|
Oberleutnant posted:Let me inflict a little of this book on the thread. The portion quoted comes fairly deep in, after a long time is spent examining not only the Liberal credentials of those quoted, but also investigating whether such statements could be put down to personal hypocrisy (being obviously incompatible with any notion of human dignity) or if they were integral to Liberal thought.
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 18:29 |
|
|
^^ Christ almighty (Edit: aimed at Ober's crazy book)Gonzo McFee posted:Aye I hosed it with that post. Reading comprehension no so good. Happens to the best of us. But your post has reminded me to ask - what's the story behind your avatar? Who's the guy on the left and who (what?) is on the right? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
I'm going to guess that it was something to do with shaking your head for 'no thanks' on ScotRef. There was a phase in ScotPol of buying people avatars for the opposite of their position.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Let me inflict a little of this book on the thread. The portion quoted comes fairly deep in, after a long time is spent examining not only the Liberal credentials of those quoted, but also investigating whether such statements could be put down to personal hypocrisy (being obviously incompatible with any notion of human dignity) or if they were integral to Liberal thought. I never realised the Island of Doctor Moreau was intended as aspiration rather than horror novel. The more you know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
That would be Terry Funk, greatest living Texan. And on the Right that would be Hot Stuff Eddie Gilbert being accurately portrayed by a horses rear end. https://youtu.be/B8g19YbAcCY?t=46s
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
Day two of Reshuffle Blue Balls, Buzzfeed dares the impossible and actually asks Corbyn's spokesperson what's going on. http://www.buzzfeed.com/emilyashton/heres-what-jeremy-corbyns-team-wants-you-to-know-about-the-r#.dhVMNKAxd quote:Hilary Benn’s just sat next to Jeremy Corbyn – is he still the shadow foreign secretary? At this point I'm starting to feel Corbyn is doing this on purpose. How's Stephen Bush doing? quote:17:04: It's not unreasonable to sack or move people because they disagree with you - it is unfair to their employees to brief it for two months and beyond incompetent - this reshuffle is now longer than the entire Terminator franchise - to wipe out your own story on rail fares and not have an Opposition frontbench by now. I hate everybody. quote:17:08: Sorry about that, I have had a cup of tea and am now feeling a lot better. Don't blink and announce anything Corbyn, he's so close to cracking. I can feel it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:If their goal was to limit population growth, the evidence of the past 200 years shows that they loving sucked at it. quote:How to ‘continue the race of journeymen and servants’? Smith’s phrase reveals that social mobility was limited or non-existent. The heaviest, worst-paid work was entrusted to a stratum that tended to be reproduced from one generation to the next, and hence to a kind of hereditary servile caste. The reproduction of this caste or race was absolutely necessary. According to Mandeville, a decidedly beneficial role was played by war. If, with its periodic massacres, it did not provide a remedy for excess male births, women, sought after by too many aspiring, competitive males, would become a kind of rare commodity accessible only to the rich. Society would then lose its re-supply of ‘the Children of the Poor; the greatest and most extensive of all temporal Blessings’. The hereditary reproduction of the poor destined to perform ‘the Drudgery of hard and dirty Labour’would prove difficult or impossible. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Not on the homepage it isn't. You know, the thing most people go to. Nobody does this. BBC News/Sport, that's it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
Ratjaculation posted:Hi guys, I think that people that drop litter in the street should be forced to pick it up with their mouths and then crawl on their hands and knees to deposit it in the nearest bin, while a hard-faced nun marches behind them, ringing a bell and shouting "Shame! Shame! Shame!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
Ratjaculation posted:Hi guys, I dont think there should be a fine, I think they should have to pick up litter for a day. Why punish the poor when the rich wont notice a 150 quid fine for chucking a starbucks cup out their mercedes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
Replace the labour spokeperson with a chatbot preprogrammed with twenty variations of "we are not commenting on the reshuffle"
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Replace the labour spokeperson with a chatbot preprogrammed with twenty variations of "we are not commenting on the reshuffle" Looks like the high ground of "there is no reshuffle" is officially not the position then. Also thanks Gonzo, that is a crazy vid!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Looks like the high ground of "there is no reshuffle" is officially not the position then. We are not commenting on our position on not commenting on the reshuffle commenting position not shuffle the reshuffle commenting we position the commenting reshuffle comment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
I'm might start littering to spite the Queen, personally. She's never got me a birthday present, so I don't see why I should chip in for hers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Looks like the high ground of "there is no reshuffle" is officially not the position then. Pro Wrestling is the true sport of the proletariat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Nobody does this. BBC News/Sport, that's it. I go to Weather, as it's a lot more interesting since moving here, and to News from there... The BBC has a Frontpage ?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Most people use that page because its the fastest thing to go to. If you look at the stats here http://bbc.co.uk.hypestat.com/ Look at the stats here for news.bbc.co.uk which doesn't even exist any more except as a redirect to bbc.co.uk/news: http://news.bbc.co.uk.hypestat.com/. 4.8m daily uniques. And that's almost entirely due to people who type it in or have it bookmarked, cause, you know, it's just a redirection now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
tentish klown posted:Look at the stats here for news.bbc.co.uk which doesn't even exist any more except as a redirect to bbc.co.uk/news: http://news.bbc.co.uk.hypestat.com/. It's probably more due to old links on places like Wikipedia. Still a lot of hits though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Only relatively. A steadily increasing supply was still seen as necessary, and thought was given to ensuring it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:That's what confused me. I thought the liberal-capitalist position was always "everlasting growth and drat the consequences" like in that quote, and always assumed that the free-market liberals were opposed to the Malthusians. Think of liberalism and capitalism sort of like leninism and marxism. One political component, one economic component (though both contain elements of the other). You can have liberal communism or anarchy for example. Liberalism and capitalism are deeply entwined for important reasons, but not inseparable. Pure modern Liberalism is more concerned with the absolute freedom of the liberal class to do as it pleases with the classes beneath it. What it then does economically with that freedom is a separate issue.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
Also Malthus was just fuckin retarded. Let's be real here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:That's what confused me. I thought the liberal-capitalist position was always "everlasting growth and drat the consequences" like in that quote, and always assumed that the free-market liberals were opposed to the Malthusians. Oh hell no, pretty much any early Liberal philosopher you'd care to mention will have at least one section of society like the poor or criminals or women or black people where they just go 'Oh btw all this liberty and rights and things won't apply to them of course, that would be silly, nope it's tyranny and oppression for them like it should be'.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
namesake posted:Oh hell no, pretty much any early Liberal Yeah.... 'bout that.... the book covers what it calls 'the catastrophe of the twentieth century' and.... it don't get no better 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
I didn't realise that historically liberalism was more explicitly class segregated. We like to pretend it applies to everyone nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I didn't realise that historically liberalism was more explicitly class segregated. We like to pretend it applies to everyone nowadays. Although everyone does have the equal right to buy a house for the going market price so liberty reigns.  Oberleutnant posted:Also Malthus was just fuckin retarded. Let's be real here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I didn't realise that historically liberalism was more explicitly class segregated. We like to pretend it applies to everyone nowadays. Now we can all read they have to lie and obfuscate all the time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
In the case of Mail and Sun op-eds, pretend to everyone involved that they're talking about those other unworthy people. You know the ones. Don't worry, they're not you. And then you end up with that lady on Question Time. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Yeah.... 'bout that.... the book covers what it calls 'the catastrophe of the twentieth century' and.... it don't get no better Well happy to be proved wrong but once we get into the era of social Liberalism I'd be surprised to hear many of them making the same major exceptions to the tenets of equality and freedom that you do from Bentham and the like. Oberleutnant posted:You can have liberal communism or anarchy for example. I think you're wrong, liberalism without private property rights isn't liberalism. It's a integral component of the concept of liberal freedom so if you're getting rid of that you're just a universalist or egalitarian or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
The Telegraph have literally added a timer counting up the seconds to their 'Reshuffle Live' page. Corbyn is totally doing this on purpose, and it's awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Let me inflict a little of this book on the thread. The portion quoted comes fairly deep in, after a long time is spent examining not only the Liberal credentials of those quoted, but also investigating whether such statements could be put down to personal hypocrisy (being obviously incompatible with any notion of human dignity) or if they were integral to Liberal thought. This reminds me of a news story a few years ago where they mapped Neanderthal DNA or something, and some Guardian columnist immediately wrote out a piece that was like "GREAT!! We can clone slaves now!!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
I don't subscribe to Malthus' views because I think they're evil but I do think that having kids is generally a bad thing, especially (or even exclusively) in developed countries, given that there seems to be absolutely no other concerted effort at all to combat climate change and in general given how lovely things are going to be in a couple of years time, it seems like a net-evil to willingly subject people to that. I guess having children is a huge, huge contributing factor to climate change in a number of ways thanks to the hosed up way the western world works, so I do feel bad contributing to that. This isn't really a fault with people having children, of course, which I think is a fundamental inalienable right but it is a huge problem that society is set up in such a way that makes it a sub-optimal thing to do, especially where other people are concerned. jabby posted:The Telegraph have literally added a timer counting up the seconds to their 'Reshuffle Live' page. Given how the media are so desperate to smear him with anything it does seem like a very, very fun game to just lead them on with vague notions that they're constantly reinforcing because they can't fathom anything else. I like to think Corbyn is in a room somewhere, and between interviewshe's checking all the various news sources to see people absolutely making GBS threads themselves for no god drat reason, and he's smiling to himself 
Rush Limbo fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
jabby posted:The Telegraph have literally added a timer counting up the seconds to their 'Reshuffle Live' page. Well we're gradually moving towards day 3 of morons liveblogging a non-story they invented, so I really hope so. I mean, the only thing that's vaguely newsworthy that's come out of it is Dugher and that's not even formally confirmed yet. The real worry is that this has been entirely invented just as Corbyn was trying to launch a new policy initiative and just after the flooding which was basically entirely the fault of dear Cambo, and it's doing a grand joob of distracting from that 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:I don't subscribe to Malthus' views because I think they're evil but I do think that having kids is generally a bad thing, especially (or even exclusively) in developed countries, given that there seems to be absolutely no other concerted effort at all to combat climate change and in general given how lovely things are going to be in a couple of years time, it seems like a net-evil to willingly subject people to that. Choosing to have a child in this country is supremely selfish and egotistical. I know that it's not quite as simple as going to the child pound and picking one out, but if you want a kid then it seems to me that in the UK adopting is really the only morally defensible choice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:The real worry is that this has been entirely invented just as Corbyn was trying to launch a new policy initiative and just after the flooding which was basically entirely the fault of dear Cambo, and it's doing a grand joob of distracting from that The Conservative split over the EU and IS Execution video have distracted from that, the reshuffle really isn't that big a news right now because nothing is happening. There's only so much the BBC can say on "It's a thing. We don't know anything about it" quote:19:17: News of Lord Falconer - apparently he is still in the Carribean. I wish I was in the Carribean.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:This isn't really a fault with people having children, of course, which I think is a fundamental inalienable right but it is a huge problem that society is set up in such a way that makes it a sub-optimal thing to do, especially where other people are concerned. In the same way, Iran managed to decrease their population growth heavily during one of their less-reactionary eras by encouraging contraception and voluntary sterilization and women being active participants in family planning. I don't agree with n-child policies or fiscal punishment and I generally feel that prohibition is a bad way of achieving any social change, but there are softer ways of influence that may be beneficial in and of themselves too. e: Fans posted:The Conservative split over the EU and IS  (It's May, isn't it.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:The real worry is that this has been entirely invented just as Corbyn was trying to launch a new policy initiative and just after the flooding which was basically entirely the fault of dear Cambo, and it's doing a grand joob of distracting from that  exactly as the Blairites planned
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
namesake posted:I think you're wrong, liberalism without private property rights isn't liberalism. It's a integral component of the concept of liberal freedom so if you're getting rid of that you're just a universalist or egalitarian or something. Sorry for slow reply, was eating!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
namesake posted:I think you're wrong, liberalism without private property rights isn't liberalism. It's a integral component of the concept of liberal freedom so if you're getting rid of that you're just a universalist or egalitarian or something. Eh you could have significant differences in social liberalism within communism, which would be the difference between utopia and an ant colony.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
It's a tricky situation. I've pretty much brought up my sister after both our parents died so I guess I have that parental experience, and I can't imagine ever wanting to have children of my own for a whole host of reasons. My bloodline has been an unbroken chain from now until the dawn of life itself but it ends with me, which is a pretty incredible power-trip, certainly more so than continuing it, so even the standard arguments don't really fly that well with me. Ever since I was made aware of the wider world and how everything is interlinked I've always strived to life my life to make it so that the world is in a slightly better state than my birth made it worse, so I think that's a noble goal to pursue, even if it pales in significance to everything else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 18:29 |
|
|
When I made that argument in the kidhaving thread everyone said I was insane. Maybe it's something endemic to the UK. Some folks are weirdly loving attached to the idea of having kids being the most ethical thing in the world.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:16
|
|