I think that communism was a major force for violence for more than 100 years, because it was built into its ideology - that progress comes through class struggle, often violent.
Interpretation
The quote critiques communism as an ideology that has historically led to violence due to its emphasis on class struggle.
In this quote, Steven Pinker highlights the inherent flaw in the communist ideology, specifically its reliance on class struggle as a mechanism for progress. He argues that this ideological foundation has resulted in significant violence throughout the history of communism, suggesting that the promotion of conflict as a means of societal advancement can have detrimental consequences.
In practice
This quote could be used in a discussion on the historical impact of political ideologies in a political science class.
The foundation of individual rights is the assumption that people have wants and needs and are authorities on what those wants and needs are. If people's stated desires were just some kind of erasable inscription or reprogrammable brainwashing, any atrocity could be justified.
The linguistic clumsiness of tourists and students might be the price we pay for the linguistic genius we displayed as babies, just as the decrepitude of age in the price we pay for the vigor of youth.
If we are not to abandon values such as peace and equality, or our commitments to science and truth, then we must pry these values away from claims about our psychological makeup that are vulnerable to being proven false.
We adults protect ourselves with laws, police, workplace regulations and social norms and there is no conceivable reason why children should be left more vulnerable, other that laziness or callousness in considering what life is like from their point of view.
The idea that children are passive repositories to be shaped by their parents has been massively overstated. A child's peer group is a far greater determinant of its development and achievements than parental aspiration.
Reason is non-negotiable. Try to argue against it, or to exclude it from some realm of knowledge, and you've already lost the argument, because you're using reason to make your case. ... We don't "believe" in reason.
It is not scientific doubt, not atheism, not pantheism, not agnosticism, that in our day and in this land is likely to quench the light of the gospel. It is a proud, sensuous, selfish, luxurious, church-going, hollow-hearted prosperity.
The zionist argument to justify Israel's present occupation of Arab Palestine has no intelligent or legal basis in history.
Zionism demands a publicly recognized and legally secured homeland in Palestine for the Jewish people. This platform is unchangeable.
I wanted to give money to people like this woman so that they would be free from the moneylenders to sell their product at the price which the markets gave them - which was much higher than what the trader was giving them.
A right to jury trial is granted to criminal defendants in order to prevent oppression by the Government.
I'm a man for whom the outside world is an inner Reality.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.