was unknowable, it was possible to understand God's law through an understanding of nature, and that civil law was bound by the rules of natural law. The realization of U.S. laws and citizen's inalienable rights to individual freedom were attained via both the belief in a Creator and purely scientific, rational thinking.


You can not take God out of understanding America's civil laws...because it was based on Lockean natural law philosophy. Tones

(Marx...and the communists took God out of the process...therefore...you cant get the true ideas of the Founding Fathers..you get the Material dialectic..of marx based on the hegelian dialectic. )

[bbagnall]

I shiver at thought of teaching civics in schools. The potential for political and philosophical indoctrination by teachers would be limitless. Dryfuss needs to learn more about what freedom really means.

[torchbearer]

I shiver at thought of teaching civics in schools. The potential for political and philosophical indoctrination by teachers would be limitless. Dryfuss needs to learn more about what freedom really means.

If schools are control by the community its not so bad because the results would be so different.
I learned a lot in my civics class about the constitution and the founders.. and about republics.
I saw from an early age that our government now didn't quite fit inside the bounds of the constitution.

[Knightskye]

really good catch...worth the time to view.

I'm glad I'm subscribed to this guy:
http://www.youtube.com/user/VOTERSTHINKdotORG


Also like how he put Huckabee and the media in its place with the sound byte stance. It is the lack of reasonable research and the buying into sound bytes which is destroying this country...

Seriously. I'd prefer if the media talked about fewer things, but in greater detail. They just go from soundbite to soundbite.

[moostraks]

I think that the view on teaching intensive civics courses is fine when parents control or have a say so it one is being indoctrinated. We homeschool so there is not the apprehension on this issue that so might have in its abuse. If we want to make a change in our communitites it begins with our youth and that means putting the effort into teaching the values of freedom and liberty...

[moostraks]

Dreyfuss is using communist hegelian dialectic right there. The founding fathers used logic...the dialectic of rational thinking: Dreyfuss wants to use Inductive reasoning (no creator only science) but Our Founding Fathers followed both Deductive REasoning and inductive reasoning...John Locke's natural law philosophy.

The scientifically based political ideas of man's natural rights to property were based on the writings of John Locke, who historically may be one of Englands most rational thinkers. He is remembered as "the intellectual father" of the U.S. Locke used both deductive and inductive reasoning, as did the Americans who inherited his ideas. Locke subscribed to the three levels of law: top-God's law, middle-Natural law, bottom-Civil Law, and he believed that each type of law must correspond up to the next level. Men believed that while God's law was unknowable, it was possible to understand God's law through an understanding of nature, and that civil law was bound by the rules of natural law. The realization of U.S. laws and citizen's inalienable rights to individual freedom were attained via both the belief in a Creator and purely scientific, rational thinking.


You can not take God out of understanding America's civil laws...because it was based on Lockean natural law philosophy. Tones

(Marx...and the communists took God out of the process...therefore...you cant get the true ideas of the Founding Fathers..you get the Material dialectic..of marx based on the hegelian dialectic. )

I went back and re-listened because the first time I just surface listened and did not read too deeply into what he was saying. Now considering he is coming at this from an atheistic viewpoint, he is going to see things differently than a person of faith would. However, I feel that there is some worth in what he is saying and that we should be able to relay issues and information on matters with facts to reaffirm our stances that also reflect our faith. Faith is not achieved in a vacuum.

I think you are a bit too paranoid just because someone is seeing things in a different light. Maybe I am not as black and white as you but think most people are shades of grey. You seem to be an absolutist and cannot see that there is value from another unless they think as you do. Henceforth why you seem to make sweeping accusations when you are disagreed with on issues.

Would I want to discuss philosophy with Dreyfuss, probably not. However I think he is making some salient points on needing to find the pride and respect for our past in order to find the value in political participation and to take the responsibilty of voting seriously. Also the fact that he is telling people to look beyond the snippets and think and evaluate rather than just go on mindless fear mongering and superstitions.

If we want to truly make a difference in our future we become educated on the facts to the best of our abilities,change our own outlook, become involved, and challenge our youth to reflect what we value. It cannot be done without heavy effort put forth. I would not want Dreyfuss or his ilk educating my children but that doesn't mean his rationalizations as surface level as they were are so outlandish. As long as we have school choice and parents respect the responsibilty of educating their young then we can retain the capacity to change the future...

[tonesforjonesbones]

I remember when they taught Americanism vs. Communism in high school. Then they changed the name to Comparative Institutions...now it is gone. Tones

[Malakai]

Hmm pretty vague stuff, didn't get anything out of it myself.

Some sense in there but mostly just prattle =)

[Knightskye]

Hmm pretty vague stuff, didn't get anything out of it myself.

Some sense in there but mostly just prattle =)

Helps if you have the volume up. :D