|
LeoMarr posted:So what is Communism then? Lets get the definition straight here. Wouldnt want to step on any toes. Are you a communist? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=u9UdsSuNEmE Also, in communist paradise everyone knows how to use wikipedia: quote:In political and social sciences, communism (from Latin communis, "common, universal")[1][2] is a social, political, and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of the communist society, which is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money,[3][4] and the state.[5][6]
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 06:17 |
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Ban corrida and recreational hunting while you're at it eh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 18:53
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
LeoMarr posted:So what is Communism then? Lets get the definition straight here. Wouldnt want to step on any toes. Are you a communist? The absolute minimum requirement for an economic system to be academically considered communist is it not containing class hierarchies: No employer-employee, no renter-rentier, no master-slave and so on. A person makes the decisions about their own labor either alone or through a collective (like a cooperatively owned company) to which they belong. It should be obvious how any "Democratic People's Republic", social democracy or Venezuela-like heavily state capitalist country don't fit that description. DPRs say that the state should be the employer+rentier and also be a one-party dictatorship. State capitalism in general says that the state should be a more important employer+rentier than the private sector. Social democracy says that the state should take money from employers and rentiers and redistribute it democratically as a kind of reparation for exploitation. A few countries like USSR and China actually gave a honest try at abolishing capitalism, but gave up after a few miserable failures we all learn about in school and the political class realizing how good it feels to be on top. Essentially what happened was Stalin and the US Red Scare agreeing to redefine communism to be about state power rather than economic associations between people. That should have been as ridiculous as saying that you could have anarchism without abolishing the state, but welp.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
As I said yesterday, here's the chart showing the coverage TV station's evening news hour had of the main rallies in favour of No and Yes respectively on last year's referendum. As you can see the communist-run SYRIZA mouthpiece ERT gave the two rallies about equal coverage, whereas the proud independent private TV stations had heavy coverage of the Yes rally and near none for the No rally. The No rally was larger, and No won by 22 percentage points. Clearly Greek TV is impartial, with the sole exception being ERT which is just a propaganda mouthpiece.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:As I said yesterday, here's the chart showing the coverage TV station's evening news hour had of the main rallies in favour of No and Yes respectively on last year's referendum. In developed countries public TV is justified with the need to raise public awareness, not to spread populist lies. As the "No" motion was a populist mummery of epic stupidity no one gave it a platform except for the populist ERT channel which parrotted the lies of Tsipras the Proto-Trump and the bald horror clown masquerading as a financial expert. So ERT is not much better than Russia Today.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/eucopresident/status/792113909708754944
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:As I said yesterday, here's the chart showing the coverage TV station's evening news hour had of the main rallies in favour of No and Yes respectively on last year's referendum. I don't think freedom of the press applies just to the ones you agree with. I personally hate the American "news" channel called Fox News, but would be extremely against our government trying to shut it down for political reasons. And I think I'd be wholly justified in being so. That's a hell of a precedent to set.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
blowfish posted:gently caress local producers and parochialism (but i am repeating myself) UBI as a primary means of income for large numbers of middle-class people and not just a safety net for the poor is never going to happen. It's a post-scarcity fantasy icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 23:14 on Oct 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
Senor Dog posted:I don't think freedom of the press applies just to the ones you agree with. I too am good and cool with a media landscape that is not politically uniform.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:UBI as a primary means of income for large numbers of middle-class people and not just a safety net for the poor is never going to happen. Not with that attitude it won't
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
Einbauschrank posted:In developed countries public TV is justified with the need to raise public awareness, not to spread populist lies. As the "No" motion was a populist mummery of epic stupidity no one gave it a platform except for the populist ERT channel which parrotted the lies of Tsipras the Proto-Trump and the bald horror clown masquerading as a financial expert. So ERT is not much better than Russia Today. How come the Brexitiers got so much coverage then? I would think you'd include Britain among developed countries? Did our betters fail in their duty to contain populism despite their best efforts? It's a disgrace the BBC wasn't shut down yet.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 08:23
|
|
|
Senor Dog posted:I don't think freedom of the press applies just to the ones you agree with. A better analogy would be if all TV stations were Fox News and then you had people bitching about NPR being unacceptably biased because it didn't broadcast "The Benghazi Report: How ILLary Murdered Americans" all day on election day. MeLKoR fucked around with this message at 08:29 on Oct 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
Exactly. If every US TV station was a different flavour of Fox News that would be closer to what Greece is like, and it would, justly in my opinion, call for state intervention to hold the industry accountable and restore impartiality.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 10:04
|
|
|
No. Freedom of the press means that the private channels can run whatever they want as long as they don't violate the law.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
I'm sure if you woke up tomorrow in the timeline where all German TV stations are pro-Die Linke you'd be singing a different tune.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 10:22
|
|
|
What if the law was that they're not allowed to tell lies, and therefore not allowed to broadcast right-wing/capitalist propaganda?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 10:24
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:What if the law was that they're not allowed to tell lies, and therefore not allowed to broadcast right-wing/capitalist propaganda? Who determines what is or isn't a lie?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 10:55
|
|
|
The facts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:02
|
|
|
Riso posted:The facts. Who determines what is and isn't facts?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:04
|
|
|
WilliamAnderson posted:Who determines what is or isn't a lie? The state, provided that the people in charge share my ideology, obviously.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:06
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Who determines what is and isn't facts? The Central Committee for Fact-Checking and Establishing Truth would be the ultimate authority to arbitrate disputes about truth and facts. It would be composed of a mix of scientists and marxists (redundant I know). At the lower echelon, there would be a web of regional FaCheComs as well, that would oversee local media.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:09
|
|
|
That doesn't mean that dissenting opinions wouldn't be heard in the media though! Expression of such opinions would be clearly allowed, provided that they are expressed as opinion, and probably prefaced by a statement such as "In spite of every fact and proof of the contrary, it is my personal opinion that..."
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:12
|
|
|
MeLKoR posted:How come the Brexitiers got so much coverage then? I would think you'd include Britain among developed countries? Did our betters fail in their duty to contain populism despite their best efforts? It's a disgrace the BBC wasn't shut down yet. I don't consider the Brexit vote to be of similiar stupidity and mendacity as the Oxi referendum. The UK can actually pull off a Brexit. But Greece couldn't pull off Oxi, it was like a legless man voting on whether to run or not. And everybody with at least half a brain realized it. Then Brexit was a referendum prepared months in advance, not some hare brained scheme pulled at the last moment and resolved without any time for a public debate. The UK has been asking itself the question whether to leave or to remain in the EU for decades. The BBC has been accused by partisans of both groups all the time for either having a "fairness bias" or being "instinctively Bremainers" (especially duting spring 2016). After they lost, the Bremainers were quick to whine about the BBC not having seen the self-evident righteousness of their cause. By now the Brexiteers are lamenting how "toxic and negative" the BBC is on the topic of Brexit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:28
|
|
|
Rationalize is as you want, but dedicating basically 0 time to a major political movement is a problem, if the media wanted to "educate" people, they could have done so through editorializing, not through a deliberate distorting of reality.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:32
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:No. If the law in Greece is anything like the law in Portugal freedom of the press is predicated on not publishing outright lies and propaganda. The airwaves are public, why should the oligarchs get to dominate the entire media and use it to advance their goals just because they got some politician in their pocket to lease it to them for a song and a dance?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 12:04
|
|
|
Einbauschrank posted:I don't consider the Brexit vote to be of similiar stupidity and mendacity as the Oxi referendum. I don't think the definition of "populism" has to do with feasibility of implementation. MeLKoR fucked around with this message at 12:39 on Oct 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 12:06
|
|
|
In these parts private media outlets are still required to give a fair representation of important issues, and not present a one-sided portrayal of events if there's a socially and politically large opposing view.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 12:09
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:No. Which is fine until you get an obvious imbalance like in the UK. We have about 8 right wing papers, 1 centrist but has shifted to the right because it doesn't like Corbyn (Guardian), and 1 left (Mirror) and one actual good newspaper (Independent). And boy is it affecting society. Like I don't understand why i'm one of the few people that thinks this is dangerous. Everyone you see picking up a newspaper in the UK is statistically likely to be picking up a right wing hate piece full of lies that they systematically "correct" the day after on page 2 by which time the lie has done it's work. It's like clockwork. Say something terrible and untrue, then next day put "correction" in and avoid punishment. At least on the tv side of things it's a little better. Most people watch BBC news which is just bland and not biased either way. Freedom of the press is essentially tearing this country apart at the cultural seams. I guess we just have to wait for Murdoch to die and hope things start to crumble.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 13:45
|
|
|
You're confusing cause and effect. If the UK is awash with idiotic right-wing tabloids, it's because there's a huge market for it. They reflect British mass culture more than they shape it. The reason it's so extreme in that country is that they have a hosed up anachronistic class system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:You're confusing cause and effect. If the UK is awash with idiotic right-wing tabloids, it's because there's a huge market for it. They reflect British mass culture more than they shape it. It's not cause and effect, it's chicken and egg. Both are a cause and a consequence of the other. As for the ability of media to shape a culture, let's just say there's a reason that the people behind Der Sturmer and, for a more recent example, those behind Radio Mille Collines were convicted of crimes against humanity.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
When Germany sends its people, they're not sending their best:Günther Oettinger posted:Germany’s European Commissioner Günther Oettinger on Sunday (30 October) defended his use of the term “slitty eyes” for Chinese people which triggered outrage after they were revealed in a leaked recording of a speech to business leaders. Oettinger – the Commissioner for Digital Economy who was last week named to the more powerful post of budget commissioner – also made disparaging remarks about women and gay marriage. In the comments, secretly filmed at a Hamburg event earlier this month, he mocked a delegation of Chinese ministers, “their hair combed from left to right with shoe polish”.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 11:00
|
|
|
Slitty eyes - "a somewhat sloppy expression"
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 11:03
|
|
|
orange sky posted:Slitty eyes - "a somewhat sloppy expression" well, oetti has never been qualified to be in charge of a 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 11:18
|
|
orange sky posted:Slitty eyes - "a somewhat sloppy expression" It's "Schlitzaugen" and "Schlitzohren" in German, which might have been an attempt at using a rhetorical device.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 12:51
|
|
|
Oettinger called Wallonia's government a bunch of communists. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 13:19
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:It's "Schlitzaugen" and "Schlitzohren" in German, which might have been an attempt at using a rhetorical device. Oh well that's okay then
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 13:32
|
|
|
It's like when you say "those chinks are up to their usual hijinks". The bad pun and/or rhyme reacts with the racism and makes it OK.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 13:37
|
|
|
uncop posted:The absolute minimum requirement for an economic system to be academically considered communist is it not containing class hierarchies: No employer-employee, no renter-rentier, no master-slave and so on. A person makes the decisions about their own labor either alone or through a collective (like a cooperatively owned company) to which they belong. re: communism so I only read Marx, maybe I am not up to date, but the beginning of his writing before Kapital emphasized something I believe is important. Basically, humans are caught in the historic dynamic and alienate themselves from their true humanity in capitalist society, just one step above being dominated by religion. So to speak, class relations get objectivized (? I read in German) to which we adhere, making true humanism impossible. Communism is not just an economic system, to its achievement humans need to overcome the alienation. Basically, humans need to become different humans (or, as Marx would have it, more human). Even in his writing the communist system is completely incompatible with incentive structures. Instead, he believes that once true humanity is reached, these issues will not matter. People can be an artist one day and a farmer the next, because social responsbility and efficiency is within their human nature. So at least that's Marx. If you believe that humans will not change and stay the same even if capitalism is dead, if they do not achieve "true humanity" in that sense but still respond to incentives of private gain, then you basically can not be a communist. So if you believe that the communist experiments did not just fail because something was done wrong, but did fail because humans are humans, then you will have to find another ideology. This is always kind of forgotten in the discussion but I think Marx spend like a gazillion years on this part of the theory early on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
Marx correctly pointed the finger at the problem but his solutions are outdated because the dynamic of the class war today is not the same as it was during the industrial revolution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 06:17 |
|
|
MeLKoR posted:Marx correctly pointed the finger at the problem but his solutions are outdated because the dynamic of the class war today is not the same as it was during the industrial revolution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 17:20
|
|
