Hodgepodge posted:

Funny, centrists love to claim scientific objectivity, but much of what you believe seems to amount to half-assed assumptions you never even considered to fact-check.

the trump tutelage posted:

He's not wrong.

asdf32 posted:

Umm yes of course and the fact that marx invented new technical definitions for existing normative terms is part of the fun of Marxism where smart Marxists try to flip between the definitions without anyone noticing to trick onlookers into thinking the sciency technical definition backs the normative claim (and the dumb Marxists buy it).

the trump tutelage posted:

He's not wrong.

Condiv posted:

he is cause he completely ignores the influence those sweatshop owners exert over the host governments to force the populace into situations where it's either sweatshop labor or starve. a lot of these places have their agricultural industries destroyed by US food, leaving a lot of hungry people without work, and then the sweatshops come in to charitably save these people by paying them sub-subsistence wages (as in they have to go into debt to loan sharks to live) and rape female workers on the regular. how charitable centrism is!

the trump tutelage posted:

That would be relevant if his argument was "it's the best we can do" and not "it's better than nothing".

Pener Kropoopkin posted:

Being a colony is better than the total collapse of civilization, I suppose.

the trump tutelage posted:

That would be relevant if his argument was "it's the best we can do" and not "it's better than nothing".

zeal posted:

lol no it isn't

Condiv posted:

he is cause he completely ignores the influence those sweatshop owners exert over the host governments to force the populace into situations where it's either sweatshop labor or starve. a lot of these places have their agricultural industries destroyed by US food, leaving a lot of hungry people without work, and then the sweatshops come in to charitably save these people by paying them sub-subsistence wages (as in they have to go into debt to loan sharks to live) and rape female workers on the regular. how charitable centrism is!

Paul Krugman and asdf32 posted:

After all, global poverty is not something recently invented for the benefit of multinational corporations.

Hodgepodge posted:

holy poo poo, you're actually trying to attack marx for defining his terms. in ways i've already demonstrated were utterly in line with their standard usage at the time he wrote.

you're going for 'centrist,' not 'trump supporter,' my dude; acting like you're unable to understand the conventions of academic prose is not a centrist look at all

asdf32 posted:

Condiv posted:

he's wrong about that too. poverty is frequently inflicted upon nations by mulitnationals for their benefit. what little wealth growth is shown is from grift paid to the host governments and paramilitaries.

Pener Kropoopkin posted:

He's not wrong that global poverty isn't new, he just also ignores the imperialist forces that reinforce it.

asdf32 posted:

No I rarely if ever criticize Marx who was a great thinker in 1867. It's modern Marxists deliberately or naively blurring Marx's technical definitions with more common normative ones (exploitation is "unfair" according to the dictionary) that I'm aiming criticism at.

Condiv posted:

can you honestly argue that global poverty is not caused by imperialism? were any of these nations impoverished before they were hit hard by imperialism? i wouldn't say the native americans were

asdf32 posted:

Holy loving poo poo.

Hodgepodge posted:

were i live, the native peoples were enormously wealthy when europeans initially arrived, which is why traders were willing to come to a place that britain and spain and later america literally decided was too far away to be worth going to war for despite knowing there was shitloads of gold in the area

or wait- you might actually be making unironically racist assumptions i guess

asdf32 posted:

Holy loving poo poo.

asdf32 posted:

Holy loving poo poo.

Ze Pollack posted:

fun game for you, asdf32: guess what the most populous city on the face of the planet was in 1492

turns out the barbaric savages understood more about public health than anyone in europe did, poo poo's nuts

the trump tutelage posted:

"wealthy" seems like a clumsy word to use. At least I imagine that the definition would change in the context of pre-contact versus post-contact North America.

the trump tutelage posted:

"wealthy" seems like a clumsy word to use. At least I imagine that the definition would change in the context of pre-contact versus post-contact North America.

Hodgepodge posted:

were i live, the native peoples were enormously wealthy when europeans initially arrived, which is why traders were willing to come to a place that britain and spain and later america literally decided was too far away to be worth going to war for despite knowing there was shitloads of gold in the area

or wait- you might actually be making unironically racist assumptions i guess

Ze Pollack posted:

fun game for you, asdf32: guess what the most populous city on the face of the planet was in 1492

turns out the barbaric savages understood more about public health than anyone in europe did, poo poo's nuts

asdf32 posted:

No meanwhile romantisizing pre-industrial life is patronizing.

One reminder about sweatshops is the're not unique to the third world - first world industrialization went through the same thing and it was just as bad (though much longer since modern economic growth can be so much faster precisely because of trade).

And the reason it's universal is because even lovely wage paying factory jobs have offered something better than the alternative for billions of people.

asdf32 posted:

You can blame westerners for lots of things but disease isn't one of them.

Pener Kropoopkin posted:

This is a very facile understanding, because Actually Existing Socialisms did rely on quite a bit of corruption just to make sure that systemic shortages didn't reach a breaking point, and the question was just how much the state should crack down on black markets. The advantage of a capitalist structure is that what you'd normally consider corrupt can be made a legally sanctioned part of the formal system.

asdf32 posted:

No meanwhile romantisizing pre-industrial life is patronizing.

One reminder about sweatshops is the're not unique to the third world - first world industrialization went through the same thing and it was just as bad (though much longer since modern economic growth can be so much faster precisely because of trade).

And the reason it's universal is because even lovely wage paying factory jobs have offered something better than the alternative for billions of people.

quote:

You can blame westerners for lots of things but disease isn't one of them.

quote:

And the reason it's universal is because even lovely wage paying factory jobs have offered something better than the alternative for billions of people.

asdf32 posted:

asdf32 posted:

You can blame westerners for lots of things but disease isn't one of them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Stink posted:

The Great Stink was an event in central London in July and August 1858 during which the hot weather exacerbated the smell of untreated human waste and industrial effluent that was present on the banks of the River Thames. The problem had been mounting for some years, with an ageing and inadequate sewer system that emptied directly into the Thames. The miasma from the effluent was thought to transmit contagious diseases, and three outbreaks of cholera prior to the Great Stink were blamed on the ongoing problems with the river.

The smell, and people's fears of its possible effects, prompted action from the local and national administrators who had been considering possible solutions for the problem. The authorities accepted a proposal from the civil engineer Joseph Bazalgette to move the effluent eastwards along a series of interconnecting sewers that sloped towards outfalls beyond the metropolitan area. Work on high-, mid- and low-level systems for the new Northern and Southern Outfall Sewers started at the beginning of 1859 and lasted until 1875. To aid the drainage, pumping stations were placed to lift the sewage from lower levels into higher pipes. Two of the more ornate stations, Abbey Mills in Stratford and Crossness on the Erith Marshes, are listed for protection by English Heritage. Bazalgette's plan introduced the three embankments to London in which the sewers ran—the Victoria, Chelsea and Albert Embankments.

Bazalgette's work ensured that sewage was no longer dumped onto the shores of the Thames and brought an end to the cholera outbreaks; his actions probably saved more lives than any other Victorian official. His sewer system operates into the 21st century, servicing a city that has grown to a population of over eight million. The historian Peter Ackroyd argues that Bazalgette should be considered a hero of London.

http://www.choleraandthethames.co.uk/cholera-in-london/the-great-stink/ posted:

Though the situation with the Thames was noticeable before the onset of England’s Industrial Age, it was the summer of 1858 that finally brought it to the attention of lawmakers. That particular summer, all of London was feeling the affects of an oppressive heat wave and as a result, all the sewage in the Thames began to ferment in the scorching sun—centuries of waste was literally cooking in the monstrous heat. The result was a smell as offensive and disgusting as can ever be imagined. It spawned accounts such as the following: there were “stories flying of men struck down with the stench, and of all kinds of fatal diseases, up-springing on the river’s banks.”

Luckily enough for the denizens of London, even the elite were not exempt from such an odious odour:
‘The intense heat had driven our legislators from those portions of their buildings which overlook the river. A few members, indeed, bent upon investigating the matter to its very depth, ventured into the library, but they were instantaneously driven to retreat, each man with a handkerchief to his nose.’

Members of Parliament tried at first to stay the course and continue their sessions without agreeing to any drastic plans of reform. They knew that any action taken in regards to ridding the stench would involve an arduous overhauling of the entire infrastructure of the Thames. Many lawmakers were hesitant to make such a commitment and tried instead to relieve their own battered senses.

Their first attempt to quench the stench involved dousing the curtains of Parliament in a mixture of chloride and lime. When that didn’t work, they even considered removing the entire government from the Westminster area—despite the newly constructed building they had only recently acquired. That idea was quickly dropped and soon, days had passed without the formation of a solid resolution. Eventually, the stench simply began to overpower the staunch sensibilities of many of the Members, some who could even be ‘seen fleeing from the Chamber, handkerchief to nose, complaining loudly about the “Stygian Pool” that the Thames had become.’

Hodgepodge posted:

let me tell you a story of the time the thames stunk so bad that it went down in history

logikv9 posted:

mass production was a mistake, bring back handmade everything

logikv9 posted:

mass production was a mistake, bring back handmade everything