Fascism is the pathological endpoint of Locke's sovereign-self axiom. It is what liberalism becomes when its institutional scaffolding collapses and the sovereign self is collectivized as Volk. It is not liberalism's opposite but its unmediated form.
@BobMurphyEcon Simul iustus et peccator. Nature corrupted by the Fall, will in bondage, no capacity to initiate or contribute. Saved by grace alone through faith alone. Faith itself as gift, not a work. No works-righteousness, no cooperation prior to grace.
@BobMurphyEcon Reformed/Lutherans hold that justification is forensic, a change in relational status (imputation of alien righteousness) and not a change in ontological substance. Luther broke with Ockham's nominalism that he studied at Uni. Extra nos is anti-nominalist. Presupposes essences.
@HoppeQuotes ... And Romans 7, "what I hate, I do", is a counterexample to "man always acts on his highest ranked preference", unless that claim is just true by definition, in which case it isn't apodictic at all.
@HoppeQuotes Mises claims you can't deny you're acting without acting, and concludes the ranking behind that action is self-generated. Paul makes the same move in Romans, but concludes the opposite. The will is dead and only acts because raised from outside itself ...
@Burgess80710@BobMurphyEcon Joshua, it is a serious error to confuse American Pentecostalism with Protestantism (Lutheran or Reformed). Pentecostalism is oddly similar to Montanism.
@BobMurphyEcon@MondoVicium Okay. Big difference between "the self doesn't exist" and "the self doesn't precede its relations". One denies personhood, the other locates it. So, not Durkheim, it's Paul-Augustine-Luther. The person exists toward another, not apart from one. Not the Enlightenment self.
@MondoVicium@BobMurphyEcon No. Ontologically, the individual exists in relation to others. The Enlightenment's atomistic individual is another convenient myth, a fabrication.