|
Nintendo Kid posted:Accelerationism can't work, since most of the time it just entrenches power, and the rest of the time it entrenches power and then makes things suck hard for a long time when it goes away. OK, so you just went straight to beheading. Even I didn't go that far, and I'm today's featured crazy. Thanks for making me look sane in comparison!
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:03 |
|
|
Quidam Viator posted:OK, so you just went straight to beheading. Even I didn't go that far, and I'm today's featured crazy. Thanks for making me look sane in comparison! Killing people you disagree with at least has a moderate chance of working. Actively supporting the people you disagree with, aka accelerationism, literally cannot work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Killing people you disagree with at least has a moderate chance of working. Actively supporting the people you disagree with, aka accelerationism, literally cannot work. Hey, you know what? Maybe you're right. Do you have the stomach for it, you loving pretentious pussy? I'd like you to pull a Caesar, recruit some legions, and slaughter millions of Americans in their churches, their GOP conventions, and in their homes. Maybe pull an Alesia, and hack off all the hand of Karl Rove and the rest, seal them with pitch, and send them around the country to tell others the tale of what happens when you oppose the mighty Nintendo Kid. You motherfucker. We left that kind of barbarism centuries ago. The point of my proposed experiment is to expose it, censure it, and end it forever, to have clean hands because all we did was say to the GOP, "Implement your policies. Do as you wish. We believe you are savages and your actions will prove it, and we hope this is the last time anyone thinks that your tactics can work."
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
^^^ , this is pretty sanctimonious just two posts after you were openly rooting for the deaths of Republican childrenQuidam Viator posted:In the end, my ideas could be wrong. But I'd STILL accept the TOXX and the ban, if a single person, just one of you, could give me a believable solution to fixing the right wing in America before the icecaps melt, the methane clathrates choke the atmosphere, and the economic bubble explodes. I genuinely want to save us all from destruction, and I feel urgency. Howzabout this: I would rather elect people now who will take some steps to mitigate the damage. Seeing some effects is basically inevitable at this point, but when they become too obvious to deny, I'd rather still have a chance at fixing it because at least the Democrats halfassed some carbon treaties and invested in low-carbon energy than elect Republicans who will floor the accelerator and refuse to see reality until the water is literally flooding their penthouses. "Yay the tsunamis and famines and floods finally wised America up and they went full enviro-socialist in the 2032 election!  Oh wait poo poo, we have no regulatory regime, or technologies in the pipeline, or even any comprehensive proposals because they gutted all climate science and alternative energy funding and spent it on wars, tax cuts, and that space-age soul-detector to find out if menstruation is murder"
VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Feb 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Killing people you disagree with at least has a moderate chance of working. Actively supporting the people you disagree with, aka accelerationism, literally cannot work. I'd be down for French Revolution 2: Electric Boogaloo. That would probably be better than turning the entire country into Kansas.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
Quidam Viator posted:No, I don't want any god drat omelets. I genuinely believe that GOP voters who think they're sitting on their eggs to hatch them are being conned into cracking them for short term gain, and I don't think reasonable debate will change their mind. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kshama_Sawant Luckily not everyone is ready to give in.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
I mean there's a lot of reasons to not like Hillary but she's one of the more consistently pro-environment politicians I know of. A comprehensive green energy policy was pretty center to her campaign in 2008. And Barack Obama has done a lot to obstruct the Keystone Pipeline to his credit, an issue important to me since it affects me on a personal level (there are issues regarding native land rights and the pipeline here in Oklahoma.)
Tricky Dick Nixon fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Feb 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:"Yay the tsunamis and famines and floods finally wised America up and they went full enviro-socialist in the 2032 election! I agree, the main problem with accelerationism is that we'd need to spend decades undoing all the damage done by the insanity of full on Tea Party Republicanism before we even got to the point of addressing current problems. If you're going that route, might as well skip the intervening step and go straight to guillotining the rich.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
Juvenalian.Satyr posted:I mean there's a lot of reasons to not like Hillary but she's one of the more consistently pro-environment politicians I know of. A comprehensive green energy policy was pretty center to her campaign in 2008. And Barack Obama has done a lot to obstruct the Keystone Pipeline to his credit, an issue important to me since it affects me on a personal level (there are issues regarding native land rights and the pipeline here in Oklahoma.) But it's not FULL COMMUNISM, how can it possibly work without a fairy loving godmother
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:^^^ I would love it too. But where are these fabled Democrats of which you speak? We have a House and a Senate run by the GOP. We have 38 Republican governors. We have countless local officials who are Republican. Worst of all, there's a valid chance in this, the presidential thread, that Hillary simply isn't enough to pull off a presidential victory. Don't act like that poo poo is guaranteed! What's your backup plan for when all the elected officials are basically Republicans? Motherfucker, we haven't even signed Kyoto, from NINETEEN NINETY FUCKIN TWO. What is this "chance" that Democrats will fix things that you speak of? I am not convinced. Yes, the water that they have constantly denied will flood their penthouses. My gamble is that at that point, they may actually consider changing their position, because they sure as gently caress aren't giving a single inch right now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
bpower posted:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kshama_Sawant Give me just a few million like her, willing to risk her life to stand up, take public office, and die in defense of equality under the law for all, and I'll gladly sit down and shut up. You have good taste.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
Quidam Viator posted:Give me just a few million like her, willing to risk her life to stand up, take public office, and die in defense of equality under the law for all, and I'll gladly sit down and shut up. You have good taste. How about you do one of those and then sit down and shut up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Quidam Viator posted:Hey, you know what? Maybe you're right. Do you have the stomach for it, you loving pretentious pussy? I'd like you to pull a Caesar, recruit some legions, and slaughter millions of Americans in their churches, their GOP conventions, and in their homes. Maybe pull an Alesia, and hack off all the hand of Karl Rove and the rest, seal them with pitch, and send them around the country to tell others the tale of what happens when you oppose the mighty Nintendo Kid. You're the "pretentious pussy", guy who's Literally A Whiny Latin Teacher Upset The Spanish Teachers Mock Him. Accelerationism is the truest barbarism, hope this helps. It's for people like you who angrily demand change but won't do anything to promote it. You think status quoin' really really hard will magically change things. Anyway do the loving toxx nerd. A violent uprising murdering a whole segment of political power is gonna get you real change compared to accelerationism, that's for drat sure.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
Professor Perry put on his smart glasses to read his new proposal for peace in Ukraine off the prompter. Can you guess what it is? Did you guess shipping a ton of military hardware to the Baltics, Poland, and Ukraine? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnAxHy-HiVU
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
As someone who cares about the environment and has their entire life focused around ecological research, accelerationism would only make it worse. And I'm not talking in a "well, it would suck for a while but then it'd get better" way. In a "Well, we've completely destroyed habitats, extinguished species, and hosed trophic webs throughout the United States, and it is unlikely we will ever be able to restore them to a functioning state" way. I mean, great, we might get some awesome pro-environmental policy but what the gently caress would be there for it to protect? Dead rivers and barely functioning land stripped of its native flora and fauna? It's a dumb idea.
Aves Maria! fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Feb 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
Quidam Viator posted:I would love it too. But where are these fabled Democrats of which you speak? We have a House and a Senate run by the GOP. We have 38 Republican governors. We have countless local officials who are Republican. Worst of all, there's a valid chance in this, the presidential thread, that Hillary simply isn't enough to pull off a presidential victory. Don't act like that poo poo is guaranteed! What's your backup plan for when all the elected officials are basically Republicans? I don't see what's functionally different between the two positions of participation and not, taking at face value what you're saying that the Democratic Party would have no appreciable effect on the issues. The only way it makes sense is if you think the Democratic Party is "not doing enough" or something like that, which is fair but wouldn't the exact same consequences come across and enforce the exact same solutions? Eventually the half-measures will fail. I've had this talk with a leftist I know about the New Deal, and how it too was a half-measure designed to neuter dissent and that if we had pushed just a bit more we could have had so much more. I don't think that's the case. I think the groundwater of reform swells and ebbs and generally speaking the further you reach the more backlash you get. I think the New Deal was exactly well timed, and maybe in that it was manipulative but considering how much it invoked trying to dismantle it then, and then under Reagan, and even now with the New Democrats, I don't think there's any way to permanently "win" at ideology, you gotta keep agitating and keep organizing. I think in a lot of ways the circumstances we're in is allowing the Democrats to shift away from the centrism of the 90's to a more progressive stance. Too little, too late? Maybe, but I'm motivated enough to try and do my part. I genuinely agree with you that as a whole people aren't going to get really motivated to stop these crises until it begins to directly affect that. However, if we get to work now creating a basis in legislation and investment, they'll have more to work with when they do get motivated. The New Deal wasn't spun whole cloth out of FDR's head. It was built on previous proposals and political will, and it required a huge coalition and work to even make happen and resulted in a complete realignment of a party. It was exceptional, but it required a lot of groundwork. These things don't happen purely by chance. Historical forces may set the context, but there's a lot of need for people to get involved and vote to make it happen. A group is just a collection of individuals, so even if your individual vote seems miniscule, it means something in the context of your demographic. The marketing analysts that have seeped into politics now are looking at those demographics and your vote, and your lack of voting as well, and its that ennui that makes your demographic unattractive and worthless for them to cater to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Professor Perry put on his smart glasses to read his new proposal for peace in Ukraine off the prompter. Can you guess what it is? Did you guess shipping a ton of military hardware to the Baltics, Poland, and Ukraine? I'm torn between hoping Perry runs again and not wanting my state front-and-center of another national embarrassment. E: Ohmygod "President Obama...always thinks through the consequences of actions." Gee that's not something I want in a President, ya gotta start wars from your gut and never do any thinkin' about how you're gonna win. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Feb 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
XyloJW posted:PLEASE DO NOT DISCUSS ASSASSINATION IN THE POLITICS FORUM, FOR gently caress'S loving SAKE So that's, what, three and a half days until we got back to "could political assassination fix America's problems"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
Juvenalian.Satyr posted:I don't see what's functionally different between the two positions of participation and not, taking at face value what you're saying that the Democratic Party would have no appreciable effect on the issues. The only way it makes sense is if you think the Democratic Party is "not doing enough" or something like that, which is fair but wouldn't the exact same consequences come across and enforce the exact same solutions? Eventually the half-measures will fail. Thank you for the most civil and reasonable post I've gotten yet today. Everything you say about how the New Deal was accomplished resonates with my memory of it. I guess the issue was that we had a real, honest-to-god national crisis happening that motivated people to gather political will and make good choices. What is the crisis of today? What is the motivation? This is why this particular FDR quote resonates with me so strongly: quote:The country needs and, unless I mistake its temper, the country demands bold, persistent experimentation. It is common sense to take a method and try it: If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something. The millions who are in want will not stand by silently forever while the things to satisfy their needs are within easy reach. We need enthusiasm, imagination and the ability to face facts, even unpleasant ones, bravely. We need to correct, by drastic means if necessary, the faults in our economic system from which we now suffer. We need the courage of the young. Yours is not the task of making your way in the world, but the task of remaking the world which you will find before you. May every one of us be granted the courage, the faith and the vision to give the best that is in us to that remaking! I'm calling you all out, because I don't believe you think we need to take drastic action. FDR did, and you still benefit from his audacity today.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Any chance of Hillary backing a carbon tax? Larry Summers, who is one of the most bracingly rightwing Democratic figures I can think of, had an op-ed in the Washington Post suggesting capitalizing on the current low oil prices to swiftly enact a tax. I also recall The Economist starkly preferring a carbon tax over a cap-and-trade system a few years ago, and I have difficulty imagining that they've changed course on that front (although I haven't subscribed or read it regularly for about three years now). I suspect the only way to get the political support for something like this will be to couple it with a "carbon tariff," somehow assessing and taxing the emissions of imported products. There's just no way the American legislature, even a Democratic one, would adopt climate protocols leaving U.S. goods less competitive on the global market. I have to admit, I'm not the most up-to-date on environmental policy, but a carbon tax plus some kind of Federal climate research bank seem like good places to start.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
Quidam Viator posted:I'm calling you all out, because I don't believe you think we need to take drastic action. FDR did, and you still benefit from his audacity today. FDR, noted for voting Republican and responsing to all pushback from the right with "well okay you write the bills, we'll do it all your way, and we'll all see how that turns out"
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
Can we have a specific thread about the merits or lack thereof of accelerationism? I'm guessing maybe this has been done? I feel like it's only tangentially related to the topic of the primaries at best and it's a constant and repeated massive derail.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
Quidam Viator posted:I'm calling you all out, because I don't believe you think we need to take drastic action. FDR did, and you still benefit from his audacity today. Look, you can be for accelerationism all you want, but I'm just here to let you know that you don't actually give a poo poo about the ecological health of anything. I don't know if you know this, but "burn it all to the ground and rebuild" doesn't quite work when it comes to things that aren't human in construction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:30
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:Can we have a specific thread about the merits or lack thereof of accelerationism? I'm guessing maybe this has been done? I feel like it's only tangentially related to the topic of the primaries at best and it's a constant and repeated massive derail. Sorry if you feel like it's a derail, and I understand. I'd start a thread, but I genuinely think it would turn to poo poo, because I'm pretty much alone here in not believing that being a Good Democrat (tm) leads to a viable world system. I honestly believe that the accelerationist critique is a valid critique when we're getting dynasties like House Clinton and House Bush, and when we have 6-year do-nothing congresses, but if mods tell me to take something to a new thread I will gladly comply. I'm not here to break the rules. I'm here to DnD.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
Quidam Viator posted:Sorry if you feel like it's a derail, and I understand. I'd start a thread, but I genuinely think it would turn to poo poo, Yeah but I'd rather you start that thread and have it turn to poo poo than have that happen to this one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:Can we have a specific thread about the merits or lack thereof of accelerationism? You just need one post: it has no merits.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
Quidam Viator posted:Sorry if you feel like it's a derail, and I understand. I'd start a thread, but I genuinely think it would turn to poo poo, because I'm pretty much alone here in not believing that being a Good Democrat (tm) leads to a viable world system. I honestly believe that the accelerationist critique is a valid critique when we're getting dynasties like House Clinton and House Bush, and when we have 6-year do-nothing congresses, but if mods tell me to take something to a new thread I will gladly comply. I'm not here to break the rules. I'm here to DnD. What is your definition of a viable world system? By that definition, when has such a thing ever existed?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
GalacticAcid posted:Any chance of Hillary backing a carbon tax? Larry Summers, who is one of the most bracingly rightwing Democratic figures I can think of, had an op-ed in the Washington Post suggesting capitalizing on the current low oil prices to swiftly enact a tax. I also recall The Economist starkly preferring a carbon tax over a cap-and-trade system a few years ago, and I have difficulty imagining that they've changed course on that front (although I haven't subscribed or read it regularly for about three years now). They could (and should) increase the gas tax to some reasonable level and index it to inflation, with some sort of string that the money goes to infrastructure improvements and maintenance. The gas tax hasn't moved since the early 90's so it's nowhere near enough, although the current Republican congress would be more likely to privatize large (important, bottleneck) chunks of the highway system than properly fund it, but since it's a regressive tax maybe it could actually pass in some fashion after '16. I'm not sure how an "increase the gas tax to fund highway infrastructure" policy would actually poll in a general election, but I'd like to think that maintaining the public highway infrastructure would actually be a good idea. At some point infrastructure will become a bigger election issue, and unless trends change I really wouldn't put it past Republican candidates to start talking about the "free market" as a solution, even though that's pretty far right even with today's overton window. It is pretty sad to think that in today's world there's zero chance a national highway system would actually get built by the feds like in the 50's.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:Yeah but I'd rather you start that thread and have it turn to poo poo than have that happen to this one. I respect that. Thanks for asking politely. I'll make a thread when I'm ready. Thanks for everyone who engaged with me. I hope I at least inspired a little bit of out-of-the-box thinking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Professor Perry put on his smart glasses to read his new proposal for peace in Ukraine off the prompter. Can you guess what it is? Did you guess shipping a ton of military hardware to the Baltics, Poland, and Ukraine? I don't want this to get lost in what's-Latin-for-accelerationist?-chat, but note that one of his proposed solutions is also to fast-track fossil fuel production for export. I wonder what form that would take? Cutting taxes and rolling back stifling regulation, maybe? Nah, couldn't be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
Quidam Viator posted:And you know what? You're not better than your ancestors in any way that counts. You'll still recklessly exploit the earth and trash the environment so that you never have to face deprivation or disease. And you'll use political power to elevate yourself over the slaves whose lives you steal so that you can have bacon and shiny gadgets. Your ancestors enslaved African-Americans. We (yes, me too) are currently enslaving millions of poor Asians, who have taken up the process from us and are working on enslaving Africans to keep products flowing and costs low, no matter what the long-term effect. Quidam Viator posted:And you know what's really lovely about this accelerationist idea? It's TOTALLY out of context before Marx. Everything, from human rights, to true capitalism, occur LONG after the Roman Republic and Empire have fallen. Do you think the pursuit of universal human rights makes us better than our ancestors? I admit that I do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
Quidam Viator posted:I would love it too. But where are these fabled Democrats of which you speak? We have a House and a Senate run by the GOP. We have 38 Republican governors. We have countless local officials who are Republican. Worst of all, there's a valid chance in this, the presidential thread, that Hillary simply isn't enough to pull off a presidential victory. Don't act like that poo poo is guaranteed! What's your backup plan for when all the elected officials are basically Republicans? Here's the thing: The U.S. electorate, by a reasonable margin, favors a higher minimum wage, sick and maternity leave, gay marriage, green energy, and a womans right to choose (to some extent, anyway) in many circumstances. We even liked universal health care until the ACA came along and made the whole thing needlessly complicated. http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2015/02/5_takeaways_on_public_opinion.html http://www.gallup.com/poll/169640/sex-marriage-support-reaches-new-high.aspx http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx http://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-majority-would-pay-higher-taxes-for-universal-health-care/ There's a vocal minority that hates these ideas, but they are just that...a vocal minority. With these kind of numbers, we mostly should be dickering over details. We don't like a $7.25 an hour minimum wage...should it be $9, $10, $11, $12, $15? Do we allow offshore drilling as a bridge towards us moving to renewable energies, or do we need to go the whole hog on wind and solar? Do we want Medicare for all, a two tiered British/Australian style system, or a German/Swiss style subsidized private system? How long should a woman have off of work after she has a baby and what percentage of her salary should she get? I believe that a Democratically controlled house/congress/presidency would be willing to at least consider the differing viewpoints on this and move forward somewhat. A Republican controlled house/congress/presidency will ALWAYS fight the progress the public wants tooth and nail. And that's why it's important for everyone who's even halfway sane politically to vote. We need to drive up turnout in traditionally blue areas to gain governorships, keep house seats, and keep the presidency. There's a reason Republicans are making the non-existent voter fraud issue into an issue and trying to kill early voting...if inner city Milwaukee votes at a 80-90% rate, Wisconsin never has a Republican governor again, and eventually they're going to lose their gerrymandering advantages and you'll see them sending more Democrats to Washington. And if you're in a highly red area and go out to vote blue, you might be able to start making it more competitive. The Dems aren't perfect, but I'll take them over accelerationism any way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
BatteredFeltFedora posted:I don't want this to get lost in what's-Latin-for-accelerationist?-chat, but note that one of his proposed solutions is also to fast-track fossil fuel production for export. I wonder what form that would take? Cutting taxes and rolling back stifling regulation, maybe? Nah, couldn't be. That's been mentioned since the beginning of the "crisis" with Russia. It takes time to develop the infrastructure to import and export LNG though, and my understanding is that the port conditions just aren't in place right now and it would take a few more years in any case to get the export channel running smoothly enough to dampen Russian's command of the European gas market. So I think you hit the nail on the head - it's an opportunistic attempt to parlay geopolitical anxieties into regulatory rollback. Here's a piece from Columbia's Center on Global Energy Policy that goes more in-depth on the anticipated macro-effects, I read it a couple months ago and thought it sounded reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
Scott Walker took a selfie in the White House. Nailed it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Scott Walker took a selfie in the White House. He looks drunk
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Scott Walker took a selfie in the White House. hooooly shiiiit 
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Scott Walker took a selfie in the White House. I presume that photo was found and published by some sort of of hacker. I mean the idea he thought that was a good thing to publish is laughable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
bpower posted:I presume that photo was found and published by some sort of of hacker. I mean the idea he thought that was a good thing to publish is laughable. https://twitter.com/GovWalker
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
You laugh, but this is the first step in a chain of events that will lead to incumbent President Walker receiving almost 60% of the 18-29 vote in 2020.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 01:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:03 |
|
|
Joementum posted:Scott Walker took a selfie in the White House. Looks very presidential. These guys just look like THUGS: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/biden-takes-selfie-obama-n82626
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 01:35
|
|
