Talk:Frank Meyer (political philosopher)

message: I think one of his sons is named Eugene, so I wonder whether it is the same family?--Jrm2007 (talk) 17:34, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  relation to Eugene Meyer (1875-1959) 

message: In the /* lede */ section, it says, in part,  Fusionism has been summed by one of his followers as [...] .
IMHO, the word "summed" probably should be either [S1] replaced by "called", (in which case the later word "as" would probably be removed); or else [S2] maybe the word "summed" should be replaced by "summed up". 
In fact, I haven't taken the time [yet!] to check the history, to see whether [a] the word "up" got removed some time after that sentence -- (containing the word "summed") -- got added, or whether [b] the word "up" was never there in the first place.  However I am curious about that, and I might investigate it (maybe later). 
Meanwhile... any advice or comments would be welcome. --Mike Schwartz (talk) 17:39, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  suggestion for a small change to the wording  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Frank Meyer (political philosopher). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120110134608/http://www.conservative.org/acuf/our-philosophy/ to http://www.conservative.org/acuf/our-philosophy/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120110134608/http://www.conservative.org/acuf/our-philosophy/ to http://www.conservative.org/acuf/our-philosophy/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:58, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article has a defensive tone in parts, as if the editor(s) are determined to defend Frank Meyer's good name against criticism. This bit stands out to me as particularly egregious: "Ronald Hamowy argued Meyer's synthesis cannot hold because there was a fundamental difference between a classical liberalism that promoted markets and freedom and a traditionalist conservatism that resisted it. But that view was refuted historically by the fact that the first industrial revolution began in Clairvaux in 1115 with a more scientific agriculture and advanced water-powered machinery, beginning capitalism in a fundamentally traditional and even feudal society." The second sentence isn't sourced, and treats as uncontested the following propositions:
A. That there was an "industrial revolution" at Clairvaux in 1115.
B. That "capitalism" in 12th century France had the same economic and cultural ramifications as "markets and freedom" in Europe and the United States during the 19th and 20th centuries.
C. That capitalism beginning in a "traditional and even feudal society" means it is compatible with the long-term existence of said society. The subsequent history of France doesn't seem to bear that out.
Hence why I'm removing the second sentence. --Ismail (talk) 08:35, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality