Prepare and eat a light meal, refill your glass, then open your philosophy book to:
"That is, the Founding Fathers took the English constitutional principles, the institutional forms that already existed in the colonies, and set them down on paper. They were not inventing a new society. They only unified and systematized already existing principles. So this is not a revolutionary movement in any way. As a counterbalance to this, some movements which, in the Brazilian popular culture, in the Brazilian mass media, and school textbooks, are regarded as reactionary and anti-revolutionary, such as the Italian Fascism, or even Nazism, are obviously revolutionary. Why? Because they raised the proposition of a radically new society: they would destroy all existing institutions and rebuild everything from scratch. In the German case, this was an even more radically revolutionary because the foundations of the new society to be created were derived from a recent science, evolutionist biology."
You may need to break this up over a few sittings. It's worth your time.
What makes a revolutionary a revolutionary? Just where did the movement of "movements" origniate? I never really gave it much thought.
(via protein wisdom)