(Thread IKs:
fart simpson)
|
yea he's right centrist liberalism has pretty much reigned triumphant since 1830 either it'll be done in because it has no reasonable answer to inequality (nation-states can no longer cage and wrangle capitalism effectively) or our ecological crisis, or it'll kill us all Mann, Wallerstein, and Anderson are pro-reads on this topic
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 07:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:19 |
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:i don't have the answer of how to achieve socialism, but if we put our minds to it, i'm pretty sure we can come up with something better than a political philosophy that says "the proles are too stupid to become revolutionaries on their own, thus they need enlightened philosophical masters to herd them into the mentality like the sheep that they are" I'd be more open to this idea if climate change didn't threaten to destroy us all within our lifetime. It's possibly, probably, too late to stop most of the damage. And I see no way that liberalism can weather the storm without mass death. We might have to resort to eco-stalinism to avoid the greatest genocide in history.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 08:00
|
|
|
rudatron posted:The cost of defeating revolutionary france was too high, in comparison to the immediate victory obtained, and that cost was what doomed aristocracy in Europe. Everyone saw the writing on the wall. And what was the basis of that increased cost, the one that doomed the aristocracy? Efficiency. The "writing on the wall" stayed up for over a century. You're seriously minimizing the persistence of reactionary power and the necessity of violence to overthrow it. quote:Both the kaiser reich and post meiji/imperial japan weren't pure aristocracies, they were internal compromises, made to persist some limited forms of aristocratic privilege, by jettisoning much of it, for the sake of modernization. The fact that any compromise was made is in itself proof of a trend, and that's particularly true of japan, which saw that its own independence as a country would be threatened, were it not to make any attempt at modernizing. What is that, if not the purest case of 'jumping on the bandwagon '? They were also imperial monarchies where the hereditary head of state wielded a lot more than just ceremonial power. France was also the first country to centralize on a large scale, and the nobility gave up many of their privileges for the sake of empowering the French state. Yet somehow it was still necessary to have a revolution. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 08:04
|
|
|
I'm not minimizing the necessity of revolution. But your contention that feudalism is somehow facing major political repression, as the reason for it's no longer being seen as a viable political future, is completely and totally false. It is widely seen as out-moded, and simply has no base of support for a realistic path back to power, because everyone recognizes that it would fare no better than the current system, and would come with greater cost. If we're to travel into some socialist future, after the revolution, and the same hasn't been achieved w.r.t capitalism, that points more to the short comings of the socialist project itself, in delivering on its promises, than it does to any subversive behavior on the part of capitalist insurgents or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 08:12
|
|
|
political repression under feudalism was always limited because the reach of the state in the pre-modern era was low: you can't send a policeman to arrest every villager who has bad thoughts about the king even if you wanted to, things were bad if you were a member of the political elite on the losing end of a political struggle in the capital but otherwise the state had limited means of getting to you dictatorships didn't really get scary until the 20th century when things like telegraphs and trains and modern administrative techniques gave the state the reach into every little hamlet dotting the countryside
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 08:15
|
|
|
Great arguments everyone. I'm glad we could come together and agree that Neoliberalism has failed us and the only path forward is Socialism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 18:09
|
|
|
I'm not clear on whether "feudalism" as Pener Kropoopkin uses it designates an economic system or whether it merely means the political supremacy of the aristocracy. Typo posted:political repression under feudalism was always limited because the reach of the state in the pre-modern era was low: you can't send a policeman to arrest every villager who has bad thoughts about the king even if you wanted to, things were bad if you were a member of the political elite on the losing end of a political struggle in the capital but otherwise the state had limited means of getting to you Political power was more widely dispersed but every village or town still had local authorities who punished people for wearing the wrong clothes or having sex with the wrong person or breaking a million social conventions that would be hard for a modern person to fathom. Religious authorities did their best to compel attendance and participation in religious activities and local government could often compel many days or months of physical service each year from the male population. And in practice every husband and father was running their own dictatorship in miniature, with socially obligatory responsibilities for keeping their children and wife under control. If a husband failed to maintain proper patriarchal authority the rest of the village might even step in and do something: you can read plenty of medieval accounts of people using physical violence to punish, say, a wife who is too authoritative and scolding or a man who is perceived as unable to control his wife or children. Because this violence was enforced by your neighbors it was probably a lot more invasive than repression by a modern police force. Just because your being oppressed by your husband, or by the local village elders or parish priest or baron instead of a bureaucrat or policeman doesn't mean that governments prior to mid-19th century weren't incredibly repressive. All else being equal I'd probably rather live under a 20th century dictatorship than be stuck in 17th century Salem, Massachusetts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 19:11
|
|
|
Dreddout posted:I'd be more open to this idea if climate change didn't threaten to destroy us all within our lifetime. It's possibly, probably, too late to stop most of the damage. And I see no way that liberalism can weather the storm without mass death. We might have to resort to eco-stalinism to avoid the greatest genocide in history. I would argue that a bureaucratic element should be charged to deal with climate change, but that it doesn't necessarily have to be unaccountable. The idea of soviet style democracy in which bureaucrats are subject to the potential for instant recall is relevant here Dictatorship of the proletariat shouldn't be conflated with vanguardism, but rather completely stripping the rich of their power. The absence of vanguardism also doesn't necessarily have to entail the absence of bureaucracies
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
CIA got owned https://twitter.com/KenDilanianNBC/status/953408325613432833
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 00:57
|
|
|
Im glad US intelligence agencies are keeping up with their proud tradition of getting owned by their communist counterparts
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 01:44
|
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:CIA got owned
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 04:47
|
|
|
CIA developing new $100 million chair that lets you sit on your own balls.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 04:50
|
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:CIA got owned Lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 05:32
|
|
|
gently caress I just spent hundreds of military points raising my absolutism in the age of revolutions. In my defense, the tooltip said that I was gaining +0.50 independence every month, and that +0.50 was caused by absolutism being less than 50. So naturally I thought raising it to 50 would help 
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 16:10
|
|
|
LegoPirateNinja posted:gently caress I just spent hundreds of military points raising my absolutism in the age of revolutions. I never understood absolutism
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 18:08
|
|
|
Helsing posted:I'm not clear on whether "feudalism" as Pener Kropoopkin uses it designates an economic system or whether it merely means the political supremacy of the aristocracy. to be fair most historians don't have a clear answer to that either. quote:Political power was more widely dispersed but every village or town still had local authorities who punished people for wearing the wrong clothes or having sex with the wrong person or breaking a million social conventions that would be hard for a modern person to fathom. Religious authorities did their best to compel attendance and participation in religious activities and local government could often compel many days or months of physical service each year from the male population. And in practice every husband and father was running their own dictatorship in miniature, with socially obligatory responsibilities for keeping their children and wife under control. If a husband failed to maintain proper patriarchal authority the rest of the village might even step in and do something: you can read plenty of medieval accounts of people using physical violence to punish, say, a wife who is too authoritative and scolding or a man who is perceived as unable to control his wife or children. Because this violence was enforced by your neighbors it was probably a lot more invasive than repression by a modern police force. I don't know if you've read Caliban & The Witch but it argues that a lot of the early modern forms of repression you describe, people through local authority was in response to early modes of capitalism and the impact it had on labour, especially the labour women performed. It argues (not sure if I totally agree) that Medieval people lived lives with fewer restrictions imposed both socially and from the top down.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 18:33
|
|
|
Typo posted:I never understood absolutism I think its the equivalent of squeezing as much as possible out of your people/vassals/colonies, and then in the Age of Revolutions you get punished for it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 20:45
|
|
|
LegoPirateNinja posted:I think its the equivalent of squeezing as much as possible out of your people/vassals/colonies, and then in the Age of Revolutions you get punished for it. I think it's supposed to model the centralization of state power under the monarchy, which is how France became such a powerful state by the 18th century. So by becoming more absolutist you're sucking up wealth that would've just filled the pockets of corrupt middlemen and aristocrats anyway. That's also why you get punished for it in the Age of Revolutions, because state power being concentrated under the king means people won't blame state corruption on bureaucrats and particular nobles. Dreylad posted:It argues (not sure if I totally agree) that Medieval people lived lives with fewer restrictions imposed both socially and from the top down. I think it's more accurate to say that they were liberated in some ways while being more restricted in others. It's easy for a modern person to view Medieval liberties as equating to greater freedom, because they're things that we've become used to being impossible in modern life that we don't even think about unless witnessed through the historical record. Pener Kropoopkin has issued a correction as of 21:02 on Jan 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 20:58
|
|
|
Dreddout posted:I'd be more open to this idea if climate change didn't threaten to destroy us all within our lifetime. It's possibly, probably, too late to stop most of the damage. And I see no way that liberalism can weather the storm without mass death. We might have to resort to eco-stalinism to avoid the greatest genocide in history.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 04:54
|
|
|
I am more optimistic. Liberalism willd ie, but democracywill in some way continue in some parts of the world.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 05:31
|
|
|
we will democratically elect who gets exiled to the wastes when the food runs low
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 08:57
|
|
|
Autism Sneaks posted:we will democratically elect who gets exiled to the wastes when the food runs low That's a waste of good meat and resources. Especially when the food runs low
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 00:38
|
|
|
Anyone thinking there might be more personal freedom in feudal villages where the local lord doesn't want to have to look at peasants unless absolutely necessary has never lived in a small town where everyone knows each other and no one moves away.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 05:02
|
|
|
BRB going to play CKII as one of the Indian rajas after watching this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_MyUGq7pgs
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 05:45
|
|
|
Inescapable Duck posted:Anyone thinking there might be more personal freedom in feudal villages where the local lord doesn't want to have to look at peasants unless absolutely necessary has never lived in a small town where everyone knows each other and no one moves away. is it me that’s out of touch .txt
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 21:19
|
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:CIA got owned ni- sorry, sorry im trying to remove it
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 01:17
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/vicenews/status/955410904442687488quote:Beijing jumped all over the U.S. government shutdown Sunday, claiming the impasse exposes the “chronic flaws” in western democracy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 13:18
|
|
|
state governed by whoever happens to be the most ruthless dude in the local republican party equivalent: haha yes, democracy sucks
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 13:22
|
|
|
That Erick Erickson tweet has zero self-awareness.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 13:22
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/meifongwriter/status/955414143540060160
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 13:44
|
|
|
The photo makes it looks like they're taping the guy's head to the wall
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 15:17
|
|
|
i hope everyone involved has a nice time https://twitter.com/JChengWSJ/status/954889030252015616
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2018 14:10
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:i don't have the answer of how to achieve socialism, but if we put our minds to it, i'm pretty sure we can come up with something better than a political philosophy that says "the proles are too stupid to become revolutionaries on their own, thus they need enlightened philosophical masters to herd them into the mentality like the sheep that they are" [drake-no.gif] BrutalistMcDonalds posted:Marxism-Leninism-Muad'Dibism [drake-yisss-gif]
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2018 14:40
|
|
|
Jose posted:i hope everyone involved has a nice time It's chilling that they would allow a musical manager to scout out venues.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2018 14:48
|
|
|
Jose posted:i hope everyone involved has a nice time negotiating open borders before sending a great musician in on a concert tour was a good civ V strat
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2018 15:03
|
|
|
At a guess I'd imagine from a SK perspective it's half novelty act, half politely and awkwardly watching and applauding your weird niece's recital because you know her parents are horribly abusive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2018 15:18
|
|
|
Jose posted:i hope everyone involved has a nice time maybe she can join a kpop band instead?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2018 17:29
|
|
|
Typo posted:maybe she can join a kpop band instead? I seriously wonder if that would be a worse fate than being a North Korean propaganda idol Possibly the same amount of prostitution.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2018 17:31
|
|
|
She'd need plastic surgery.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:19 |
|
|
Inescapable Duck posted:I seriously wonder if that would be a worse fate than being a North Korean propaganda idol amount of exploitation is debatable because N.Korean idol prob has family in high up government placement to have resources to learn singing instead of dying of hunger so they can protect her, whereas s.korean idol prob doesn't
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2018 17:41
|
|