|
Edible Hat posted:Yeah, that is horrific (if it happens). What are you doing to stop it? Is this evidence of a rightward shift in the Democratic Party (i.e. would they have been more or less likely to have done this ten, twenty, thirty years ago?) Do other pieces of evidence suggest that Democrats are moving rightward? How do they, in their magnitude, to pieces that may suggest the opposite? This is par for the course for progressive politics, who despite their professed love for worker's rights treat their own like absolute garbage. I was an organizer for SEIU Healthcare in 2012 and the turnover rate at the office was over 100% for organizers and reps.
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 09:59 |
|
|
Rodatose posted:Just a reminder, in 2004, gay marriage was a major issue in the election, and many democrats blamed LGBTQs being too vocal in their demands for Kerry's loss. Yet their activism eventually ended up paying off in changing the social landscape for the better. unfortunately, dems are too cowardly for that. they'd rather be the abused bootlicker party
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:37
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:I know better than to rely on minorities to defend my lovely trade policies, or respect American institutions enough not to buy a gun in Trumpland to defend myself or rely on political correctness and the 1st Amendment to protect me from the cops. Trump didn't outflank Hillary on anything because his trade policy isn't left wing, it's just stupid and based on the alternate reality he and his most rabid supporters live in. You're just really hell bent on revisionist "racism did not matter in 2016, no sir" bullshit and it's really honestly funny. Guess what bro, I live in the Rust Belt too. There's a lotta racism, even if you don't want to admit it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:Doesn't Zizek have really poor ideas about transgenderism? Because speaking of North Carolina, the loss of business from HB2 is part of what swung the votes away from McCrory because even most conservatives don't care who's using the bathroom. His views are not as poor as your typical SV hack job that champions it like Elon Musk. I certainly don’t trust business and the free market to do something because otherwise it is unethical. Usually, it is a reaction to a gross misuse of funds. That bathroom bill was expensive to enforce. Had the GOP gone with something like a religious tolerance bill, McCrory would still be in office.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:41
|
|
|
I don't give a flying gently caress what Slavoj Zizek thinks and in a just world nobody else would either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:41
|
|
|
Philosophy is an artifice of the bourgeoisie. The only true path to full communism is blind and violent rage that can't explain itself, nor wants to. Read more on my MySpace.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Trump didn't outflank Hillary on anything because his trade policy isn't left wing, it's just stupid and based on the alternate reality he and his most rabid supporters live in. This is not true. If you look at what both the far right and far left parties in Europe are doing, it’s something remarkably similar: They’re all trying to return economies back to control on national levels. TPP was a rusty sword for Hillary to go die on, and she was inarticulate in how she was going to deal with globalism. Trump, on the other hand, had a very clear message: The rich global elite hosed you. That’s pretty left wing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:45
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:Philosophy is an artifice of the bourgeoisie. The only true path to full communism is blind and violent rage that can't explain itself, nor wants to. Read more on my MySpace. Most of it is needlessly complicated jargon full of abstractions and obfuscation that the average member of the working class neither cares about nor could hope to understand even if they wanted to, and deliberately so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:Philosophy is an artifice of the bourgeoisie. The only true path to full communism is blind and violent rage that can't explain itself, nor wants to. Read more on my MySpace. link!? i liked the zizek video, thought it entertaining, and have enjoyed many of the things he's had to say
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:Philosophy is an artifice of the bourgeoisie. The only true path to full communism is blind and violent rage that can't explain itself, nor wants to. Read more on my MySpace. would you like to merge with my death cult? pm if interested
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Most of it is needlessly complication abstractions and obfuscation that the average member of the working class neither cares about nor could hope to understand even if they wanted to. I'm just making jokes. In all honesty, as an English major, most philosophical writing offends me in its obfuscation. Also, I'd argue the undertones of Trump's words are less that the rich people are loving you so much as, "their rich people are loving you." Trump's message is still rooted in the idea of benevolent business saviors, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:47
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:This is not true. If you look at what both the far right and far left parties in Europe are doing, it’s something remarkably similar: They’re all trying to return economies back to control on national levels. TPP was a rusty sword for Hillary to go die on, and she was inarticulate in how she was going to deal with globalism. Yes, they are, but that's because of populism, not because of left-right economics. Nationalism isn't an inherently left-wing thing at all and lol if you think otherwise because we have a word for that and it isn't socialism. Trump's message wasn't just about how the rich elites are loving the Rust Belt, it was about how the shadowy (((cabal))) was working to ensure that China would become more powerful than the US and steal our jobs alongside Mexico. His spite narrative was explicitly oriented around nationalism, and his entire gimmick was that as a member of the rich elite who is not accepted by them socially, only he could reign them in and return the United States to its nebulous true former glory. Also lmao if you think Trump or anybody else in any far right party has any intention of ever renegotiating a trade deal to favor workers of any kind.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Most of it is needlessly complicated jargon full of abstractions and obfuscation that the average member of the working class neither cares about nor could hope to understand even if they wanted to, and deliberately so. Small wonder the working class gets hosed over all the time by both parties.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
You get mad at me over political correctness and then use jew echoes. What?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:49
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:
trump's final campaign commercial was about taking control back from global financiers, with the images of a few particular people who happened to mainly be jewish
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:49
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:You get mad at me over political correctness and then use jew echoes. What? Your reading comprehension sucks. Let me be more clear. Trump's narrative wasn't about class warfare, it was about how the Jewish conspiracy was trying to kill the white working class. That was his narrative. That's what "globalism" means. That's why STEVE loving BANNON was running his campaign. You're ungodly dense.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:51
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Also lmao if you think Trump or anybody else in any far right party has any intention of ever renegotiating a trade deal to favor workers of any kind. True, but Trump didn't have to actually intend to renegotiate trade deals, to be able to claim that he would, and have a lot of voters believe him. The Dems should be able to tell the same lies, and I'm still kind of flabbergasted that Clinton was so bad at it for so long.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:52
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:yeah incrementalism is the only way to pass policy and make it last he has both houses, obama lost that in 2010 and had a supermajority for what, a week?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:53
|
|
|
Majorian posted:True, but Trump didn't have to actually intend to renegotiate trade deals, to be able to claim that he would, and have a lot of voters believe him. The Dems should be able to tell the same lies, and I'm still kind of flabbergasted that Clinton was so bad at it for so long. I mean, I don't think that should be a lie. We should work to renegotiate trade deals to be better for the environment and workers (I stress the environment first here because, uh, yeah, we done hosed up with the environment), like that's a great idea and a way to turn globalization into a force for good on the world stage. Trade deals are only as lovely as we make them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:it's also national socialist The Nazis co opted a shitload of left wing views to get the working class on their side.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
Clinton never had a, "Read my lips - no new taxes," moment, and she kinda needed one if she really thought Trump was the threat she made him out to be. But we're talking about the candidate who refused to shake Trump's hand at a debate, then shook it the next day at some correspondents dinner or whatever, so that should say volumes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:55
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:Mark Blyth in a prophetic voice: “I told you so” I just watched pretty much every clip of his on YouTube a couple days ago. He rattles off his politico-economic knowledge like a machine gun, I sometimes have to replay it cause he's so erudite. Here's my question about him, like he claims he is on the Left but what kind of economic system does he favor? A heavily regulated capitalism, or a socialism or something else? His analysis is fantastic and insightful, but like Zizek, doesn't really offer a direction where we should be going. But like Zizek, raises more important questions that are interesting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:55
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I mean, I don't think that should be a lie. We should work to renegotiate trade deals to be better for the environment and workers (I stress the environment first here because, uh, yeah, we done hosed up with the environment), like that's a great idea and a way to turn globalization into a force for good on the world stage. We usually don't write these trade deals. Corporations do. Look at anything from the WTO or European capital trade agreements. They weren't written by any government.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I mean, I don't think that should be a lie. We should work to renegotiate trade deals to be better for the environment and workers (I stress the environment first here because, uh, yeah, we done hosed up with the environment), like that's a great idea and a way to turn globalization into a force for good on the world stage. Well sure, I'm just saying - even if a Democratic nominee didn't actually intend to do so, he or she still should probably pretend like they do. If they can't even do that, what good are they?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Your reading comprehension sucks. Let me be more clear. The fun thing about dog whistles is that they mean different things to different people. You are COMPLETELY wrong if you think that antisemitism was one of Trump's major campaign planks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:The fun thing about dog whistles is that they mean different things to different people. You are COMPLETELY wrong if you think that antisemitism was one of Trump's major campaign planks. Mmmm, no, he's actually quite right. A lot of his most fervent supporters saw the antisemitic dog whistles as a positive thing. That may not be the case with every Trump supporter, but it certainly was an encouraging factor to a lot of them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
I don't know why it is only philosophy as a branch of knowledge that is excoriated for its obscurantism (i.e. that it often takes a few read-throughs to comprehend the depth of its argument). It took me a lot longer to understand calculus one iota -- its bizarre symbols, its counterintuative axioms, its questionable applicability to my goals -- than anything Žižek writes. He is also a lot funnier and more entertaining than calculus.
Edible Hat fucked around with this message at 05:02 on Feb 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/lhfang/status/835576391563255808?ref_src=tw https://twitter.com/lhfang/status/835577030414479360?ref_src=tw so yeah, perez was a win for the lobbyist, clintonista wing of the party why should people stay in again? (ɐusʍǝɹ: ʇɥǝʎ sɥonןpu,ʇ)
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
Edible Hat posted:I don't know why it is only philosophy as a branch of knowledge that is excoriated for its obscurantism (i.e. that it often takes a few read-throughs to comprehend the depth of its argument). It took me a lot longer to understand calculus one iota -- its bizarre symbols, its counterintuative axioms, its questionable applicability to my goals -- than anything Žižek writes. He is also a lot funner and more entertaining than calculus. Yeah, but Žižek is pretty easily comprehensible compared to a lot of Marxists, tbf.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Mmmm, no, he's actually quite right. A lot of his most fervent supporters saw the antisemitic dog whistles as a positive thing. That may not be the case with every Trump supporter, but it certainly was an encouraging factor to a lot of them. Ok. Is there any proof of this?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
Confounding Factor posted:I just watched pretty much every clip of his on YouTube a couple days ago. He rattles off his politico-economic knowledge like a machine gun, I sometimes have to replay it cause he's so erudite. I don't think Blyth operates on that kind of ideological plane, he usually is offering pure economic analysis and tends to fit in a frame work of left-wing capitalist reformist because capitalism is what presently exists. Dead Cosmonaut posted:We usually don't write these trade deals. Corporations do. Look at anything from the WTO or European capital trade agreements. They weren't written by any government. Yes, and? So we change that. Any discussion of how to fix the issues with globalization and capitalism is already operating on a level of hypothetical way outside what is presently likely to happen soon. Majorian posted:Well sure, I'm just saying - even if a Democratic nominee didn't actually intend to do so, he or she still should probably pretend like they do. If they can't even do that, what good are they? Lying about it probably is the worst strategy, honestly. Either say what you plan to do about trade and the economy or come up with a new plan and talk about that. The Kingfish posted:The fun thing about dog whistles is that they mean different things to different people. You are COMPLETELY wrong if you think that antisemitism was one of Trump's major campaign planks. Playing to the history of popularity of Jewish and UN/NWO conspiracies on the right was absolutely a major part of Trump's campaign, or have you forgotten the whole "tweeting out the 'sheriff's star' " incident which, iirc, was before Bannon signed on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Ok. Is there any proof of this? There's certainly evidence. Lightning Knight posted:Lying about it probably is the worst strategy, honestly. Either say what you plan to do about trade and the economy or come up with a new plan and talk about that. I dunno, it worked for Trump.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
One candidate understood that the financial elite are not well liked and pandered to that when needed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Ok. Is there any proof of this? i'd say the jewish places of worship being attacked and defiled recently is p decent proof
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I dunno, it worked for Trump. I personally consider an unwillingness to adopt racist nationalism and a desire to provide solutions that might actually work a halmark of modern progressive leftism, maybe I'm wrong. For god's sake we have to spend four trillion dollars on infrastructure, we could run on literally just that + make the rich people pay for it and win.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
Edible Hat posted:I don't know why it is only philosophy as a branch of knowledge that is excoriated for its obscurantism (i.e. that it often takes a few read-throughs to comprehend the depth of its argument). It took me a lot longer to understand calculus one iota -- its bizarre symbols, its counterintuative axioms, its questionable applicability to my goals -- than anything Žižek writes. He is also a lot funner and more entertaining than calculus. Analytic philosophers always charge continentals as being obscure, when its really the latter that is at pains not to be. I think it helps to have Hegel, Lacan, Freud, Marx, maybe a few chapters of Being and Time (Zizek's early work is totally entrenched in Heidegger) before reading Zizek with greater understanding. His popular works are easy to get into, but his more dense academic stuff heavily rely on understanding the thinking of those prior figures. IMO he's a second-tier thinker, but still worth the read.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I personally consider an unwillingness to adopt racist nationalism and a desire to provide solutions that might actually work a halmark of modern progressive leftism, maybe I'm wrong. Yeah, but one can run against NAFTA and other free trade agreements without adopting racist nationalism. Sanders did.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:The Nazis co opted a shitload of left wing views to get the working class on their side. with certain variations which make them not left wing anymore. unfortunately, a lot of americans are not able to detect the differences which might clue them in if it's no longer about taking from the rich and giving to the poor, but instead targeting certain social groups without a describing a method of how the plunder will enrich proles other than a nebulous "the economy will be strong again" it's not leftist
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
Edible Hat posted:I don't know why it is only philosophy as a branch of knowledge that is excoriated for its obscurantism (i.e. that it often takes a few read-throughs to comprehend the depth of its argument). It took me a lot longer to understand calculus one iota -- its bizarre symbols, its counterintuative axioms, its questionable applicability to my goals -- than anything Žižek writes. He is also a lot funnier and more entertaining than calculus. It's words, and I love words, but abused to an absurd extent. I haven't read much Zizek, though, it seems mostly accessible. The more inaccessible ones than general philosophy are economists or a particularly abstract feminist, where a single proper noun or concrete example isn't used for the entire piece.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 09:59 |
|
|
Majorian posted:Yeah, but one can run against NAFTA and other free trade agreements without adopting racist nationalism. Sanders did. You can, but running against trade agreements won't do what the anti-trade voting public wants, which is bring back the good (factory) jobs. "We should renegotiate existing trade agreements to emphasize environmental and labor standards and do so in all new trade agreements before agreeing to sign" is an honest position that would actually be productive to American interests in combination with infrastructure spending, and happens to be a minor modification to Bernie's platform. Honestly I'm just arguing that instead of "trade agreements bad, tear them up," we say "trade agreements bad, let's rewrite them," because that has a shot at doing something to help the problem substantially.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 05:06
|
|