|
Sethex posted:If i recall correctly Yanis Varoufakis (Greece ' s finance minister at the time of Syriza) blames the failure of the Syriza showdown with Berlin on the elite of the left bailing on the idea of leaving the EU and defaulting because those elites were largely worried that it would destroy their personal wealth. And he was 100% correct. If Greece pulled out of the Euro, Greece would have had another recession then be back on track. This is historically what happens to debt ridden countries (see: Argentina). Greece would then have had full autonomy over their situation and be able to stop their depression rather than continuing it's downward sprial that it has. Syriza failed and everyone on the left should take lessons from it. MiddleOne posted:Are you going to claim that he was wrong? Varoufakis, when he realized that the negotiations were going nowhere, spent almost the entire spring of 2015 fruitlessly urging Tsipras to take preventive measures that would stop the Eurogroup from being able to blow up what remained of Greece's banking sector. Instead, Tsipras did none of that and pushed through on the, before Brexit, dumbest referendum in EU history which was virtually just one big prayer to Schauble and the rest of the Eurogroup to give Greece a break. Schauble called his bluff, the banks almost went underwater and the rest is history. Tsipras then got rid of Varoufakis and has since then be loyally wagging his tail whenever the EU pretends to care. Tsipras is such a piece of poo poo. Such a lost opportunity. punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 18:49 on Dec 3, 2016 |
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 03:27 |
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I hate myself for reposting a "Tweet storm" but this guy seems like he's onto something: https://twitter.com/matthewstoller/status/805058044262567936 Apparently a minimum income is neoliberalism now, so that word has completed its evolution into "economic policies I don't like or understand". https://twitter.com/matthewstoller/status/805058404486156288 Apparently the Republicans were right about welfare all along. This guy's really onto something!
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
you could just save yourself a lot of effort and just replace your posts with 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:https://twitter.com/matthewstoller/status/805058044262567936 He's talking about perceptions there not actuality. It matters that things like GMI are *seen* as lacking dignity. We have to either change that perception or find a way around it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:He's talking about perceptions there not actuality. It matters that things like GMI are *seen* as lacking dignity. We have to either change that perception or find a way around it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:He's talking about perceptions there not actuality. It matters that things like GMI are *seen* as lacking dignity. We have to either change that perception or find a way around it. Ok, but things like a GMI manifestly aren't neoliberalism. They're socialism. If voters don't like socialism, or at least a lot of the socialist policy menu, the path forward for Democrats can't be as simple as "get more leftist, dummies".
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:He's talking about perceptions there not actuality. It matters that things like GMI are *seen* as lacking dignity. We have to either change that perception or find a way around it. No he isn't. https://mobile.twitter.com/matthewstoller/status/805061406840279040 He later er comments that metely stopping upward redistribution will cause things to even out, no downward redistribution necessary.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
i mean he's right? people want to work, not have a stipend.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
He's selling left-libertarianism, beware.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:i mean he's right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:i mean he's right? People want to be healthy not have to go to the doctor, but be healthy isn't a plan.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:He's selling left-libertarianism, beware.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Ok, but things like a GMI manifestly aren't neoliberalism. They're socialism. If voters don't like socialism, or at least a lot of the socialist policy menu, the path forward for Democrats can't be as simple as "get more leftist, dummies".
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
farraday posted:No he isn't. Well, ok, but I dont think that's his main point. I saw the narrative he was telling as pretty simple; 1) Democrats have become the party of financial monopoly power (just like the Republican s in a different way) 2) voters want *anything else* because they know the consensus is screwing them 3) Trump was disliked but he wasn't establishment and that was the best available option. I think the obvious conclusion to draw from that narrative is that credible progressives are the answer. We need candidates with charisma and who are focused on economic justice. Obama's greatest mistake was the decision not to prosecute bankers after 2008. You can't be a progressive without busting trusts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Die Sexmonster! posted:Is this A Modest Proposal? Like, do you think these insane power-hungry God warriors won't latch onto another arbitrary aspect of the culture war to scream about?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:It's not socialism either. It would probably not be incompatible with a socialist system though. If you're more comfortable calling it social democracy, fine. But it ain't neoliberalism, if that word has any meaning. Anime Schoolgirl posted:ah yes, ideological purity, the one most important thing when democracy is getting owned I'm not demanding ideological purity, I'm identifying this guy's lovely ideology. There's a difference.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:If you're more comfortable calling it social democracy, fine. But it ain't neoliberalism, if that word has any meaning.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:It's an important difference. Social democracy is a betrayal of the working class, a stalling tactic while capitalism regains its strength. So Bernie was a trojan horse?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:It's an important difference. Social democracy is a betrayal of the working class, a stalling tactic while capitalism regains its strength. Are you literally wearing a red diaper right now Social democracy is the furthest left it is realistically possible to conceive of pushing American democracy in our lifetimes. (See: Bernie, FDR, Scandinavia.) If you're rejecting it in favor of Full Communism Now you're not engaging with reality.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
People tend to forget that capitalism is almost 200 years old while the current creator of our dread, neoliberalism, is only a variant of capitalism that was preceded by the much more progressive egalitarian capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:People tend to forget that capitalism is almost 200 years old while the current creator of our dread, neoliberalism, is only a variant of capitalism that was preceded by the much more progressive egalitarian capitalism. Capitalism was never progressive or egalitarian. The worst practices of v it were just pushed to the periphery. Out of sight, out of mind. New Deal capitalism was just as brutal as our current and previous Gilded Age capitalism. They just treated the workers a little less like poo poo in the West and continued the brutality in the developing world
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:If you're more comfortable calling it social democracy, fine. But it ain't neoliberalism, if that word has any meaning. As Anime Schoolgirl pointed out, it's not incompatible with socialism either. It's kind of orthogonal as a concept really - even Friedman advocated a minimum income. Hieronymous Alloy posted:I think the obvious conclusion to draw from that narrative is that credible progressives are the answer. We need candidates with charisma and who are focused on economic justice. Obama's greatest mistake was the decision not to prosecute bankers after 2008. You can't be a progressive without busting trusts. I don't think you're wrong, but I do think progressivism will be a tougher sell (to the extent Matt Stoller is correct which I think he is) because progressives aren't really focusing on economic empowerment to the extent they should.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Are you literally wearing a red diaper right now While I agree for the most part, I do agree we can push socialist/anarchist like systems such as participatory budgeting, expansions of credit unions, and German like worker representation in corporations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:Capitalism was never progressive or egalitarian. The worst practices of v it were just pushed to the periphery. Out of sight, out of mind. New Deal capitalism was just as brutal as our current and previous Gilded Age capitalism. They just treated the workers a little less like poo poo in the West and continued the brutality in the developing world Well that is more of a symptom of the human condition than capitalism. Racism and realism had a lot more to do with colonial cold-war attitudes than capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Are you literally wearing a red diaper right now
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:I don't think it's neoliberalism either, but it isn't socialism or social democracy because UBI is totally compatible with the economic center of gravity remaining in the hands of (slightly more benevolent) oligarchy. You could have the same 5 corporations or whatever controlling 95% of global capital, and kindly redistributing some of the profits to the rest of society - how is that socialism? That's exactly what social democracy is. The nordic model. quote:Most progressives in US politics are just liberals with more focus on the social safety net. If you're a progressive and you're hammering on raising the minimum wage instead of profit sharing or democratic workplaces and unionization, then you're doing it wrong. Raising the minimum wage is nice but no one wants to be earning the minimum wage for their entire life - if your message sort of implies that they will then that's pretty bleak. It's the same sort of thing with basic income; basic income might be an easier sell if we weren't implying that we'd use it to save the Rust Belt by cutting everyone a check, then loving off and doing nothing else. Basically the message of the Democratic party sort of boils down to "turn your political power (your vote) into transfer payments at the ballot box" which is a poo poo message. Progressivism has always been about good government, regulations, labor protections, and welfare.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Well that is more of a symptom of the human condition than capitalism. Racism and realism had a lot more to do with colonial cold-war attitudes than capitalism. Except it doesn't the British didn't wage the Opium Wars because of the Cold War they did it for pure capitalistic reasons, yeah that's the 19th century, but the Colonial attitudes during the Cold War weren't that different. If you were in a nation or colony that exported natural resources capitalism still made life miserable for you. That's the root of Maoist Third Worldism. But you don't even have to go over seas, just look at the first wave of outsourcing wasn't to Asia, but it was from the Northern union states to the Southern and Western non- union states where people would work for less in more dangerous conditions. Capital was still exploitative, it just went from being, we're going to put your heads on pikes bad, to tolerable bad
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:Except it doesn't the British didn't wage the Opium Wars because of the Cold War they did it for pure capitalistic reasons, yeah that's the 19th century, but the Colonial attitudes during the Cold War weren't that different. If you were in a nation or colony that exported natural resources capitalism still made life miserable for you. That's the root of Maoist Third Worldism. I'm not going to claim that capitalism is universally good because that is provably ridiculous. The legacy of colonialism in the 20th century and globalization today stand as stark proof of the opposite. We basically replaced guns and slavery with debt. I'm not sure that can be called an improvement. What I am going to claim however is that capitalism be less bad through its FDR or Scandinavian social democracy inspired variants.  I hate property rights as much as the next person but I still haven't come up with a better system and neither has the rest of the world. De-centralised ownership is a good start but it's not really a departure from the capitalist model, it's only a change in the structure of ownership. Hell, state capitalism seems way more favorable than the actual 20th century communism models that were attempted.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:That's exactly what social democracy is. The nordic model. People seemed to using social democracy and democratic socialism interchangeably though. Point taken.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:And aren't we finding out that the nordic model is vulnerable to right-wing ideologues, same as the rest of Europe?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:And aren't we finding out that the nordic model is vulnerable to right-wing ideologues, same as the rest of Europe?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:in sweden's case it's more "loving nonsense" than right-wing ideologues, because migrants are taken freely and given all benefits immediately while thousands of long-time immigrant families who have contributed to the economy and own businesses are being deported for no actual reason--not even the bookkeepers know. That's not even remotely how it works.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:If you're more comfortable calling it social democracy, fine. But it ain't neoliberalism, if that word has any meaning. UBI may not be neoliberal, but is the logical outcome of neoliberal policy, unless you want a revolution. You can give the 99% either work or bread, but you must give them *something* or you will end up on the guillotine. Turns out they prefer work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:And aren't we finding out that the nordic model is vulnerable to right-wing ideologues, same as the rest of Europe? Democracies are always vulnerable to right-wing ideologies. "Make the US more like Denmark or Norway" is a pretty fair summary of Bernie's economic agenda, right? Now we find out that's just more compromise with the capitalists that is doomed to fail?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:That's not even remotely how it works.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:I'm not going to claim that capitalism is universally good because that is provably ridiculous. The legacy of colonialism in the 20th century and globalization today stand as stark proof of the opposite. We basically replaced guns and slavery with debt. I'm not sure that can be called an improvement. What I am going to claim however is that capitalism be less bad through its FDR or Scandinavian social democracy inspired variants. Yeah I can agree that, that capitalism under FDR or through social democracy is a less bad, or at least bad in a different way. Though I don't really know if China today is really any better than China under Mao. Not that we should blindly retry 20th Century Communism without any changes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:I'm going to disclaimer that as going by what friends in Sweden tell me, and I'm more inclined to believe that and AP/google translated swedish news outlets over filtered international news. I'm pretty sure the true picture is darker and more depressing As an actual Swede who has written a literal 40-page study on the change to our immigration policy this summer, they're wrong. The old system didn't work like that, and the new one which is objectively one of the worst in the EU does absolutely not. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 21:12 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
Nermal posted:UBI may not be neoliberal, but is the logical outcome of neoliberal policy, unless you want a revolution. You can give the 99% either work or bread, but you must give them *something* or you will end up on the guillotine. Turns out they prefer work. I'm not sure they prefer work, but let's assume they do. Maybe the reason they prefer employment programs to welfare is employment programs help hard working americans whereas welfare is for lazy brown people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:New Deal capitalism was just as brutal quote:treated the workers a little less like poo poo Well, which one is it forums poster KomradeX?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 21:17
|
|
This poster loves police brutality, but only when its against minorities!
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 03:27 |
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:Well, which one is it forums poster KomradeX? while you were tripping over yourself to make this own, you forgot that his idea was "new deal capitalism just exported the misery"
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 21:22
|
|