|
Is it okay to call it racism yet? This is from their official Facebook.
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 18:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 15:01 |
|
|
Who is it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 18:25
|
|
so that means I can be a cheapskate and post about posting instead of having some wit or spending any more on comedy avs for people. Which I'm also incapable of. Comedy.
|
Retarded Goatee posted:Who is it? Danish People's Party official Facebook.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 19:21
|
|
|
SplitSoul posted:
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 19:29
|
|
|
Balder posted:That is a definition of academia so narrow as to be useless and disingenious.* Academicians might be the term you're looking for? Well, my definition is focused on the 2%(which is admittedly narrow and guess where the 2% comes from) and I would say L is the party with the largest part of post-graduate members and therefore the most academic party. Anyone who have been in academia (the part you never see as a bachelor/master) knows that it is full of people who are convinced they know best, which then reflects a bit on L. Balder posted:Regarding the term value-conservative I feel that it is not related to wishing to uphold "law and order" per se but rather a certain attitude towards how to best do it. (M) tends to focus on incarceration/punishment and allocating funds to uniformed services. All parties of relevance wishes to uphold law and order but parties on the traditional left tend to focus on measures intended to lessen the risk of people adopting a criminal life styles in the first place. This is my understanding of the term though and it might of course differ from the one of the poster you were responding to. Value-conservative is pretty much a strawman in this sense, because it tries to associate M with the US term of value-conservative, which is not a correct description in any way. The 3 largest parties in Sweden can all be called value conservative, but with some differences in which values they want to conserve. Otherwise I agree with your description on right-left differences on the view of law and order. MiddleOne posted:She's managed to combine being a contrarian and a career politician. That combination is to me unforgivable, to call her a populist would be to give her too much credit. Eh, she made a political career of being a contrarian. MP, V and SD politicians all say hi. And as far as I see on Twitter, she continues to be contrarian in Linköping. Also, contrarian in which sense? MiddleOne posted:Yes I agree, doctorates are stubborn idiots when it comes to actors vs structure-oriented ideology and L would likely fall apart if it picked a side. The problem is just that to non-academics what comes out the other end of that compromise is inconsistent nonsense and that is reflected in L's polling. I don't think so, since L have survived for a long time while switching between different views. There is still an internal consistency of the party in a similar way that S manages to handle their own schizophrenia. MP as an example was formed by people (Gahrton) breaking out of LUF in the 70s. MiddleOne posted:No. Most politicians are not opportunists in the sense that they're corrupt and literally out to line their own pockets. All parties (okay maybe not V) have a few of these but M stands out by it being one of the defining traits of almost all of their representatives currently in power. Persson and Reinfeldt at least had the dignity to go for the ethically questionable cushy think-tank gravy-train instead of profiting while in office like Kristersson himself and most of his current executive. All politicians are opportunists with respect to real-world events. Corruption is another thing, and I would like to see a source for all M politicians in power being corrupt. Especially in comparison to what S does.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 08:25
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:Corruption is another thing, and I would like to see a source for all M politicians in power being corrupt. Well you're going to have to look somewhere else because that's not my claim. But lets look at some examples what the very top of the moderates have been up to.  The Facts: 1. M is overrepresented in parliamentary members jumping straight from politics into private sector lobbying. You can see that S and L, while represented here too, can not not compete with M. 2. Let us not forget that this is one of the core members of this years election campaign and key player of Kristersson's executive:  There is much that could be said about NKS and how it ties into the Moderates but lets focus on the obvious. 3. Their current party leader is Ulf Kristersson who is no stranger to coasting what is ethical and legal and who also oversaw several of the most laughably corrupt municipal sell-offs in Swedish history. And these are just the cases we know about. If this is not the proverbial canary in the coal-mine in regards to M's attitude on corruption then I don't know what is. Like Cardiac, if post-Reinfeldt M is indicative of anything it is that Sweden's corruption laws are clearly way too lax and not in sync with public perception of what constitutes corruption. I'd like to see Social Democrats like Bodström put to the cross as much as the next guy but lets not pretend that this is a game that M is not the king of. They internally do not see it as a problem, profiteering is for them is a valid ideological reason to be involved in politics. Cardiac posted:Eh, she made a political career of being a contrarian. MP, V and SD politicians all say hi. She's the annoying person in primary school who would always say the opposite of what the teacher claimed just to get attention focused on herself. Like I said, I don't necessarily have a problem with career politicians as long as they have some kind of personal reason they're involved in politics. I don't buy this idea that to be a politician you need to come from somewhere else. Fridolin might not have given a poo poo about the environment but he clearly and desperately wants to be involved in school politics, to the death of his party. SD politicians might like being populists but they also supplement that by consistently trying to make life difficult for brown people. You can call V contrarians if you want but they consistently stand up for their own causes like equality, environmentalism, anti-racism and feminism on a left-wards ideological basis. Like what even is she. Even people like Hanif Bali have core ideas (in his case, 'I am a self-made man and I don't understand why you can't be too') which they center themselves around. Who is Sara Skyttedal, what does she stand for? Populists might like being contrarians, but they're not defined by being contrarians like she is. Cardiac posted:I don't think so, since L have survived for a long time while switching between different views. There is still an internal consistency of the party in a similar way that S manages to handle their own schizophrenia. MP as an example was formed by people (Gahrton) breaking out of LUF in the 70s. I don't see the current breed of L politicians coming up with truly earth-shaking fence-hopping reforms like LSS. They're like KD and MP, running on empty fumes and in dire need of reconsidering what their ideology is. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 10:37 on Feb 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 10:24
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:Well, my definition is focused on the 2%(which is admittedly narrow and guess where the 2% comes from) and I would say L is the party with the largest part of post-graduate members and therefore the most academic party. Let me guess, business? Economics? As someone who has been on both business, social science and humanities faculties, my experience that only the academics in business fall into that category. Well, to be fair, 'convinced they know best' is a little weird, in a lot of cases the people in academia actually do know best, in their own area obviously. In my experience only business people and economists consistently feel that they know best about all kinds of things, even things completely distant from their area. I've no experience with natural sciences or medicine though, in my imagination they're probably pretty bad too. Curiously academics in law departments are often very nice. I assume it's because all the assholes leave to make big bucks somewhere, while the idealist accept much, much, lower pay out of interests in the field.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 10:40
|
|
|
I don't think it's fair to lob in business students with economic students. Business students, like most of humanities, get a solid introduction to both overly quantitative disciplines (finance, accounting) and overly qualitative disciplines (marketing, management) so that they at least are familiar with the idea that there is not one correct way to analyze society. I'd compare this to how a political scientists first readings are likely to be Robert Nozick (extremely liberal) and John Rawls (extremely egalitarian) or Adam Smith (rational actors shape society) and Karl Marx (structures shape the individual). In your introduction you get polar opposites thrown at you. Business students gradually starts leaning towards one or the other like most disciplines but they do start out on an equal footing. Economic students however get micro and macro, which are both quantitative and that predispose a world and a level of societal predictability that does not exist. There's a shitloads of 'however in reality' to the models and theories of these courses but in almost all of the economic institutions it gets glossed over by professors, sometimes until the master or even doctorate level. Like seriously, one of the most influential economists in Sweden is Lars Calmfors and his own introductory course books are stunningly devoid of nuance or competing ideas. It's just equilibrium, equilibrium, equilibrium with hardly any analysis or critical thought. Business students going for a specialization in economics get just these two courses and I can imagine that it retroactively sours their perception from marketing and management. Economics desperately wants to be a natural discipline with high levels of predictability but in doing so it builds itself on a ton of shoddy assumptions which since the global financial crisis are disproven almost annually by reality. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 11:09 on Feb 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 10:58
|
|
|
Revelation 2-13 posted:Let me guess, business? Economics? As someone who has been on both business, social science and humanities faculties, my experience that only the academics in business fall into that category. Well, to be fair, 'convinced they know best' is a little weird, in a lot of cases the people in academia actually do know best, in their own area obviously. In my experience only business people and economists consistently feel that they know best about all kinds of things, even things completely distant from their area. I've no experience with natural sciences or medicine though, in my imagination they're probably pretty bad too. Curiously academics in law departments are often very nice. I assume it's because all the assholes leave to make big bucks somewhere, while the idealist accept much, much, lower pay out of interests in the field. Naw, that isn't the case. At least in the natural sciences, barring the occasional weirdo, the people who are good enough to get academic positions are pretty well aware that there are well-defined limits to knowledge and to what you can and cannot justifiably claim.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 11:12
|
|
|
Natural disciplines all have the benefit of being able to put their poo poo in a controlled environment, a level of control over environment and variable which most of humanities can only dream of. Society is difficult to put in a box.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 11:28
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:I don't think it's fair to lob in business students with economic students. Business students, like most of humanities, get a solid introduction to both overly quantitative disciplines (finance, accounting) and overly qualitative disciplines (marketing, management) so that they at least are familiar with the idea that there is not one correct way to analyze society. I'd compare this to how a political scientists first readings are likely to be Robert Nozick (extremely liberal) and John Rawls (extremely egalitarian) or Adam Smith (rational actors shape society) and Karl Marx (structures shape the individual). In your introduction you get polar opposites thrown at you. Business students gradually starts leaning towards one or the other like most disciplines but they do start out on an equal footing. I think there may be differences between countries. Down in racist Denmark, business students certainly do not get introduced to any actual social theory, and most certainly not Marx (there may be some obscure, I'll-attended, elective, at one of the smaller programmes at CBS, but it's far from the norm) - I think the program which focuses on philosophy reads Foucault and such, but it's pretty far from an actual business degree. Mostly, 'normal' business students get a lot of micro, macro and finance, a tiny bit of qualitative, and a poo poo-load of quantitative (which 90% of them are absolutely astoundingly terrible at). Then a little organizational theory and a little management theory. That's the Danish situation. Regardless, I was talking mainly about the staff, who mostly have an economist or political science backgrounds, not really the students.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 11:36
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:Anyone who have been in academia (the part you never see as a bachelor/master) knows that it is full of people who are convinced they know best, which then reflects a bit on L I mean really I don’t know why I still get surprised seeing you talk outta your rear end but here we are. evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 11:52 on Feb 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 11:40
|
|
|
I was contrasting political science & business management to economics. I don't think the average business student has studied of lot of philosophy. But they will undoubtedly have been exposed to a lot of philosophies off-springs in marketing and management like sociology and feminism. Foucault to take that as an example for instance is name that's hard to avoid completely in marketing. I mean, marketing is at its core a discipline all about understanding how to manipulate people into making irrational decisions against their own interest.
MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 11:47 on Feb 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 11:45
|
|
|
I don't know man, I wish they got some Foucault inspired stuff, but marketing courses are mainly porters five forces, swot, pestel, etc. if they're lucky they get some consumer behavior and segmentation (which typically ignores the Bourdieuan foundation). In other words, the dumbest poo poo imaginable. Here are the subjects which the vast, vast, majority of bachelors in business get. CBS posted:Regnskab: lærer dig om virksomhedens økonomiske helbred, hvordan dens økonomiske kredsløb hænger sammen, og hvor sund dens økonomiske tilstand er. Fx kan lønsomhedsanalyser og budgetter bruges til at beslutte, hvilke produkter der fortsat skal produceres og til at planlægge produktionen. Only the organization area has vague connections to actual social theory, and it's really mainly focused on performance management, human resource management, strategic organizational design (which is mostly schumpeter, for some stupid reason), and a lot of vapid pocket psychology stuff, such as; hofstedes cultral dimensions, big-five, and jungian, personality types (  ), personal values, etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 12:12
|
|
|
p. sure cardiac's a biologist
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 12:20
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:p. sure cardiac's a biologist Cerebral Bore posted:Naw, that isn't the case. At least in the natural sciences, barring the occasional weirdo, the people who are good enough to get academic positions are pretty well aware that there are well-defined limits to knowledge and to what you can and cannot justifiably claim. Does not compute. - oh wait, he is the occasional weirdo. Posts on somethingawful.com, checks out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 12:25
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Natural disciplines all have the benefit of being able to put their poo poo in a controlled environment, a level of control over environment and variable which most of humanities can only dream of. Society is difficult to put in a box. Yeah, and us natural scientists generally call the people who try engineers and get a bit upset if somebody associates us with them. V. Illych L. posted:p. sure cardiac's a biologist Didn't know that statens institut för rasbiologi still existed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 13:01
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/viktorbk/status/967009890584727552
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 13:52
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Natural disciplines all have the benefit of being able to put their poo poo in a controlled environment, a level of control over environment and variable which most of humanities can only dream of. Society is difficult to put in a box. Every now and then the IMF does large scale tests of economical theory. It usually shows that the theory sucks rear end when applied to actual humans. Who'd thunk it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 16:12
|
|
|
Potrzebie posted:Every now and then the IMF does large scale tests of economical theory. It usually shows that the theory sucks rear end when applied to actual humans. Who'd thunk it? If measures don't work the ways model predict then it is only because we didn't follow them closely enough, the theory can't be wrong!
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 18:04
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:If measures don't work the ways model predict then it is only because we didn't follow them closely enough, the theory can't be wrong! This is a good point. We need more data points before the r^2 fit is acceptable! The results so far are obviously from the tail end of the bell curve! 
Potrzebie fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Feb 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
Latest fascist proposal from the Danish government: Designated "punishment zones", obviously ghettos, where crimes are punished doubly as harsh. The Social Democrats, obviously, are for it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 06:56
|
|
|
What on earth
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 07:06
|
|
|
How far away are we from danish internment camps?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 14:24
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:How far away are we from danish internment camps? Not that far. Most of the racist right wing (yes, in Denmark that includes the social democrats), are just sitting around desperately waiting to one-up each other in some sort of horrifying, fascist, bidding war, as soon as the next inevitable 'terrorist event' occurs - which obviously, in a tragic-comic, badly xerox'ed copy of American politics, goes; white=mentally unstable, brown=terrorist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 14:53
|
|
|
As soon as the current neoliberal zeitgeist finally kicks the bucket, we're going to out-do Denmark in horrific racist violence and repression. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 15:23
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:How far away are we from danish internment camps? Well, Social Democrat Henrik Sass-Larsen chose May 1st last year to propose the adoption of an Australian-style policy of dumping refugees in foreign internment camps to be raped and beaten, which the party leadership recently came out in favour of. The Danish People's Party and Liberal Alliance have also proposed the same thing previously. Thankfully we can count on the Liberals to be the voice of reason...
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:33
|
|
|
SplitSoul posted:Thankfully we can count on the Liberals to be the voice of reason...
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
How hard could that possibly be? Just make the camps privately owned to let the divine hand of the free market solve it and throw more money at them the more UNTERMENCHEN SIE GASEN!!!!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 23:23
|
|
|
DF klar med nyt krav: Udgangsforbud i alle muslimske lande When satire feels less wacky than reality 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 07:13
|
|
|
what made denmark so lovely and how do we avoid it
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 20:29
|
|
|
Hot take on Scandinavian shittiness: A functioning welfare system and progressive politics leads to your country being "the best" in a bunch of important measures and then idiots go  its because of our blood and we should cleanse it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
Mercrom posted:what made denmark so lovely and how do we avoid it Critical juncture in the 80s were they diverged from the rest of Scandinavia and starting becoming more conservative. Their drift to the right predates the alt-right phenomenon by several decades.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 21:55
|
|
|
Government Handjob posted:Hot take on Scandinavian shittiness: Or, relatedly, Herrenvolk democracy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2018 00:12
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/parjkarlsson/status/968773664303919104 Called it. It is literally the one thing of note they’ve done these past few....decades? Also lol that a party that is surviving by the skin of it’s teeth and is very close to be ousted from Riksdagen will be ”kompromisslös”. If you live, then it’s only because M pulled some strings to give you enough charity votes. BigglesSWE fucked around with this message at 11:06 on Feb 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2018 11:03
|
|
|
So, to recap: 1. They, together with M, gave V unprecedented influence through breaking off DÖ in nothing but name 2. They unsuccessfully pushed for an alliance budget 3. They ousted some ministers, but in the end it didn't really affect anything but a minor tax-change Huge win in the battle of ideas for Ebba Busch.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2018 11:22
|
|
|
Oh, forgot to mention, the government also wants to literally jail teachers that "fail to report students not thriving".
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2018 17:01
|
|
|
They rolled in an army of PET guards and police to hold a press conference in Mjølnerparken. Not even the residents of this prospective "double penalty zone" were allowed at the venue, and protesters outside demanding equality before the law were described by Inger Støjberg as adherents of sharia who hate the Constitution.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2018 18:49
|
|
|
SplitSoul posted:They rolled in an army of PET guards and police to hold a press conference in Mjølnerparken. Not even the residents of this prospective "double penalty zone" were allowed at the venue, and protesters outside demanding equality before the law were described by Inger Støjberg as adherents of sharia who hate the Constitution. And as usual, S attempts to double down  e: Guide to danish politics: DF/K/V/RV/LA/S: "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn." SF: "We think what S thinks oh and also the enviroment. Fhtagn." EL: [long winded speech about issues that only a few copenhageners would care about] Alt: "Uuuhm... Uh, we don't like to identify as people having opinions... We think?" Lima fucked around with this message at 21:45 on Mar 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 15:01 |
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Ebba Busch. I can smell those 3.5% from here. Here's to the funeral.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2018 22:05
|
|