Seth Finkelstein, reluctant cypherpunk?

[dmolnar]

On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Jim Choate wrote:
> 
> That the populate in general will find a way to resolve the disparities
> and problems by simple understanding and toleration.

Has anyone ever done a study - a worthwhile, entertaining, informative,
cautionary study - of rhetoric employed by revolutionaries? The "simple
understanding and toleration" here makes me think of other solutions which
have been put forth as "simple"; other principles of "brotherly love"
or perhaps "universal peace" which I associate with radical and reform
texts from the late 1800s and early 1900s (though, alas, without examples
to draw on right now - I want to say Sinclair's _The Jungle_ and Emma
Goldman's essays)

Also the great rhetorical question "WHAT IS TO BE DONE?" comes to mind -
the punch line after a description of the sorry state of the world, often
accompanied implicitly or explicitly with a helpful list of answers. Great
projects set in motion, called to action by this question, hell-bent on
applying the "simple" principles set forth, presumably validated,
previously. 

We (who?) know how those projects turned out, don't we?

The point is -- I'm not sure that using this kind of rhetoric is helpful
to anyone any more. Independent of what the argument at hand is. 

thanks, 
-David