|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Yes, but even then, posit a future in which its not someone's boot. As I said before and you never responded to, nations are fundamentally unethical. The very concept of the nation is an unethical conceit. The US is only unethical in its power because it has power. Any nation put into the position of a global superpower would be as bad as us, if not worse, because it is the nature of nations to exploit those weaker than themselves. loving hell horselord you've changed your tune
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 02:51 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 04:00 |
|
I dream of one day allowing people in western Pakistan to have open air weddings again. Some day in the far future, of course, because America just isn't ready yet.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 02:51 |
|
the trump tutelage posted:Is this supposed to be a defense? That her opponents are successful at persuading people of distrusting her? Propaganda is a powerful drug. Notice how people keep going on about the whole email thing without being able to bring anything of substance?
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 02:51 |
|
CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:You're right, we can have progress next year. Again, the Democratic party platform is more progressive this year than it's basically ever been. Progress is being made, you just don't understand it because you care more about feeling superior to people than in improving things.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 02:52 |
|
Bob le Moche posted:Bernie Sanders actually showed better chances against Trump than Hillary did in the polls. The large swarths of angry disenfranchised people want socialism, not barbarism. Losing a primary by millions of votes isn't being suppressed by the party.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 02:52 |
|
Bob le Moche posted:Bernie Sanders actually showed better chances against Trump than Hillary did in the polls. Bernie Sanders also never had his policies vetted on a national stage like Clinton did. Bob le Moche posted:The large swarths of angry disenfranchised people want socialism, not barbarism. Hello, allow me to introduce you to the Tea Party Bob le Moche posted:Fascism is what happens when you let the "moderate" party of liberal capitalists completely suppress any and all leftist alternatives to it. This might be an interesting point if it were not completely wrong and ahistorical
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 02:53 |
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Bernie Sanders also never had his policies vetted on a national stage like Clinton did. Except for that 14 month primary thing. He has a 91% awareness and +25 favorability. Clinton was a weak candidate for GE, not sure why that's even debatable.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 02:55 |
|
CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:You're right, we can have progress next year. We are. In case you didn't notice: a career Socialist third party candidate used the Democratic party as a tool, generated a massive following and then got a large number of his policies added to the winning candidate's platform in exchange for his endorsement. The guy was named Bernie and a lot of us voted for him. I'd have been happier if he had won but his minority outreach sucked. Now those of his supporters who liked his actual policies and not his image only have to vote for the people who have agreed to support the platform. This primary has represented the biggest victory for progressives in my adult life.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 02:56 |
|
TomViolence posted:I dream of one day allowing people in western Pakistan to have open air weddings again. Some day in the far future, of course, because America just isn't ready yet. Because if America was gone Pakistan would be safe from foreign intervention? menino posted:Except for that 14 month primary thing. He has a 91% awareness and +25 favorability. A primary is not a meaningful vetting of the feasibility of a platform on the national stage See: Donald Trump
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 02:57 |
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Explain how a destabilized US is better off in the long term for the world than a stable one Buckwheat Sings posted:Propaganda is a powerful drug. Notice how people keep going on about the whole email thing without being able to bring anything of substance?
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 02:59 |
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Because if America was gone Pakistan would be safe from foreign intervention? Everywhere in the world would be much safer if the Great Satan just hosed off yes. That's not even remotely controversial.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 02:59 |
|
TomViolence posted:Everywhere in the world would be much safer if the Great Satan just hosed off yes. That's not even remotely controversial. Enjoy a return to pre-MAD politics.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:02 |
|
the trump tutelage posted:A destabilized America may prompt election reform Hmm interesting.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:03 |
|
the trump tutelage posted:A destabilized America may prompt election reform. But most likely won't TomViolence posted:Everywhere in the world would be much safer if the Great Satan just hosed off yes. That's not even remotely controversial. Why do you imagine America loving off would leave a power vacuum that would remain unfilled? Do you really think China or Russia would just leave the world alone in our absence? There has never been a point in world history where a superpower has not exploited weaker nations. Removing America from the equation doesn't end imperial exploitation any more than removing England and France in the early 20th century did. No matter what there is going to be imperialism in a global economy. Push to make the system fairer and better, don't just reshuffle the deck.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:04 |
|
sarmhan posted:Holy poo poo you really are a naive child aren't you? Mel Mudkiper posted:Why do you imagine America loving off would leave a vacuum that would remain unfilled? Nice exceptionalism you've got there. I'd much prefer a multipolar world rather than everywhere outside of the US being treated like a backyard full of abused toys personally. I mean maybe things are different, living in America, being dripfed constantly the idea that your nation is a world unto itself and the wild Mad Max-like wasteland beyond its fringes is something that needs to be managed and contained via the blunt instruments of a belligerent and overbearing foreign policy. TomViolence fucked around with this message at 03:07 on Oct 6, 2016 |
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:04 |
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Because if America was gone Pakistan would be safe from foreign intervention? I'm sure they'd be fine.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:04 |
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Hello, allow me to introduce you to the Tea Party Hillary Clinton is making no effort at all to distance herself from the ideological basis of movements like the tea party. The tea party exists because the American ruling class, democrat and republican, have been feeding a nationalist, bourgeois-worshipping, white supremacist ideology to them since forever and they end up believing it. It's cool that you are basically showing how the ideology of the democratic party is actually a fundamentally anti-democratic one though: "the masses are brutes and they need our enlightened leaders who know what's best to rule over them"
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:05 |
|
Mel already said it, but the US 'loving off' would just leave a massive power vaccum that'd lead to wars and global realignment behind other, worse imperial powers.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:05 |
|
I was waiting for someone to take my alley oop
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:05 |
|
Bob le Moche posted:Hillary Clinton is making no effort at all to distance herself from the ideological basis of movements like the tea party. The tea party exists because the American ruling class, democrat and republican, have been feeding a nationalist, bourgeois-worshipping, white supremacist ideology to them since forever and they end up believing it. ok sure bro
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:06 |
|
the trump tutelage posted:A destabilized America may prompt election reform. Otherwise, we get to the terminus of your preference a lot faster. I'm really not persuaded by a "We're as good as you can expect!" argument for American imperialism. quote:No. However, outside of the Fox News circlejerk, I've noticed a lot of substance being brought forward that is casually dismissed.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:07 |
|
Reminder: By any metric that accounts for worldwide population growth this is the most bloodless era in recorded human history.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:08 |
|
sarmhan posted:Mel already said it, but the US 'loving off' would just leave a massive power vaccum that'd lead to wars and global realignment behind other, worse imperial powers. Are you trying to say the US, like Hillary Clinton, is some sort of necessary evil? I didn't think you guys still bought that World Police bullshit. I thought we were at least somewhat on the same page.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:09 |
|
TomViolence posted:Are you trying to say the US, like Hillary Clinton, is some sort of necessary evil?
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:11 |
|
TomViolence posted:
How is it exceptionalism to agree that America is the current dominant superpower? That's exactly what you have been saying this entire time. quote:I'd much prefer a multipolar world rather than everywhere outside of the US being treated like a backyard full of abused toys personally. I mean maybe things are different, living in America, being dripfed constantly the idea that your nation is a world unto itself and the wild Mad Max-like wasteland beyond its fringes is something that needs to be managed and contained via the blunt instruments of a belligerent and overbearing foreign policy. We live in a multipolar world already. US is the strongest, but China and Russia are also carving up their own portions of the globe to exploit. Removing the United States doesn't make geopolitics multipolar, it turns a three way struggle into a two way struggle. If you think the US is the only one currently exploiting the globe with overbearing foreign policy you are irreparably ignorant. TomViolence posted:I didn't think you guys still bought that World Police bullshit. I thought we were at least somewhat on the same page. I don't know how you got "world police" from pointing out that contemporary geopolitics will inherently birth exploitative superpowers whether or not its the US. We're not arguing the US should be uniquely responsible for governing the world, we are pointing out that removing America wouldn't change the nature of imperialism, just change the players. Mel Mudkiper fucked around with this message at 03:15 on Oct 6, 2016 |
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:12 |
|
This thread really needs Boon and Iron Rose to the start posting in other now, lmao
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:17 |
|
Lemming posted:Again, the Democratic party platform is more progressive this year than it's basically ever been. Progress is being made, you just don't understand it because you care more about feeling superior to people than in improving things. It's very interesting to hear what I think. I wasn't aware of this. Eifert Posting posted:Now those of his supporters who liked his actual policies and not his image only have to vote for the people who have agreed to support the platform. This primary has represented the biggest victory for progressives in my adult life. I'll probably vote for people who support this watered down platform, I guess. Just not Clinton. Eifert Posting posted:Reminder: By any metric that accounts for worldwide population growth this is the most bloodless era in recorded human history. Do you work in PR? You're very good at it. This is an honest compliment.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:18 |
|
If Hillary Clinton comes out and makes statements along the following lines: - America is not the best nation on earth - The founding fathers are not heroes - Capitalism is not good for workers - America stands on indigenous territory and was built by slaves Then she will have my vote. Otherwise I consider her a collaborator and part of the reason why the Tea Party and Trump exist
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:19 |
|
Bob le Moche posted:If Hillary Clinton comes out and makes statements along the following lines:
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:21 |
|
Bob le Moche posted:If Hillary Clinton comes out and makes statements along the following lines: Ok cool, enjoy riding your ethical superiority to historical irrelevance I guess?
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:21 |
|
sarmhan posted:Since when does "Without the threat of US intervention other world powers would be much freer and willing to wage war" equate to Bush-era World Police bullshit? There are numerous other factors that restrain independent nations from waging war without overbearing big brother murica standing over everyone like a referee. If America's global hegemony can be rationalised in those terms then the only solution is neverending war against it. Mel Mudkiper posted:How is it exceptionalism to agree that America is the current dominant superpower? That's exactly what you have been saying this entire time. Oh, the system is there and I can't dispute that. I can, however, argue that the existence of such a system should not by itself justify itself. America, China, Russia, these empires do not get to be empires just because "contemporary geopolitics" dictate, that system of contemporary geopolitics is a product of their imperial status. I can and will get cancer because of the laws of science, it shouldn't mean that cancer has to be accepted and that efforts should not be undertaken to cure it. It also means I'm well within my rights hating cancer and wanting it to gently caress off and considering my life better without it. TomViolence fucked around with this message at 03:25 on Oct 6, 2016 |
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:22 |
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Ok cool, enjoy riding your ethical superiority to historical irrelevance I guess?
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:22 |
|
Eifert Posting posted:We are. That's weird, because passing out instructions to drown out anti-war chants with "USA! USA!" seems to be a regression from post-Bush positions, not a progression.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:22 |
|
sarmhan posted:Wow you really are the living example of someone who is so deeply concerned with ideological purity they will actively work against progressive policies. The perfect is the enemy of the good indeed. Except I am actively working towards progressive policies in my political life, whereas what you seem to be doing is coming up with reasons why people like me should feel ashamed for that and align ourselves with a politician that we consider to be opposed to everything we stand for
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:23 |
|
sarmhan posted:Wow you really are the living example of someone who is so deeply concerned with ideological purity they will actively work against progressive policies. The perfect is the enemy of the good indeed.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:23 |
|
Bob le Moche posted:Except I am actively working towards progressive policies in my political life, whereas what you seem to be doing is coming up with reasons why people like me should feel ashamed for that and align ourselves with a politician that we consider to be opposed to everything we stand for
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:24 |
|
sarmhan posted:No one has said you should stop working FOR progressive policies, or completely align yourself with Hillary. People are saying that fighting against her now is self-destructive and stupid when she is the only hope in this election for progressive policies to actually happen on a broad basis. I'm pretty confident that all my problems with Hillary are very clearly things that Trump is not better at, and that me openly speaking out about them will not cause anyone to vote for Trump
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:26 |
|
Bob le Moche posted:I'm pretty confident that all my problems with Hillary are very clearly things that Trump is not better at, and that me openly speaking out about them will not cause anyone to vote for Trump
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:26 |
|
TomViolence posted:Oh, the system is there and I can't dispute that. I can, however, argue that the existence of such a system should not by itself justify itself. America, China, Russia, these empires do not get to be empires just because "contemporary geopolitics" dictate, that system of contemporary geopolitics is a product of their imperial staus. I can and will get cancer because of the laws of science, it shouldn't mean that cancer has to be accepted and that efforts should not be undertaken to cure it. It also means I'm well within my rights hating cancer and wanting it to gently caress off and considering my life better without it. We agree on the basic principle though. Yes, steps should be taken to cure it. The difference of opinion is here is that I do not think you are going to cure the problem by simply removing the result and not the cause. US, Russia, and China are not the cause of global exploitation. They are the result of the nature of modern geopolitics. You are not going to cure it by simply removing these nations from power, because the global system is set up that someone somewhere will take over. Let's take your cancer metaphor. If you wanted to be cured of cancer, would you rather the doctor already be experienced with the type of tumor and know how it works, and try to cure the disease he understands or would you rather he randomly replace your tumor with a different cancer and just kind of hope it won't be as bad? Its going to be easier to push towards a better global system with stabilized and understood political powers in place than just reshuffling the deck and hoping for the best. sarmhan posted:Bullshit. Any system of ethics would call this out for being lovely behavior, because you're putting personal hangups over the general good. I was being facetious
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:28 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 04:00 |
|
I know. I just felt it had to be said, because people on the left have really broken ideas about what is ethical behavior. Protip: It isn't about being true to your ideals at all costs.
|
# ? Oct 6, 2016 03:29 |