|
Main Paineframe posted:By that definition, any political reforms by definitions are also material conditions reforms, because increasing a group's political power also increases their ability to push for policies affecting their material conditions. You are looking at this from a very "top-down" perspective. In reality, the peasants and workers who marched for bread and land in the streets of Paris, St. Petersburg, or Shanghai were more concerned with getting their basic needs for survival met, than with increasing their group's political power. quote:In the French and Russian Revolutions, material conditions were actually a side issue: the primary focus of both revolutions was around dismantling social and political barriers, typically a backlash against the extremely rigid class structures of feudalism. That may have been what motivated the elites who rode the waves of public resentment against their monarchs, but the public resentment was fueled by impossibly high grain prices, regressive taxes, extremely low pay, unpopular wars that disproportionately affected the poor, etc. These are all material conditions. Had the peasants and workers been fed and paid they most likely would not have risen up against Louis XVI or Nicholas II. Calling these material concerns "side issues" is completely ahistorical. quote:In China, as far as I can tell, the initial 1911 revolution was primarily motivated by ethnic resentment against the Manchu elite and nationalistic resentment against foreign involvement in China, as well as a reaction to the failure of various attempts at political reform. Public resentment in the 1911 revolution was partially fueled by the government's complete inability to deal with crises like the 1906 famine, which killed up to 25 million. That is very much a material condition. Majorian fucked around with this message at 07:31 on Feb 26, 2024 |
# ? Feb 26, 2024 07:24 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 06:37 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:In the French and Russian Revolutions, material conditions were actually a side issue: the primary focus of both revolutions was around dismantling social and political barriers, typically a backlash against the extremely rigid class structures of feudalism. Those are material conditions, too. Here’s a way think about it. Have you ever boarded an old battleship or destroyer? Like WWII era. They’ve got these metal placards posted around “Never forget material conditions”. Here they’re referencing the damage control state of the vessel. Very simplified it is: are the water tight doors open or are they shut? That’s the material conditions on a ship Social and political barriers are open or shut doors. Those are real conditions that exist independently from and outside of one’s consciousness. They’re no less material conditions than the organization of a railroad, or a horizontal global supply chain.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 07:45 |
Bar Ran Dun posted:Those are material conditions, too. Here’s a way think about it. Have you ever boarded an old battleship or destroyer? Like WWII era. They’ve got these metal placards posted around “Never forget material conditions”. Here they’re referencing the damage control state of the vessel. Very simplified it is: are the water tight doors open or are they shut? That’s the material conditions on a ship You have constructed a definition which is impossibly, uselessly, unfalsifiably broad. This is, of course, not a new problem with this line of rhetoric. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 08:00 on Feb 26, 2024 |
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 07:54 |
|
Is racism a material condition? cause everything comes down to racism in the end
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 08:00 |
|
Discendo Vox posted:edit: god drat it, let's try a fifth loving time. I don't think acknowledging that economic framing is an integral part of fascist movements because it's effective for certain purposes is the same thing as believing said framing. Economic framing allows them to obfuscate their true intentions and present them as legitimate to outsiders because being out and proud about their true intentions makes the initial hurdle of getting a hearing much higher. If economic arguments had no purpose in fascist rhetoric, they wouldn't bother to make them. Trump wouldn't waste time blathering about reopening steel mills and coal mines and doing trade wars with China and talking about how he's an expert businessman who'll fix America's broken economy. I'm essentially saying that economic concerns are an effective tool for fascists like dogwhistling is an effective tool for racists. Those who are already part of the movement understand what the movement is actually about, and those outside of the movement can credulously buy the bullshit at face value.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 08:03 |
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Is racism a material condition? But racism comes down to excusing the abuse of our-groups for materialistic purposes.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 08:06 |
Kanos posted:I don't think acknowledging that economic framing is an integral part of fascist movements because it's effective for certain purposes is the same thing as believing said framing. It has already been communicated to you, and you have already acknowledged, that the economic framing is not an effective part of the rhetorical framing of fascism. it's a pretense. You already acknowledged it is a pretense. It is not what makes the rhetoric effectve. You have done nothing to show that it is effective, and multiple users, multiple times, have explained that it is not the means by which people engage with fascism. Kanos posted:Economic framing allows them to obfuscate their true intentions and present them as legitimate to outsiders because being out and proud about their true intentions makes the initial hurdle of getting a hearing much higher. You are the only person who is accepting either the prevalence of this framing or its success. You are the person who has constructed and internalized this. Only you. Kanos posted:If economic arguments had no purpose in fascist rhetoric, they wouldn't bother to make them. Trump wouldn't waste time blathering about reopening steel mills and coal mines and doing trade wars with China and talking about how he's an expert businessman who'll fix America's broken economy. Let me make sure you understand what you are saying. Because Donald Trump wastes time blathering about something, you think it must be because it is effective? Why? Why do you think it is effective when you have already been presented evidence that it is not, and acknowledged that it is not? Kanos posted:I'm essentially saying that economic concerns are an effective tool for fascists like dogwhistling is an effective tool for racists. Those who are already part of the movement understand what the movement is actually about, and those outside of the movement can credulously buy the bullshit at face value. You are demanding that we engage with what you know is bullshit at the expense of engaging with what you know is reality. Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Is racism a material condition? Anything can be a material condition, or not a material condition, depending on the rhetorical needs of the user.
|
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 08:11 |
|
Discendo Vox posted:You have constructed a definition which is impossibly, uselessly, unfalsifiably broad. This is, of course, not a new problem with this line of rhetoric. Navy seems do well enough with it. Thus far I’m the only one that’s proposed a definition. The conditions of reality as it actually exists outside our brains. Edit : I guess what I’m saying is that when that outside reality can kill you, and it will on ships, one checks and rechecks what actual conditions really are. Bar Ran Dun fucked around with this message at 08:18 on Feb 26, 2024 |
# ? Feb 26, 2024 08:16 |
Bar Ran Dun posted:Navy seems do well enough with it. Thus far I’m the only one that’s proposed a definition. Your "definition" is just anything the user wants to be true. It includes whatever the user wants it to, and rejects whatever they want to disregard.
|
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 08:21 |
|
The marxist conception of social base (means of production) and superstructure (literally everything else) seems apropos re: 'what are material conditions.'
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 08:24 |
|
Discendo Vox posted:It has already been communicated to you, and you have already acknowledged, that the economic framing is not an effective part of the rhetorical framing of fascism. it's a pretense. You already acknowledged it is a pretense. It is not what makes the rhetoric effectve. You have done nothing to show that it is effective, and multiple users, multiple times, have explained that it is not the means by which people engage with fascism. Yes, it's a pretense, but pretenses are very important when you're attempting to get people to platform and listen to ideas that are generally considered abhorrent or beyond the pale. Understanding the infection vector is nearly as important as understanding the disease itself. quote:You are the only person who is accepting either the prevalence of this framing or its success. You are the person who has constructed and internalized this. Only you. It's been pretty demonstrably effective, because this discussion started before I even entered it, has come up repeatedly in these threads in the past, and also appears frequently in the media(the aforementioned NYT Trump Safaris).
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 08:35 |
Kanos posted:Yes, it's a pretense, but pretenses are very important when you're attempting to get people to platform and listen to ideas that are generally considered abhorrent or beyond the pale. Understanding the infection vector is nearly as important as understanding the disease itself. It has already been repeatedly demonstrated to you that the pretense is not the means by which people are joining, rationalizing, believing, or identifying with fascism. If it were, the constituent population of fascists would be different. Kanos posted:It's been pretty demonstrably effective, because this discussion started before I even entered it, has come up repeatedly in these threads in the past, and also appears frequently in the media(the aforementioned NYT Trump Safaris). Your examples are people being wrong, you chief among them. You are saying "I know this isn't how it works, but it's how it works," and simultaneously, "I know they are lying, but they are telling the truth," with the addition of "I know I am wrong, but I am right."
|
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 08:39 |
|
What’s been shown is that actually having low socioeconomic status doesn’t make you vote Trump. That doesn’t mean that material concerns aren’t what’s being activated in people who shouldn’t need to be so worried about them but do and therefore vote Trump. It also doesn’t mean that those people don’t use the filled of materialist concerns as an excuse for doing what they want to do anyway. I agree with whoever said earlier that the rich are the biggest class warriors. People at the bottom of the socioeconomic scale are often forced to think about material concerns, but does it seem so unlikely that all other things being equal they might be people who tend to pay less attention to material concerns than people whose distinguishing characteristic is that they’ve amassed lots of wealth? Ie that the poorer people might be, broadly speaking, in terms of their traits, less materialistic. And that richer people with less to actually worry about may nonetheless put more weight on “my future economic wellbeing” as a reason to vote for a fascist they think will feather their nests? That fascists may be using false rhetoric to appeal to wrongly held material concerns among selfish people all to ready to believe that oppressing others will ensure they can have a bigger house?
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 09:52 |
|
Staluigi posted:very well done people This one made me puff out my cheeks and exhale, drat. Like it's good, but holy poo poo
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 11:41 |
|
Ms Adequate posted:This one made me puff out my cheeks and exhale, drat. Like it's good, but holy poo poo yeah i saw the video and a lifetime of gallows humor as compensation for horrible realities was right there for me if he has not died yet, he will soon, unless there's some kind of unearthly new technology in burn care i know gently caress all about
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 11:55 |
|
The Artificial Kid posted:What’s been shown is that actually having low socioeconomic status doesn’t make you vote Trump. Right, that's more or less what I was getting at. I think the whole idea of "Trump tapped into something that was being ignored and Dems should look into that" has been proven false -- at the very least, after the 2016 election. Trump's appeal ultimately ended up being something much darker that shouldn't be chased by anyone. But I do think there's still a vacuum looking to be filled. The fact that Trump filled the vacuum (only once, hopefully) just isn't necessarily as instructive as many people had assumed.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 13:18 |
|
The lesson of Trump is that there's a lot of unengaged people who can be activated into a passionate base if you actually give them something other than the same old, same old. Just, you know, find a demographic other than frustrated bigots who tuned out because they thought society didn't want to say the quiet part out loud anymore. There are "every day normal people" Republicans, though they'll almost all tell you they're independents, who you might be able to convince to be better. They largely vote Republican because that's their team and social circle. It's very case by case and you're almost certainly better off looking for an actually cohesive group of politically unengaged people. But you absolutely shouldn't expect to reason with MAGA cultists, Dominionists, Libertarians, Business Ghouls, or Remnant Cold Warriors.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 13:45 |
|
The Artificial Kid posted:But racism comes down to excusing the abuse of our-groups for materialistic purposes. The old saying "everything is really about sex, except sex, which is really about power" is still true, but in America we can also have "everything is really about race, except race, which is really about money."
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 14:35 |
|
Ronna McDaniel officially steps down after Trump criticizes her and endorses new leadership at the RNC. The party nominees picking new leadership at the RNC/DNC during an election year is normal practice, but letting Trump do it before the primary is over is basically just an acknowledgement that he runs the party. She is expected to be replaced by a new co-chair system run by Lara Trump and 2020 Trump campaign official/North Carolina GOP chairman Michael Whatley. Trump's top campaign aid will take over as COO of the RNC. The party is also cancelling a planned "election autopsy" to determine what went wrong in 2020 and 2022 for the party. It is unclear if Ronna will go back to using her previous last name of "Romney" that she changed when she previously took over the RNC. https://twitter.com/jonallendc/status/1762080401965597002 quote:RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel announces her resignation
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 15:13 |
|
The only thing I will remember about her is how she stopped using the Romney name because Trump loving hated Romney’s guts
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 15:22 |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:
literally Never Change, GOP
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 15:28 |
|
FlamingLiberal posted:The only thing I will remember about her is how she stopped using the Romney name because Trump loving hated Romney’s guts Another in the long line of people who debased themselves for Trump and got nothing in return for it.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 15:39 |
|
Angry_Ed posted:Another in the long line of people who debased themselves for Trump and got nothing in return for it. She got to leave Michigan for 7 years.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 15:43 |
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Material concerns and racism are not mutually exclusive motivating forces.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 16:05 |
Oracle posted:Wow the bolded is utter bullshit. I cannot tell you how many people with real problems fall for con artists peddling fake solutions for real problems, from ‘invest in bitcoin to get rich quick’ to ‘I just got diagnosed with cancer I’m going to go on this fruitatian diet instead of have surgery and chemo’ to ‘I’ll just buy a ton of lottery tickets to solve my financial problems because someone has to win.’ The bigger issue is that a lot of people aren't being offered any actual solutions at all. It's not like we have universal health care or a UBI. If we did, people would like them! We know this because Medicaid and Medicare are very popular among people who have them, as is Social Security. In the total absence of actual help, yes, people fall for con jobs. They're desperate.
|
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 16:07 |
|
https://twitter.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1761926124588687546 So here's Donald Trump all but admitting he took documents with the expectation that the federal government would pay him to get stuff back.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 16:16 |
|
I'm just going to reflexively assume that it's not true that Nixon sold $18 million of documents back to the feds, so what's the real story there?
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 16:18 |
|
haveblue posted:I'm just going to reflexively assume that it's not true that Nixon sold $18 million of documents back to the feds, so what's the real story there?
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 16:22 |
|
haveblue posted:I'm just going to reflexively assume that it's not true that Nixon sold $18 million of documents back to the feds, so what's the real story there? You're instinct looks to be right. They didn't pay $18m to get the documents back. It was a settlement for claims that the Watergate tapes and other materials that were seized without compensation. And even then, 6m of that was for improvements to the Nixon Library. quote:WASHINGTON — https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-jun-13-mn-40455-story.html
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 16:23 |
|
Thank you for making all of my arguments significantly better than I ever could, hah.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 16:44 |
|
Velocity Raptor posted:You're instinct looks to be right. They didn't pay $18m to get the documents back. It was a settlement for claims that the Watergate tapes and other materials that were seized without compensation. And even then, 6m of that was for improvements to the Nixon Library. Isn't this also what led to the Presidential Records Act being created?
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 16:47 |
|
"I'm sure you didn't poo poo your pants on stage. What was the explanation for what happened that our viewers will 100% buy and you'll be off the hook." "I poo poo MY PANTS AND EVERYONE LOVED IT!"
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 16:53 |
|
I'm pretty sure that Hannity interview is several months old at this point.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 16:54 |
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Yeah, addressing material concerns is prophylaxis and prevention, not cure, for fascism. It also, you know, helps people, which is nice. The reason I chimed in with my initial post is that sometimes people take the basic fact ("material conditions should be improved") and twist that in to the actual cause or rhetoric they support... for example when someone who routinely handwaves away the blatant racism of the pre-Trump GOP (like Philadelphia, MS or bleugh people and their foodstamps) tries to cast Trump as the fault of elitist libs mocking the economically anxious. "We should work to improve material conditions" shouldn't necessitate we accept the bullshit in silence just because some Trump voters are legitimately economically anxious and some libs are elitist trash. When the overall theory has been debunked, pointing out that the pushed narrative is built on lies doesn't mean we can't advocate for improving material conditions anyway. The second part of the two step, when pushed by "former" Republicans (or, as we'll see below, well regarded progressives who happen to fawn over bigots) is always that electoral success and improvement in material conditions will come from setting aside cultural disagreements. For instance, how important is breaking up big tech? Important enough, according to Matt Stoller, that we ought to partner with the worst of the right-wing trash. quote:“Consolidated corporate power is the biggest problem that we’re facing right now in our politics,” said Matt Stoller, research director at the anti-monopoly group American Economic Liberties Project, who regularly works with populist figures on the right, including APP. He said divisions within both parties about antitrust changes mean that supporters “have to cobble together a majority.” quote:One progressive antitrust advocate, who requested anonymity to discuss the dynamic candidly, said that given they have the same goal as APP on this issue, “there’s no reason to be oppositional to them out of spite.” But who is the APP? quote:The American Principles Project is one of the only right-leaning groups agitating in favor of overhauling trust-busting laws to rein in Google, Facebook, Amazon and Apple. In theory, that would make it a useful ally to Democrats who need bipartisan support to revamp U.S. antitrust laws. Remember kids, when the goal is breaking up big tech, you'll have to break a few eggs (trans rights, racism, medical autonomy) to make an omelet for your new besties who oppose big tech for censoring conservative opinions ("lower taxes?" "No, you know the ones") and antivax bullshit. You shouldn't worry though, I'm sure it's mostly rhetori--- quote:Another Democratic strategist who works on antitrust issues said the Democrats need support from populist Republicans to push bills across the finish line, so “intel sharing across a variety of groups of varying ideologies is vital.” Sharing intelligence with overt fascists has never gone wrong in the past, right? This is all tl;dr for "do material conditions motivate political and movement behavior?" is an interesting enough question but
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 17:29 |
|
Discendo Vox posted:It has already been communicated to you, and you have already acknowledged, that the economic framing is not an effective part of the rhetorical framing of fascism. it's a pretense. You already acknowledged it is a pretense. It is not what makes the rhetoric effectve. You have done nothing to show that it is effective, and multiple users, multiple times, have explained that it is not the means by which people engage with fascism. The pretense is effective in as much as it convinces the media to look sympathetically at racists because they accept the pretense at face value. And the pretense is effective in giving moderates/centrists/"non-MAGA" Republicans the ability to deny their own inherent racism and convince themselves that they're not racist, actually while supporting policies that are implicitly and explicitly racist/anti-lgbtq and/or fascist.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 17:47 |
|
Paracaidas posted:This is all tl;dr for "do material conditions motivate political and movement behavior?" is an interesting enough question but Im not sure why working with bad people towards a good end is inherently bad, the way you seem to feel it is? That is something literally anyone who improved things politicially has done. I can understand the important of limiting how much you empower their ability to so unrelated bad stuff, and why intelligence sharing could be a problem, but productive effort towards mutual good goals should be the goal, since you're never gonna get anything done by limiting yourself to working with people you agree with on everything.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 17:55 |
|
GlyphGryph posted:Im not sure why working with bad people towards a good end is inherently bad, the way you seem to feel it is? That is something literally anyone who improved things politicially has done. I can understand the important of limiting how much you empower their ability to so unrelated bad stuff, and why intelligence sharing could be a problem, but productive effort towards mutual good goals should be the goal, since you're never gonna get anything done by limiting yourself to working with people you agree with on everything. quote:“It doesn’t make sense to work with someone that doesn’t share our values and doesn’t share our goal,” said Jeremie Greer, co-founder and executive director of economic rights group Liberation in a Generation. “I don’t think we’re fighting for the same thing.” Greer argued that the push for antitrust reform is essentially about increasing equality and strengthening democracy — and a group fighting against LGBTQ and minority rights is fundamentally opposed to that work Blumenthal's press release posted:“Our bill provides specific tools to stop Big Tech companies from driving toxic content at kids and to hold them accountable for putting profits over safety,” said Blumenthal. “Record levels of hopelessness and despair—a national teen mental health crisis—have been fueled by black box algorithms featuring eating disorders, bullying, suicidal thoughts, and more. Kids and parents want to take back control over their online lives. They are demanding safeguards, means to disconnect, and a duty of care for social media. Our bill has strong bipartisan momentum. And it has growing support from young people who’ve seen Big Tech’s destruction, parents who’ve lost children, mental health experts, and public interest advocates. It’s an idea whose time has come.” Hell yeah, big tech shouldn't be allowed to commit and profit off such blatant public harms. This is a motive I genuinely agree with. Let's check in with his bipartisan coauthor quote:Well, there are a couple of things, of course, protecting minor children from the transgender and this culture and that influence. And I would add to that watching what’s happening on social media. Oh. Turns out that in order to get Republicans on board we had to class "trans culture and influence" as a public harm. Oh well. I'm sure that's the only downside quote:“I view [KOSA] as a blank check for Attorneys General to be able to intimidate in any way that they can,” Philips told Jezebel. “They wouldn’t even need to necessarily pass this [state] legislation if you give them this tool,” she said, referring to proposals in Texas and South Carolina. I'm down with anyone who wants to vote for and advocate for a good bill that doesn't actively create harms. The downside of seeking common cause with bigots and fash like the APP and Blackburn is they're in it FOR the harms. And the downside of a lot of the Democratic party is they've repeatedly shown themselves willing to throw people under the bus if it accomplishes their priorities or campaign promises or makes their donors happy.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 18:29 |
|
Cimber posted:Can someone explain to me why the media reports that when Trump scores 60 percent of the primary votes its an amazing victory for him, but if Biden doesn't score 90 percent he's washed up and it's game over for the democrats? Because the media wants a horserace, and Biden is unpopular among liberal momeyed interests.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 18:47 |
|
AsInHowe posted:Because the media wants a horserace, and Biden is unpopular among liberal momeyed interests. It's more that the media has a mostly out of date focus on "home states" and Trump beating Haley by 19 points in her "home state" is a huge and embarrassing victory in the narrative. Even disregarding the fact that "home state = victory" hasn't been true for a long time, Haley also hasn't been elected to office in South Carolina for a decade.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 19:26 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 06:37 |
|
AsInHowe posted:Because the media wants a horserace, and Biden is unpopular among liberal momeyed interests.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2024 19:31 |