|
AHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! IT'S THE BLACK MONOLITH! IT'S REAL! RUN!!! Ice Phisherman posted:Literally gospel by the by. When someone talks about the invisible hand of the market, they are usually referencing something ephemeral and difficult to describe. Very wishy washy. As imagined by Adam Smith, the invisible hand is literally God making everything better through free market capitalism. Divine providence, benevolently directing human labor and capital through the market. And that argument is absolutely absurd to begin with. And while it was developed over time as an idea into uh...Whatever the hell it is now, the root of the invisible hand argument is literally God. I guess if you merge the divinity of the market into the state, then, OOPS! Fascism! Somfin posted:Christian thought and capitalist thought should be incompatible. Yes, but liberal thought can devour any ideology and excrete capitalist propaganda quite efficiently.
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 01:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 12:33 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1257422269791580167?s=21 shoulda been unionized from the get go but eh
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 01:33
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Christian thought and capitalist thought should be incompatible. At the time of writing The Wealth of Nations, capitalism was far more utopian because it was so new. And because basically everyone was religious, it was easy to blend the two together. Remember that this was written literally in 1776. So that book is as old as the United States. Cpt_Obvious posted:I guess if you merge the divinity of the market into the state, then, OOPS! Fascism! Fascism is different and emerged specifically as a reaction to the failures of liberal democracy. Personally I view liberal democracy and fascism as basically the same kind of political system, just at different times in its life cycle. And while liberal democracy predated fascism, I feel like it really wasn't complete until you saw what happens in its failure state.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 01:35
|
|
|
Liberal ideology (which cannot be divorced from capitalism) is firmly tethered to the ideals of Locke and Kant at its core and both were explicit Christians so saying Liberalism and Christianity are antithetical to each other doesn't make much sense to me
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 01:36
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1257422269791580167?s=21 Bernie's campaign was unionized from the get-go. Like almost from the beginning. Maybe sooner. Can't remember. But back in...poo poo, I want to say December, the fifteen dollars an hour, healthcare and union was applied. Ice Phisherman fucked around with this message at 01:42 on May 5, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 01:36
|
|
|
How are u posted:Ending the Federal Govt's use of private prisons, nice. That's a hell of a long list of policy goals, lot's to dig into there. Imagine being so far up your own rear end that you think this is a "win" for your rapist candidate. I'm sure these proposals will receive the same level of media scrutiny and skepticism as the policies proposed by the only actual progressive in the race. Just pure tribalism at this point.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 01:39
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1257422269791580167?s=21 Joe had no campaign until now.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 01:42
|
|
|
rscott posted:Liberal ideology (which cannot be divorced from capitalism) is firmly tethered to the ideals of Locke and Kant at its core and both were explicit Christians so saying Liberalism and Christianity are antithetical to each other doesn't make much sense to me Jesus was pretty clear that rich people don't get into Heaven and that you should give all your wealth to the poor, which would be an ineffective way of doing capitalism.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 01:43
|
|
|
Somfin posted:I don't think I'll ever see a prison abolitionist president in the United States. Not being a prison abolitionist is not a disqualifying trait in a candidate for me. Ershalim posted:I think it would probably help. Capitalism forces a race to the bottom in every field it operates, so the fact that there are any private prisons means that those prisons are attempting to maximize revenue and minimize expenditure -- in a vacuum that wouldn't matter, but since everything is connected it also effects all the other aspects of its ecosystem. Private prisons can do more with wage fixing and such that has an influence on how much state-owned prisons pay their inmates as well, for one thing. https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2017/04/10/wages/ I'm not talking about being a prison abolitionist (though that would obviously be ideal), but just openly arguing for specific conditions and standards for all prisons regardless of private/public status. I'm also not even remotely convinced that eliminating private prisons would actually result in a significant improvement in public prisons. Maybe those wages would go up some (though they could be many times higher and still be far below minimum wage), but that wouldn't significantly impact other hellish aspects of our prison system. I don't see any reason not to directly talk about what changes should be made, instead of just hoping that eliminating private prisons somehow incentivizes public prisons to be operated much better. How are u posted:Hillary rolled out a proposal to start cutting away at the private prison industry, and subsequently the stocks of those companies tanked. How is that not an indicator that investors took her at her word? The point is that it doesn't make sense for you to take investors at their word, even if they genuinely believe something.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 01:44
|
|
|
The funniest thing about this is that Trump hasn't even truly started laying in to Biden yet. There's going to come a time in the near future where Biden is getting humiliated on a daily basis and we'll think "so this is the guy they sold their soul for."
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 01:45
|
|
|
is pepsi ok posted:The funniest thing about this is that Trump hasn't even truly started laying in to Biden yet. There's going to come a time in the near future where Biden is getting humiliated on a daily basis and we'll think "so this is the guy they sold their soul for."
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 01:55
|
|
|
Ice Phisherman posted:Fascism is different and emerged specifically as a reaction to the failures of liberal democracy. Personally I view liberal democracy and fascism as basically the same kind of political system, just at different times in its life cycle. And while liberal democracy predated fascism, I feel like it really wasn't complete until you saw what happens in its failure state. My point was that you can draw a direct line between the liberal divinity of the market and the fascist divinity of the state. Both systems seek to replace the worship of God with the worship of the anchoring political structure. And, yes, I consider the stock market to be a political structure.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 01:55
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I'm not talking about being a prison abolitionist (though that would obviously be ideal), but just openly arguing for specific conditions and standards for all prisons regardless of private/public status. I'm also not even remotely convinced that eliminating private prisons would actually result in a significant improvement in public prisons. Maybe those wages would go up some (though they could be many times higher and still be far below minimum wage), but that wouldn't significantly impact other hellish aspects of our prison system. I don't see any reason not to directly talk about what changes should be made, instead of just hoping that eliminating private prisons somehow incentivizes public prisons to be operated much better. I agree on that, yeah. I think being part of the capitalist system makes it demonstrably worse, but ideally abolishing any form of criminal justice that wasn't rehabilitation-based would be better. And yeah, advocating specifically for prisoner rights is way better than simply trying to remove monetary incentive from running prisons in the first place -- but since we live in such a shitheap I tend towards allowing any positives through because the ones I actually want are typically immediately written off as fanciful nonsense for dummies. I wasn't going for "instead of" just "and". Ice Phisherman posted:At the time of writing The Wealth of Nations, capitalism was far more utopian because it was so new. And because basically everyone was religious, it was easy to blend the two together. Remember that this was written literally in 1776. So that book is as old as the United States.\ To be fair to Adam Smith, he came to many of the same conclusions that Marx did with regards to equity of the labor force -- that exploitation was something that needed to be curbed or would certainly happen. Obviously Marx went a bit further, but Smith wasn't really a slouch on things like unions or land provision or even taxes. He would never have supported the version we have now. Under his proposed system he recognized the dangerous consequences of very high wealth concentration and suggested that profits should be low and wages should be high in any stable, equitable system. He saw rent-seeking behaviors as fundamentally opposed to the well-being of "the great body of the people." That people took a selective reading of it to spread the message that they wanted to spread is probably the least surprising thing ever.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 02:11
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I'm not talking about being a prison abolitionist (though that would obviously be ideal), but just openly arguing for specific conditions and standards for all prisons regardless of private/public status. I'm also not even remotely convinced that eliminating private prisons would actually result in a significant improvement in public prisons. Maybe those wages would go up some (though they could be many times higher and still be far below minimum wage), but that wouldn't significantly impact other hellish aspects of our prison system. I don't see any reason not to directly talk about what changes should be made, instead of just hoping that eliminating private prisons somehow incentivizes public prisons to be operated much better. Absolutely. My point was more the broad point that Bernie is necessarily a compromise on a number of core issues- part of what I'm doing in this thread is trying to introduce people to just how far left "left" can go. Prison in the United States is unlikely to ever go away, and I'm willing to accept that as reality, because prison is basically in place in all countries everywhere at the moment. Prison should, ideally, go away, but the likelihood of me ever seeing someone pushing for that politically is nil. In part because people don't understand how damaging prison is (though you'd expect them to have some understanding after lockdown) and in part because it's such an established thing, and the line between prison (bad) and jail (good) is a complicated and finicky one, and on and on and on. But universal health care? There are loads of countries that have that poo poo. I live in one. Not being a rapist? There's loads of world leaders who aren't rapists.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 02:12
|
|
|
Ershalim posted:To be fair to Adam Smith, he came to many of the same conclusions that Marx did with regards to equity of the labor force -- that exploitation was something that needed to be curbed or would certainly happen. Obviously Marx went a bit further, but Smith wasn't really a slouch on things like unions or land provision or even taxes. He would never have supported the version we have now. Under his proposed system he recognized the dangerous consequences of very high wealth concentration and suggested that profits should be low and wages should be high in any stable, equitable system. He saw rent-seeking behaviors as fundamentally opposed to the well-being of "the great body of the people." Oh yeah. Philosophers like Smith and Ricardo wanted to see capitalism that works for everyone, even though that's not really possible. What's fun is to drag out Smith or Ricardo when someone starts talking about capitalism being the best and I start talking about how landlords are parasites and should be abolished. They expect that communist left hook, but they never see the attack from the capitalist right based on this book they all worship but have never read. It's kind of like the bible in that way, where reading gives you the cheat codes over ideologues who've never cracked open their source material save for select passages.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 02:18
|
|
|
Ershalim posted:
i was actually pondering taking a swing at Phish's slightly odd reading of adam smith, but A) it's been a while since I read Adam Smith and B) he was writing in fuckin' 1759, there are some limits to how modern an attitude you can expect in the first place so not really worth arguing about or rereading me some Smith, might be some of my recollections are wrong although I would like to note that as you mention Smith was real, real big on a truly free market requiring some serious regulation and a bigger government than frankly was the norm thenabouts, because otherwise you get horrific oligopolies and monopolies and all the travails of end-stage capitalism; libertarian and Republican takes on Adam Smith are considerably worse than "slightly odd"
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 02:19
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:i was actually pondering taking a swing at Phish's slightly odd reading of adam smith, but A) it's been a while since I read Adam Smith and B) he was writing in fuckin' 1759, there are some limits to how modern an attitude you can expect in the first place It's actually been a while since I've read it and I have time to crack it open again. So my takes are going to be on what I remember from a few years ago.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 02:21
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:If they're throwing out REPUBLICANS FALL IN LINE, DEMS FALL IN LOVE just loving disengage, you're arguing with someone with a black hole where their brain should loving be You're absolutely right, but I engaged anyways because I'm stubborn. Shared the Ryan Grim story, which didn't count because The Intercept is apparently an "unknown" publication. The Larry King call didn't count because I didn't link to that video, I followed that up with a link to the CNN article which has said video and confirms it's legitimate. He and another brokebrain then went in with the "Well I guess if someone accuses YOU of rape, we'll know to automatically believe them with no questions asked." I said they may as well, since as long as there's a (D) next to my name they'd defend me anyways. And just for some extra seasoning, they went with the "Voting 3rd party is the same as voting for Trump." line of disingenuous horseshit. Honestly, I expected better from this guy. I mean, he's married with a husband, but I forgot that so is Mayor Pete and he's a loving monster too, so there's no correlation to basic human decency there. That being said, I'm tuned out of the conversation now. Notifications are disabled. No point arguing with a centrist, they just move the goalposts further away.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 02:57
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:there are some limits to how modern an attitude you can expect in the first place You know, sometimes it depresses me how progressive some ancient philosophies sound by modern standards. Usury is a favorite of mine, since there have been prohibitions on being a money-sucking horror since the Vedic texts in the X000's BC. But somehow we keep coming back to "hey, we can make money if we're unscrupulously loving people over when they need it, let's do that!" In election-ish news: not all the democrats are being total poo poo on the whole Biden-as-rapist thing. Ayanna Pressley wrote a pretty decent article on Medium about how we treat survivors and how we should maybe think about doing better. She didn't really offer any particular solutions, but at least it wasn't a defense of Biden to the detriment of all survivors and their experiences like we're used to. https://medium.com/@AyannaPressley/its-2020-and-we-still-don-t-know-what-survivor-justice-looks-like-983d7a94173c It's not the best thing I've ever seen, and I've had liked it if she went into some proposals about how to actually go about standardizing due process and restitution, but my standards are kinda low for good news at the moment and it made me feel a little better about her for a bit. It's just nice that someone in some position of power understands that being a sexual assault survivor, including Tara Reade, kinda sucks when the concept is used as an obvious cudgle. Everyone suffers from how we handle this kind of thing, culturally, so someone mentioning that is a tiny victory. e: vvvv from memory we were mostly laughing at Celestial Scribe being a trump-pumper and Covok being insanely over dramatic about everything. The prevailing wisdom was that Hilary would do a good job and had a lot of experience, but the election would swing the right way. Collectively we thought it would end up being way closer than it had any right to be, but the country would do the right thing in the end. Hah. Ershalim fucked around with this message at 03:08 on May 5, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:01
|
|
|
Meta question but what was the tone of D&D towards the end of the 2016 primary? Was there as much pushback against the vote blue no matter who mentality as there is now?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:04
|
|
|
Euphoriaphone posted:Meta question but what was the tone of D&D towards the end of the 2016 primary? Was there as much pushback against the vote blue no matter who mentality as there is now? I remember a lot of true believers but also a lot of folks who where bummed it wasn't Bernie voting against Trump
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:08
|
|
|
Wasn't there a big focus on "Post the Map" where Trump wins? I do think the last email bomb right before did kill Hillary's chances and depressed turnout though.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:12
|
|
|
bobjr posted:Wasn't there a big focus on "Post the Map" where Trump wins? I do think the last email bomb right before did kill Hillary's chances and depressed turnout though. I remember anime was right calling it clear as day when it happened
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:14
|
|
|
Here's how Bernie can still win at the convention! Here's how Bernie can still win in the Electoral College! (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:18
|
|
|
the_steve posted:
lol, third parties taking votes because the two main candidates were awful saved the Dems from an even more incredible loss 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:30
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:lol, third parties taking votes because the two main candidates were awful saved the Dems from an even more incredible loss Ok, but was that chart notarized as authentic by Hillary Clinton and/or Obama themselves? Guess it doesn't count then. Don't mind me, I'm just gonna take my goalposts for a bit of a walk.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:40
|
|
|
Somfin posted:And we're remembering for future reference. Absolutely! It's more than just a distinction because these two concepts are completely different even if somewhat related. I've read way too much about neoliberalism! Before anyone stops me, I know Wikipedia isn't a source but it is a good place to start! Wikipedia - Neoliberalism Wikipedia posted:Neoliberalism or neo-liberalism is the 20th-century resurgence of 19th-century ideas associated with laissez-faire economic liberalism and free market capitalism. It is generally associated with policies of economic liberalization including privatization, deregulation, globalization, free trade, austerity, and reductions in government spending in order to increase the role of the private sector in the economy and society;however, the defining features of neoliberalism in both thought and practice have been the subject of substantial scholarly debate. Neoliberalism constituted a paradigm shift away from the post-war Keynesian consensus which had lasted from 1945 to 1980. Underlined for emphasis and for further reading I highly I recommend watching The Power of Nightmares by Adam Curtis. It describes the rise of the noeliberalism movement in excellent detail granted it's kind of a secondary focus of the documentary but it does a great job. The Power of Nightmares Wikipedia or parts of it posted:The film compares the rise of the neoconservative movement in the United States and the radical Islamist movement, drawing comparisons between their origins, and remarking on similarities between the two groups. More controversially, it argues that radical Islamism as a massive, sinister organisation, specifically in the form of al-Qaeda, is a myth, or noble lie, perpetuated by leaders of many countries—and particularly neoconservatives in the U.S.—in a renewed attempt to unite and inspire their people after the ultimate failure of utopian ideas. Now, I am not saying The Democratic Party, Democrats, Obama or Clinton aren't neoliberals because they technically are indeed such but there are by far much better examples. The best neoliberals politicians would be these two! 
Gucci Loafers fucked around with this message at 03:47 on May 5, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:45
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:lol, third parties taking votes because the two main candidates were awful saved the Dems from an even more incredible loss Don’t know if you can just add Gary Johnson votes to Trump since he established himself largely as an option against Trump than against Hillary. Had he not run, those people likely stay home. Same with the Jill Stein vote - she was primarily anti-Hillary. The 2016 results as they happened are a pretty good idea of how it would play out with no 3rd parties.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:46
|
|
|
Euphoriaphone posted:Meta question but what was the tone of D&D towards the end of the 2016 primary? Was there as much pushback against the vote blue no matter who mentality as there is now? The Hillary voters would never stop posting and always had a terribly pragmatic response to any perceived criticism. Imagine the worst Biden rape defender derails of this thread, but the entire thread was back-and-forths with the Hillary defenders making sure nothing good was ever said about Bernie without their 14 paragraph critique. After the meltdowns in November, it got a lot nicer.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:47
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Jesus was pretty clear that rich people don't get into Heaven and that you should give all your wealth to the poor, which would be an ineffective way of doing capitalism. Easy for Jesus to say, his kids weren't nagging him for a Nintendo and a ski trip.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:55
|
|
|
I did ask for you to define an actual distinction between neoliberalism and liberalism. Not show me the opening lines of a wikipedia page that you could have pulled up literally the moment before you made this post. And I'm super curious whether or not the distinction actually matters to you, or whether you're just trying to be pedantically more correct.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:58
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:Don’t know if you can just add Gary Johnson votes to Trump since he established himself largely as an option against Trump than against Hillary. Had he not run, those people likely stay home. Same with the Jill Stein vote - she was primarily anti-Hillary. The 2016 results as they happened are a pretty good idea of how it would play out with no 3rd parties. True! Which is why I only ever deploy this chart when people claim Stein votes all would've gone to Hillary otherwise. Anybody who actually understands that 80% of peoples' ideology is a totally incoherent scattershot of petty grudges and incorrect beliefs knows better
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:59
|
|
|
Mike the TV posted:The Hillary voters would never stop posting and always had a terribly pragmatic response to any perceived criticism. Imagine the worst Biden rape defender derails of this thread, but the entire thread was back-and-forths with the Hillary defenders making sure nothing good was ever said about Bernie without their 14 paragraph critique. Overall, it was fairly similar to now. Hillary was the most right wing, racist piece of poo poo, who had the blood of millions on her hands, was complicit in Bill Clinton’s rapes, and about how lesser evil is still evil, the only moral choice is to reject both candidates, and that if she loses, the Democrats would be forced to move to the left, and 2020 would usher in a 1000 years of socialist paradise. I fully expect that four years from now we will be having the exact same conversation about how the nominee is among the worst people to have ever lived, and is somehow even worse than Biden the rapist.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 03:59
|
|
|
THOT PATROL posted:I’m sorry, was this quote supposed to be telling us anything aside from the fact that Jesse Ventura patronized sex workers at some point in his life? A few posters mentioned Jesse Ventura and asked - what do people make of him? Well, he is or was an anti-vaxxer along with drugs and prostitutes. Personally, I am indifferent towards vices and I think American's take this sort of stuff way too seriously and we could definitely learn from Europeans on how to treat that sort of behavior. As in, unless it's a problem who cares? On the flip side, it appears Jesse wasn't addicted to drugs and the things he did were legal and consensual however the way he's described it doesn't exactly sound healthy or positive. YMMV. Somfin posted:Christian thought and capitalist thought should be incompatible. Someone has never heard of the prosperity gospel! It's a big huge deal in the United States! Prosperity theology quote:Prosperity theology (sometimes referred to as the prosperity gospel, the health and wealth gospel, the gospel of success, or seed faith)[A] is a religious belief among some Protestant Christians that financial blessing and physical well-being are always the will of God for them, and that faith, positive speech, and donations to religious causes will increase one's material wealth.[1] Prosperity theology views the Bible as a contract between God and humans: if humans have faith in God, he will deliver security and prosperity.[2] What it comes down to is that if you are rich that means God approves of your actions and is rewarding you! Be happy! It results in stuff like huge mega churches! Like Joel Olsteen's Lakewood Church that has an attendance of tens of thousands and he himself is a millionaire with a mansion, jet, etc. 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 04:00
|
|
|
Scientist Al Gore posted:Someone has never heard of the prosperity gospel! Why do you think I don't know about this
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 04:03
|
|
|
Somfin posted:I did ask for you to define an actual distinction between neoliberalism and liberalism. Not show me the opening lines of a wikipedia page that you could have pulled up literally the moment before you made this post. I showed more than just opening lines and when it comes to addressing the use of the world "liberal" especially in this thread I think a quick glance at Wikipedia should be strongly encouraged. Words have meaning.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 04:04
|
|
|
Euphoriaphone posted:Meta question but what was the tone of D&D towards the end of the 2016 primary? Was there as much pushback against the vote blue no matter who mentality as there is now? basically an insufferable victory lap, and i say this as someone who was part of the insufferables it's not like hillary clinton, the most qualified candidate ever, could ever lose to a fat orange idiot who can't read. now to take a big sip of water
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 04:04
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:Anybody who actually understands that 80% of peoples' ideology is a totally incoherent scattershot of petty grudges and incorrect beliefs knows better I like this line a lot. TyrantWD posted:Overall, it was fairly similar to now. Hillary was the most right wing, racist piece of poo poo, who had the blood of millions on her hands, was complicit in Bill Clinton’s rapes, and about how lesser evil is still evil, the only moral choice is to reject both candidates, and that if she loses, the Democrats would be forced to move to the left, and 2020 would usher in a 1000 years of socialist paradise. That reminds me, there were a lot of people playing demographics as destiny at the time as well. The cyclical nature of the whole thing kinda sucks. I don't remember many people saying that not voting was the correct option, but there were a few vote-swaps proposed for safe blue state goons to "send a message" by voting third party in exchange for someone in an at-risk state voting for Hillary. I think. I feel like that doesn't make any sense, but I remember it being a thing.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 04:04
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Why do you think I don't know about this That's the impression I got from your last reply, if not. Great! I'm glad we're all on the same page.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 04:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 12:33 |
|
|
Scientist Al Gore posted:I showed more than just opening lines and when it comes to addressing the use of the world "liberal" especially in this thread I think a quick glance at Wikipedia should be strongly encouraged. Yeah, and I'd recommend that you read further than the opening line of that wikipedia article because it goes into some detail about why the two are very similar, I want to know what part of our discussion requires whatever specific distinction you wish to draw beyond naked pedantry Scientist Al Gore posted:That's the impression I got from your last reply, if not. Great! I'm glad we're all on the same page. Like, do you think that prosperity theology is in line with Christian thought or did you just bring it up because I mentioned two words
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 04:06
|
|