Quotes About Ideology

The main ideology of all religions is based on the measuring scale of several sins, from left to right, like a swinging pendulum.

You can try to mix capitalism and socialism together, but you cannot be both at the same time! In the end, one system will always take over the other. Resulting in a true/false friendship.

This was the ideology of the European enlightened despots of the eighteenth century, especially Prussia's Frederick the Great, who ruled through a meritocratic class of efficient, educated, benevolent bureaucrats, who, more than ordinary citizens, could divine the spirit of the times and knew which way the arc of history bent, so they could speed it along in the right direction.

Caesar is only mentioned once in the gospels, and there Jesus says that there's a clear division between God and Caesar, a split of church and state, so that never the twain shall meet. Well, not so fast. We'll get to that. It sounds suspiciously modern. Did Jesus really anticipate post-Enlightenment Western ideology so exactly?

Part of the problem in our contemporary debates about asylum seekers or about the Middle East is that our politicians still want to present us with the dream of progress, the steady forward advance of the golden dream of freedom; and when the tide of human misery washes up on our beaches or when people in cultures very different from our own seem not to want the kind of freedom we had in mind, it is not just socially but ideologically untidy and inconvenient.

Communists are the last optimists.

I would be a socialist if I thought it would work.

An astute observer wrote in 1924 that American voters preferred to "cherish the unrealities they have absorbed" based upon "the primal instinct to defeat the side they hate or fear.

Like every alternative to Christianity, the mechanistic worldview was essentially a substitute religion, a mental idol.

False ideas are the greatest obstacle to the reception of the gospel."13 Not pop culture. Not consumerism. Not moral temptation. False ideas.

liberals have no compelling truth, no 'good news,' to proclaim.

We can call this view liberalism, employing a definition by the self-described liberal philosopher Peter Berkowitz. In his words, "Each generation of liberal thinkers" focuses on "dimensions of life previously regarded as fixed by nature," then seeks to show that in reality they are "subject to human will and remaking.

A worldview can be replaced only by another worldview.

Christians are called to tear down mental fortresses and liberate people from the power of false ideas.

The public's dilemma is to know how to consume the news with an ability to extract opinion from the simple facts and evidence... The best solution to the fact/opinion dilemma is to acquire more diverse information across the ideological and geological divide. If you find yourself relying on one source of information for the news, whether right or left, you are likely to be exposed to more opinion that reinforces rather than challenges your own.

Liberal hand-wringing over the electoral victory of the far-right in Italy will not extend to its core ideology: anti-migration. The EU will continue to support Italy's abandonment and terrorizing of people on the move. Anti-migrant politics truly is the fascist foot in the door.

Like Russia's gangsterism and Bush's cronyism, contemporary Iraq is a creation of the fifty-year crusade to privatize the world. Rather than being disowned by its creators, it deserves to be seen as the purest incarnation yet of the ideology that gave it birth.

Barry Goldwater famously argued that extremism in the defense of liberty was no vice. Our story will show that it is.

But the construction of a revisionist history of DDT gives the game away, because it came so long after the science was settled, far too long to argue that scientists had not come to agreement, that there was still a real scientific debate. The game here, as before, was to defend an extreme free market ideology. But in this case, they didn't just deny the facts of science. They denied the facts of history.

Many years later, the right wing continued to lambast Sagan well after the man was dead, while Seitz's attack on nuclear winter was reprised by Rush Limbaugh in the 1990s and by novelist Michael Crichton in the 2000s.110 What was going on? The answer is that the right-wing turn against science had begun.

The most terrible thing about terrorism, the thing that people fond of saying "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" didn't get, was that even siding with the terrorists gave you no immunity. The terrorist never knew his victims, and didn't give a damn. When you sided with them, you were taking sides against yourself.

There is no place in a fanatic's head where reason can enter.

Is it possible to be so blinded by your own doctrine that you would actually take human life in God's name and think you are doing Him a service?

You know, in the Soviet Union they used to have a tradition of ordering scientists to change their studies to conform with the ideology then acceptable to the state. And scientists in the rest of the world found that laughable as well as tragic.