|
GreyjoyBastard posted:relatedly, this is how I got declared king of a bronze age hick valley
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 17:07 |
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:relatedly, this is how I got declared king of a bronze age hick valley This is an Ernaldan thread!  So why don't we start talking about the death tolls of capitalist countries that had experienced the Enlightenment movement? Would anyone like to go first?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:20
|
|
|
Protip we're going to count every death that occurred due to disease and natural disaster since those apparently count.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:22
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Because as we all know, $15/hour and Medicare 4 All is the first step on the slippery slope to Full Gay Space Communism. God, I hope so
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:27
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:Protip we're going to count every death that occurred due to disease and natural disaster since those apparently count. and then just double it because why the gently caress not
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:29
|
|
|
lol at all of this, but seriouslyquote:Ya'll are living in a limited, binary spectrum of political debate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:30
|
|
|
Well for starters since we're quoting the top numbers ever said by anyone in a book we're looking at about 100 million dead native americans to the european conquests of the Americas.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:31
|
|
|
5 million dead in the transatlantic slave trade
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:32
|
|
|
Like 30 million dead Indians because the British were relatively late to the game and were not about to be outdone by the loving dutch of all people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:33
|
|
|
Caros posted:Oh, you sweet summer child. That's not what I was arguing. My point, though admittedly not worded very well, is that I care far less about the ignorant prejudices a person may have if they believe in non-aggression and individual rights. If someone believes that they have the right to use violence against people they don't like, then their personal bigotry becomes an imminent threat to society. I think that there is a disproportionate emphasis on rooting out thought and speech crimes when compared to holding people accountable who participate in rank aggression, mass murder and a host of other atrocities as a member of the military or government. Let me give you an example. Consider a socially-conservative christian who personally thinks being gay or transgender is a sin. However, they don't speak about it or try and get other people to hate gays or anything like that. Most importantly, they recognize the equal rights of gays and transgendered people and would oppose any law that would deny them the right to get married or engage in any consensual behavior, regardless of their personal opinion on the matter. You could say that such a person is homophobic and transphobic. But also consider that they are strongly anti-war and are very articulate in speaking out against some of the most horrific atrocities that our government commits. Personally, I would form a coalition with such people and get along with them based on our shared values, even though I don't agree with their social conservatism. I would suspect that you would never overlook such rank "bigotry", regardless of the other merits of the person, or the fact that they would never impose their personal views on others. Further, you'd probably excoriate me for even associating with such a person even if I was only associating with them based on other areas where we agree. My argument is that you'd readily forgive someone who associated with a known war criminal far more easily than you would someone who associated with a person that you think is a bigot. The scope of political discussion is too constrained and our priorities are somewhat misplaced. I'm not suggesting we overlook bigotry. I'm just suggesting that we realize that fallible people hold irrational prejudices all the time, but they often have redeeming characteristics. Toward the goal of having a rigorous debate, we have to tolerate controversial viewpoints even by some people we consider to be odious. Caros earlier posited as evidence of Peterson's misogyny that Peterson went on the Stefan Molyneux show. I don't know about that one. Noam Chomsky was interviewed by Stefan Molyneux once or twice also but I don't think you'd claim that this proves that Chomsky is a bigot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:33
|
|
|
lol this motherfucker "Bigots are harmless if they agree with me! In fact, I would embrace them as my brothers in arms!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:35
|
|
|
RealTalk posted:Pointing out that we have to guard against extreme identity politics and radical egalitarianism (equality of outcome) doctrines is the sane thing to do. No. The distinction between 'equality of opportunity' and 'equality of outcomes' is incoherent. Outcomes is all there is. Rejecting outcome equality as a value leaves you no conceptual resources to criticize any actual set of social conditions. (Yes, I realize this is rather the point)
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:37
|
|
|
RealTalk posted:
I see we’ve reached gay black Hitler territory.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:38
|
|
|
RealTalk posted:Caros earlier posited as evidence of Peterson's misogyny that Peterson went on the Stefan Molyneux show. Stop lying about what Caros said, you can't gaslight an Internet forum. Caros has given you multiple sourced reasons to explain Peterson's misogyny, you don't get to act like you get to dismiss one of them and then they all go away you fuckface.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:39
|
|
|
What are "extremist identity politics" and "radical egalitarianism"? Because I can only really parse that as meaning accepting minorities, sexual, racial, religious, and otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:40
|
|
|
RealTalk in 1855: "I think it's more important that we look past the Southerners legal exercising of their property rights, odious though we may find them, in order to have a rigorous debate on the merits! Consider the South Carolinian who is avidly anti-war, surely we could look past his holding of one or two families in bondage, and ally with his opposition to anything that might interfere with the Atlantic cotton trade! Why, we should embrace him and the Northerners that agree with him as allies in that struggle against government tyranny, not accuse them of being part of some sort of 'slave power'."
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:41
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:How do you square the fact that right-wing extremists are featured prominently on even, as you say, supposedly left-leaning mass media with your claim of dangerous mass censorship of the far right? Given that leftist positions, thinkers, and politicians have been almost universally ignored if not outright opposed by U.S. media for over a century, how can we possibly consider you intellectually honest when you focus on anything other than communists being given equal representation in American public discussion? There is censorship of leftist thinkers on the mainstream media, absolutely. The neo-conservatives may be rightly considered to be extremist war-mongers and Israel-first fanatics to you and me, but in Washington they are almost centrist. There's a reason Bill Krystol and several other prominent neo-cons flirted with supporting Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump (more than a few of them did vote for Clinton if I'm not mistaken). They figured that their ultra-hawkish foreign policy could be enacted through a Clinton presidency more than through a Trump presidency. I'm no fan of the government of Russia, but I find it ludicrous that "the majority of Russians wish they could return to communism". Do you have a source to back up that statement? If we cannot agree that actual communism, of the sort that was historically practiced in the twentieth century, was a failure then I'm not sure we're living in the same universe. There's a reason Bernie Sanders cites Sweden as a modal and not the Soviet Union. He recognizes that the moderate social democracy of Sweden is far more palatable to American voters than is the historical failure of communism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:43
|
|
|
Changing the subject slightly... I want to know what your opinion is on the claim that the Russians hacked our election and/or Trump colluded with Russia.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
RealTalk posted:That's not what I was arguing. My point, though admittedly not worded very well, is that I care far less about the ignorant prejudices a person may have if they believe in non-aggression and individual rights. If someone believes that they have the right to use violence against people they don't like, then their personal bigotry becomes an imminent threat to society. Don't really have time to debunk this line by line since I'm waiting for my movie to start, but the first line of this is horseshit. You posted:And so we draw distinctions. The way I draw distinctions is whether or not someone is advocating violence against a person owing to their group affiliation. That was your criteria for what is and is not bigotry. I get that you want to walk it back, because holy poo poo, but I don't think you made a mistake. This is what you meant, then and now. Bigotry is only bigotry if it is violent. In your eyes. And no, you gently caress, being on Molyneux's show is not in and of itself a bad thing. Molyneux was on Joe Rogan's show once or twice, and I don't think that makes Rogan a bad guy. The key point is that Rogan realized 'hey, this guy is a nut' and excoriated him afterward. Chomsky went on the show to debate him, not because he agreed with him. My point wasn't guilt by association in and of itself, but as a series of data points. Going on a white supremacists show once or twice and arguing with him is a drat sight different from being a long running and respected guest.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:49
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:I've heard of the idea of "socialist stagnation" before, but I assumed rightly that it was a capitalist canard to try and maintain the status quo - I'd like to know more about this. Goon Danton posted:iirc there was an economic stagnation in the USSR around the Brezhnev era, is what that usually refers to. Goon Danton has it here. When historians talk about the stagnation period we're referring to Brezhnev's long, dreary period of rule in which Krushchev's occasional creative ideas got rolled back and things fell into the depressing groove of every post-Stalinist Soviet stereotype you'd care to mention. RealTalk posted:To illustrate the potential threat, I cited statistics from the twentieth century that put into context the astronomical death toll caused by communist regimes. Was that the time you used incorrect sources on the Great Terror, or the other time you cited a guy who got his statistics on the USSR and Communist China entirely wrong? I've lost track.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:52
|
|
|
RealTalk posted:Changing the subject slightly... Why don't you state yours first?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:53
|
|
|
RealTalk posted:Changing the subject slightly...
I've come to sermonize again Because compulsion softly creeping Grew acute while I was sleeping And the sanction that is planted in my brain Still remains Within the speech Of freedom In restless dreams I walked alone Narrow topics, ears of stone 'Neath the halo of von Mises I regrouped with my Free Market Jesus When my eyes were stabbed By the flash of some tolerance That split my trance And breached the speech Of freedom And in the naked light I saw Ten thousand sheeple, maybe more Sheeple talking without preaching Sheeple helping without praxis Men with guns oppressed the cis straight rich white man And could not stand To hear the speech Of freedom "Fools," said I, "you do not know Freedom like a cancer grows Social progress must be halted Jordy Pete must now be exalted" But protests, they dispute his biotruths This nonsense, uncouth, harms freedom And the sheeple bowed and prayed To the leftist god they made And incels flashed out their warning Manifestos and lead storming The alt-right said: "The justness of profits are Written in the ethnics' blood While donning no hoods And whispered in the speech Of freedom."
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:54
|
|
|
RealTalk posted:Changing the subject slightly... It is true? Well, to be clear they didn't 'hack our election' in terms of changing vote totals, though they did attempt to (in some cases successfully) gain access to voter rolls. And yes, you'd have to basically be willfully ignorant to not see that there was multiple attempts at collusion from the Trump campaign. Whether that rose to the level of Trump and Putin flat out conspiring or whether it was merely a few dozen campaign staffers and his children acting 'independantly' is up for grabs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:54
|
|
|
Grace Baiting posted:
holy moly 
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:55
|
|
|
RealTalk posted:Changing the subject slightly... I want you to tell me what "extremist identity politics" and "radical egalitarianism" means. Also if you're feeling up for it, what your stance on private police and law courts is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:56
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:RealTalk in 1855: "I think it's more important that we look past the Southerners legal exercising of their property rights, odious though we may find them, in order to have a rigorous debate on the merits! Consider the South Carolinian who is avidly anti-war, surely we could look past his holding of one or two families in bondage, and ally with his opposition to anything that might interfere with the Atlantic cotton trade! Why, we should embrace him and the Northerners that agree with him as allies in that struggle against government tyranny, not accuse them of being part of some sort of 'slave power'." This is exactly the opposite of what I was saying. I specifically stipulated that the most dangerous forms of bigotry are those where the use of force or the threat of force is used against the group that the bigot despises. You think actual brutal chattel slavery might fall into that category?!
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 04:57
|
|
|
Son of a bitch... someone in another thread on SA linked an article that did a very good job of adding up the Lives Lost to Capitalism in the wake of Trump doing some kind of anti-communism thing. I know that I bookmarked it, but bugger me if I can find it. poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:01
|
|
|
I think, presented with the choice of slavery as an institution continuing to exist and using an army to contain and destroy it, you'd be in favor of it continuing. And probably twist yourself into knots trying to argue that slavery isn't violent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:01
|
|
|
look I'm not even asking about watermelons. Just stop dodging the questions and trying to change the topic every time something goes wrong, and elaborate on the stuff you have dropped here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:01
|
|
|
If we had internet forums in the 1850s RealTalk would be posting threads about the dangers of those extremist abolitionists,
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:07
|
|
|
Giving a straight answer is a violation of the NAP.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:08
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:I think, presented with the choice of slavery as an institution continuing to exist and using an army to contain and destroy it, you'd be in favor of it continuing. And probably twist yourself into knots trying to argue that slavery isn't violent. I think he would say that slaves are perfectly within their rights to fight for their freedom, but it was wrong of the north to fight a war to help them. The fundamental rejection of any sort of group or collective identity in favour of absolutists individual and personal property is the core of libertarianism. How do you even argue with someone who holds that view?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:12
|
|
|
Caros posted:It is true? Are you familiar with the work of Ray McGovern and Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity? Forensic evidence of the big event (theft of Hillary Clinton's emails) prove that it wasn't a hack, it was a leak by an insider. They know this because the speed with which the data was downloaded exceeded the capacity of any known internet connection. The data was downloaded onto a thumb drive by someone who had physical access to the servers that the data was stored on. After all this time, there has been no actual evidence produced to verify the core claims about collusion. The goalposts keep moving. These two articles by Daniel Lazare sum up the situation quite well: https://consortiumnews.com/2018/05/18/making-excuses-for-russiagate/ https://consortiumnews.com/2018/05/31/spooks-spooking-themselves/ I also think Glenn Greenwald has been excellent on this issue for a couple of years now. https://theintercept.com/greenwald/ There really is nothing to this story. It's extremely dangerous on multiple levels. We don't need to create a new Cold War and torpedo any possibility of rapprochement with Russia over some bullshit accusations that are fictitious. If you had asked me before the election to tell you the best thing about Trump's platform, I'd say it was his stated intention to get along with Putin and ease tensions over Syria. This was the single issue that prompted me to vote for Jill Stein. Stein said this right before the election: "“Under Hillary Clinton, we could slide into nuclear war very quickly from her declared policy in Syria. So I won’t sleep well at night if Donald Trump is elected, but I sure won’t sleep well at night if Hillary Clinton is elected. Fortunately, we have another choice other than these two candidates, who are both promoting lethal policies. But on the issue of war and nuclear weapons, and the potential for nuclear war, it is actually Hillary’s policies which are much scarier than Donald Trump …” Since avoiding a nuclear conflict with Russia trumps (no pun intended) all other considerations, I thought Jill Stein was the only candidate who understood the grave seriousness of the situation and the danger of escalating conflict with Russia.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
I'll be honest I don't really find much catharsis in debating libertarians and this point because it's like children arguing why unicorns are blue and don't need to be taxed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
KennyTheFish posted:I think he would say that slaves are perfectly within their rights to fight for their freedom, but it was wrong of the north to fight a war to help them. The fundamental rejection of any sort of group or collective identity in favour of absolutists individual and personal property is the core of libertarianism. How do you even argue with someone who holds that view? Swear words, mostly
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:19
|
|
|
RealTalk posted:Changing the subject slightly... what does this have to do with libertarianism
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:19
|
|
|
RealTalk posted:Are you familiar with the work of Ray McGovern and Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity? Forensic evidence of the big event (theft of Hillary Clinton's emails) prove that it wasn't a hack, it was a leak by an insider. They know this because the speed with which the data was downloaded exceeded the capacity of any known internet connection. The data was downloaded onto a thumb drive by someone who had physical access to the servers that the data was stored on. I'm going to break it down in a few hours when I get home, but I just want to point out the obvious. Hillary Clinton's emails didn't get stolen you dumb gently caress. The emails that were stolen belonged to the DNC and John Podesta. You are so ill informed you don't even know that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:24
|
|
|
RealTalk, please define the terms you're using to smear your opposition. Or give us a definitive answer on your attraction towards watermelons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:26
|
|
|
RealTalk posted:The goalposts keep moving. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 17:07 |
|
|
RealTalk posted:This is exactly the opposite of what I was saying. I specifically stipulated that the most dangerous forms of bigotry are those where the use of force or the threat of force is used against the group that the bigot despises. do you support the military action taken against southern slave owners?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 05:39
|
|