|
Atrocious Joe posted:Can someone redo this image with various left wing parties' associated publications?
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 03:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
lmoa @ u guys clicking on that pic
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
Atrocious Joe posted:Can someone redo this image with various left wing parties' associated publications?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
my old lady's mom died tonight and we had to make an anti-suicide pact. lmao 2016 has been a real bitch of a yeart
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 04:37
|
|
|
jarofpiss posted:my old lady's mom died tonight and we had to make an anti-suicide pact. lmao 2016 has been a real bitch of a yeart That's pretty hosed up. Good luck.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
All the hoopla of fake news and yet the NYT still airs the writings of Thomas loving Friedman.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 05:45
|
|
|
It's cool if you admit the news was fake after we've gone to war.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 05:47
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
Atrocious Joe posted:Can someone redo this image with various left wing parties' associated publications? Does anyone have a link to the review from another publication in the 90s where the reviewer points out that the Economist is only popular because it's got the reputation of an old established British institution with great institutional knowledge but in reality it's written by dorks in their 20s who studied business at university and look things up on wikipedia? I usually summarise it as 'People in X read it for its perspective on Y because their articles on X are terrible and people in Y read it for its perspective on X because their articles on Y are terrible, etc, etc'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
Atrocious Joe posted:Can someone redo this image with various left wing parties' associated publications? im not the only one seeing goatse right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
resar posted:im not the only one seeing goatse right? looks like a Tachikoma to me
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
namesake posted:Does anyone have a link to the review from another publication in the 90s where the reviewer points out that the Economist is only popular because it's got the reputation of an old established British institution with great institutional knowledge but in reality it's written by dorks in their 20s who studied business at university and look things up on wikipedia? https://www.theatlantic.com/technol...post-1991/7415/
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 07:02
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dut6sPW52Q New Richard Wolff update, if anyone is interested. Starting around 50ish minutes till the end is some good stuff. Deimus fucked around with this message at 12:40 on Dec 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 09:41
|
|
|
Deimus posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dut6sPW52Q Thanks for posting this, first video of his I've watched through completely. He did a good job of putting a lot of this coming poo poo storm into perspective. I had no idea that Labour even had a policy that radical, I thought they had done the usual center-left thing of fading away into obscurity instead of taking actual progressive stances.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 11:35
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/hegelfan1/status/809450356753068032 https://twitter.com/hegelfan1/status/809450735234449408
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
Marx is ... good?!
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 06:55
|
|
|
Did Marx have a plan if communism really took off? Like, if the day after he put out his zine all the bankers and landlords got together and said "yeah, this is way better than what we're doing now, let's go farm some potatoes" and just let the proletariat have at it. Was he gonna crops, or did he figure they'd just keep him around out of gratitude?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 07:04
|
|
|
so has anyone designed an AI that can write a Thomas Friedman op-ed yet?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 07:24
|
|
|
Who needs an AI? just pre write the article leaving blank spaces for country to bomb, leader to trial and atrocity that justifies said bombing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 07:41
|
|
|
Volcott posted:Did Marx have a plan if communism really took off? Like, if the day after he put out his zine all the bankers and landlords got together and said "yeah, this is way better than what we're doing now, let's go farm some potatoes" and just let the proletariat have at it. Marx's whole thing was that you can't just pre plan the form of communism because it will arise from the circumstances that birth it. However, he did once advance a theoretical system with non transferable "labor tokens" you'd exchange for stuff. It has (rightfully imho) been mostly discarded.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 08:09
|
|
|
Volcott posted:Did Marx have a plan if communism really took off? His thing was 95% more about just analyzing capitalism. But the '10 planks of the communist manifesto' were demands that communists would hope to do to get the ball rolling if revolution happened though. It's really a case by case basis though..
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 08:16
|
|
|
resar posted:Who needs an AI? just pre write the article leaving blank spaces for country to bomb, leader to trial and atrocity that justifies said bombing. I was talking to my ethnicity cab driver in world city about article topic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 08:40
|
|
|
Lol at Marxists making fun of liberals for not changing. Call me when Liberals are quoting Friedman from prosperous communist states in 100 years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Lol at Marxists making fun of liberals for not changing. Call me when Liberals are quoting Friedman from prosperous communist states in 100 years. You know one of the foundations of Marxism is self-criticism, right? There's a reason the left gets so fractured. Would quoting Adam Smith in an economic discussion disqualify the quoter in your eyes?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
Oh absolutely. The point is there is nothing wrong with Marx. It's th bizarre psudo-religious fake science ideology of Marxists that's the problem.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
Don't lie to us.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
http://i.imgur.com/fL5A2qP.gifv
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Oh absolutely. The point is there is nothing wrong with Marx. It's th bizarre psudo-religious fake science ideology of Marxists that's the problem. I understand where you're coming from since these days you're only likely to meet a Marxist (if you don't seek them out) and know that's what they are on internet forums for brokebrain nerds (present company excluded)
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
Fiction posted:I understand where you're coming from since these days you're only likely to meet a Marxist (if you don't seek them out) and know that's what they are on internet forums for brokebrain nerds (present company excluded) I've only met one communist irl he was an old dude who used to build mcmansions for rich Texans and mostly cares about the parts that involved victimizing the rich so he's p much the most legit leftist
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
In facebook comment battle with someone who commented on a socialist post by just saying: "The goal of socialism is communism." - Vladimir Lenin Isn't there a quote by someone floating around that's like "Capitalism leads to communism." or something? Like, wasn't a theoretical point of someone that capitalism creates the perfect situation for communism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
Barracuda Bang! posted:In facebook comment battle with someone who commented on a socialist post by just saying: "The goal of socialism is communism." - Vladimir Lenin Ask them what they mean by "socialism." If it's not seizing and democratizing the means then that quote doesn't apply.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
Barracuda Bang! posted:In facebook comment battle with someone who commented on a socialist post by just saying: "The goal of socialism is communism." - Vladimir Lenin Here's my take: Marx makes a number of criticisms and observations about capitalism and says that because there's absolutely no limit to capital accumulation under capitalism, and no limit to labor exploitation, capitalism will eventually drive itself to destruction when the labor force finally says, "Yes, there is a limit to exploitation, and you've reached it." In America, the New Deal responded to many of Marx's critiques with... socialism. Medicare and Social Security and Unemployment Insurance... that's all socialism. But in America, the goal of socialism is to mitigate the bad effects of capitalism. It keeps it going by imposing limits, by providing safety nets and all that stuff the economic system doesn't do on its own. Lenin disagrees. He doesn't want to use socialism to "fix" capitalism. He wants to pursue socialism until it develops into communism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
The Marxist tendency to keep on reading and quoting Marx can be a little archaic-seeming, but it's nowhere near as embarassing as the Marxist tendency to keep on reading and quoting asdf32.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
LegoPirateNinja posted:Here's my take: Socialism is a completely different mode of production from capitalism, where workers control their own enterprises democratically. There are multiple models of socialism regarding how you get all of those liberated workspaces working together, or in service to a peoples' state - but if your workplace isn't holding elections then you're probably not experiencing socialism. Welfare programs are non-ideological, and could be employed by any state to mitigate the effects of inequality. Otto von Bismark's Imperial Germany was the first industrial state to implement widespread welfare reforms, and that was in service to a conservative monarchy trying to suppress socialist agitation. Marxists generally view socialism as a necessary developmental stage to create the preconditions to realize communism. The Leninists in particular followed a state socialist model, since the state was the most efficient aggregator & director of capital in society. What you're talking about is an American liberal conception of "socialism," which is a reactionary game of wordsmithing intended to reinforce capitalist hegemony. By confusing ideological terminology, it reinforces the right to private property by making redistribution appear as the end itself when it is actually a means. Operating within this framework, even while pursuing leftist ideals you would not be free from liberalism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
Government telling Private Industry what they can pay their workers is socialism even if Government doesn't own the enterprise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
LegoPirateNinja posted:Government telling Private Industry what they can pay their workers is socialism even if Government doesn't own the enterprise. Then my dude, you're pretty much saying Japan is a socialist state.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Then my dude, you're pretty much saying Japan is a socialist state. Nope.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
Wage controls are not particularly socialist. Richard Nixon was not a socialist. What is even going on here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 19:32
|
|