|
so if I'm reading above right, the argument is that because democrats haven't come to ~~bipartisan compromise~~ with the right wing, we should burn everything down, in order to reach a... state of... something? in other words it's basically just total and complete surrender to the forces of reaction in order to make some kind of point? Is that about right? Maybe - just maybe - we could try to figure out something where the bad guys don't just win at everything forever. quote:Oh, I am heartily tired of hearing about what Lee is going to do. Some of you always seem to think he is suddenly going to turn a double somersault, and land in our rear and on both of our flanks at the same time. Go back to your command, and try to think what we are going to do ourselves, instead of what Lee is going to do.
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 08:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 07:35 |
|
|
Mrit posted:Accelerationism comes from the same place as small children knocking over the game board because they didn't win. Its more like you are playing a game of Monopoly and you notice two of them are giving eachother tons of slack, bending the rules, playing footsie under the table, taking money from the bank and making the other players play -strictly- by the rules while they slowly drag the game on because their having too much fun while the other players just don't care, txting on the phone about bullshit, or obviously doesn't understand why their losing. And when you finally get frustrated enough to say something, everyone just goes "Whatever. Man quit your whining. You don't know, just play, stop ruining our fun." THATS when you flip over the board and say, "gently caress YOU DAD!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 09:09
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:There's a hard ceiling to Trump's poll numbers. So are you going to be the next BoostedC5 "gently caress it, ia ia Trump ftagn"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 09:15
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:There's a hard ceiling to Trump's poll numbers. looooool Joementum posted:@daveweigel: When focus group began, only 10 people said they were 90% or 100% set on backing [Trump]. After an hour of discussing his gaffes, it's 16. Joementum posted:@daveweigel: Two voters who came into the focus group having cooled on Trump now say they're more supportive, after 2.5 hours of negative arguments The more you try to convince people Trump is a horrible human being who should not be allowed to ever become president, the more people who initially agreed with you will begin to love him and become convinced he should ＤＥＨＵＭＡＮＩＺＥ ＹＯＵＲＳＥＬＦ ＡＮＤ ＦＡＣＥ ＴＯ ＴＲＵＭＰＳＨＥＤ 
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 09:21
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:ＴＲＵＭＰＳＨＥＤ
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 09:31
|
|
|
Considering the gentleman in question needs to try and appeal to a wider base than just "crazy old people" and "crazy people" I sincerely doubt he is going to get that far post republican primary. Of course if he runs independent then its going to end up with a split ticket and possibly one of the greatest examples of "You reap what you sow" in the history of political discourse.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 09:38
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Considering the gentleman in question needs to try and appeal to a wider base than just "crazy old people" and "crazy people" I sincerely doubt he is going to get that far post republican primary. Isn't old/retired/seniors and political junkies, like, the people who actually vote? Like 75% of the population doesn't vote at all, so basically appealing to 'crazy old people and crazy people in general' is basically 'appealing to people who actually vote'?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 09:44
|
|
|
Berk Berkly posted:Isn't old/retired/seniors and political junkies, like, the people who actually vote? Like 75% of the population doesn't vote at all, so basically appealing to 'crazy old people and crazy people in general' is basically 'appealing to people who actually vote'? Also most recent elections have been more about turning out the base rather than convincing an increasingly small "independent" center. Given how well Trump energizes the base (and Hillary doesn't appear to), well... Let's just say I'm certain you'll be sleeping well tonight.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 09:52
|
|
|
Mrit posted:Accelerationism comes from the same place as small children knocking over the game board because they didn't win. Accelerationism is bad and dumb, but it somehow manages to be less idiotic than this idea that you (and way too many other people) seem to have that politics is just some team sport. Government policy dictates the society you live in and the opportunities you're given from birth until death to interact with that society. It has more influence over the trajectory of your life than any other factor outside of where and to whom you are born, and even that's arguable since it's politics that determines how strongly those other factors will affect you. People who get pissed off and want to burn it all down aren't loving sore losers. They're angry because people's entire lives are literally ruined by terrible policies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 13:55
|
|
|
The only way I can see Accelerationism being useful is the Middle East. By destroying Daesh with nukes you could get Israel and Iran to realize they need to share nuclear technology. You could also turn people against the MIC and the politics of superstition. This is not going to happen for a number of reasons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:Accelerationism relies on the narcissistic belief that, if things got worse, people who were uninformed of systemic problems would come to see the same objective truth you see, because it's so obvious. When in reality, the perception of systemic problems can be shaped heavily by media, and those who are in power are going to have a better chance of coordinating their media to shape uninformed people's perceptions, and in doing so, convince them to work in ways to reinforce their positions of power. I believe in Accelerationism, not because I believe or even hope that the world will suddenly realize that they've been going wrong all this time, but because I believe the human species as a whole is fundamentally unworthy of continued existence so the sooner we gently caress off and let others have a chance the better off the world, and all its inhabitants who aren't us, will be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 14:49
|
|
Woolie Wool posted:I'm actually making fun of it, but I suppose it should be obvious you're far too up your own rear end to recognize comedy on a comedy internet forum. You're right, resistance to international ownership will always be faulty when done nation-by-nation, as autarky leads to stagnation. Clearly, what is necessary is a broad, popular front across nations, working to create an international network of mutual support against the predatory behavior of capitalists.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 16:22
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:I believe in Accelerationism, not because I believe or even hope that the world will suddenly realize that they've been going wrong all this time, but because I believe the human species as a whole is fundamentally unworthy of continued existence so the sooner we gently caress off and let others have a chance the better off the world, and all its inhabitants who aren't us, will be. If humanity goes extinct, don't you think it's going to be in a world-ruining rain of nuclear fire? There's no way we get wiped out and leave this place habitable for anything else, short of some sort of mega death virus that only affects us, and even then I'd wager the nukes would be launched before the last of us bit it. Also your reason for believing in Accelrationism is stupid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
Voting for democrats is triage. You don't say "The patient is in shock, stop treating them"
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:This is where the unpersons go. Gold-plated showerheads.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Will it further your political ideas to help the very worst of your political enemies? Is this really a hard question to answer?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
Accelerationism only makes logical sense if you conduct it via direct means of destroying the existing order in its entirety. Supporting your political opponents only allows them to reinforce their power within the system while changing it to their ends. Voting Bad Guys in an attempt at accelerationism isn't stupid because it hurts X group of people, it's stupid because it literally cannot achieve your alleged goals. Anyone serious about supporting it needs to get back to their place, at the kiddy table with their mouth shut until called upon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
quote:
Compelling arguments, all. What alternative is there to accelerationism, after every attempt to move the Overton Window left is met with homophobia, Islamophobia, death threats, claims of treason, and just general crankiness, with the reactionaries getting daily infusions of hate? How can the reactionaries be convinced?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Doomtalker posted:How can the reactionaries be convinced? Acquaint their heads with the pavement. There are two paths forward: Violently reject the system, or work within it. You are advocating giving up in a manner that allows you to continue stroking your ego, making you a fool and a coward.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:Acquaint their heads with the pavement. Except you're ignoring that it's very obviously impossible to work within it, and that violent revolution will be annihilated by the powers that be via drone, bearcat, machine gun and Spec Ops infiltration. Crazy dudes who drop the word "nuke" beneath a bridge somewhere find themselves being prosecuted for terrorism, thanks to some handholding via the FBI. So, both inside the system and outside the system and equally void options.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:Acquaint their heads with the pavement. Also, many of these reactionaries are obese; the sad truth is, if it came to a riot they would tire quickly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:You are advocating giving up in a manner that allows you to continue stroking your ego, making you a fool and a coward. This is the best description of what the concept of "accelerationism" is all about
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 04:26
|
|
|
i gotta say, i've never been happier to be a straight white man
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 05:39
|
|
|
Question for the Marxists here: how exactly is the revolution supposed to work in a globalized/financialized economy? The poorest states are the least capable of producing for themselves because colonialism and neo-colonialism have forced their economies to specialize in production for Western demands, not for their own consumption. So you seize the means of production and you get a lot of capital assets that are not useful except in the context of global trade (say, Bangladesh having a ridiculous surplus of textile production relative to its own needs.) Meanwhile the rich states have increasingly become financialized, spending less resources on production and more on managing Western-owned productive capital located in China and in poorer states. So if there’s a revolution in a rich country, what gets seized? Effectronica posted:You're right, resistance to international ownership will always be faulty when done nation-by-nation, as autarky leads to stagnation. Clearly, what is necessary is a broad, popular front across nations, working to create an international network of mutual support against the predatory behavior of capitalists. OK, that's one answer. But how is the working class going to come together globally? Is there even a unified global working class? The conditions of a US service worker, Chinese factory worker, and Congolese miner are completely different, and the American worker reaps benefits (in the form of cheap food and goods) from the exploitation of the non-Western worker.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 06:03
|
|
|
Saeku posted:Question for the Marxists here: how exactly is the revolution supposed to work in a globalized/financialized economy? It isn't, that door has closed. For now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 07:13
|
|
|
Saeku posted:OK, that's one answer. But how is the working class going to come together globally? Is there even a unified global working class? The conditions of a US service worker, Chinese factory worker, and Congolese miner are completely different, and the American worker reaps benefits (in the form of cheap food and goods) from the exploitation of the non-Western worker. Now we need a Maoist-Third Worldist to come in and start a flamewar with the orthodox Marxists.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 07:14
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:There's a hard ceiling to Trump's poll numbers. 100% is a ceiling. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 12:08
|
|
|
Name one time accelerationism has worked anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 12:09
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:I believe in Accelerationism, not because I believe or even hope that the world will suddenly realize that they've been going wrong all this time, but because I believe the human species as a whole is fundamentally unworthy of continued existence so the sooner we gently caress off and let others have a chance the better off the world, and all its inhabitants who aren't us, will be. You don't actually believe this because you're alive instead of the alternative. Can't even revolt against yourself, though you're certainly revolting. Peztopiary fucked around with this message at 12:23 on Dec 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 12:19
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:I believe in Accelerationism, not because I believe or even hope that the world will suddenly realize that they've been going wrong all this time, but because I believe the human species as a whole is fundamentally unworthy of continued existence so the sooner we gently caress off and let others have a chance the better off the world, and all its inhabitants who aren't us, will be. But you're using human judgement, which we know sucks, so why should I listen to you?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 12:22
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:I believe in Accelerationism, not because I believe or even hope that the world will suddenly realize that they've been going wrong all this time, but because I believe the human species as a whole is fundamentally unworthy of continued existence so the sooner we gently caress off and let others have a chance the better off the world, and all its inhabitants who aren't us, will be. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9dEZ0hRlF4
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 13:01
|
|
|
The US deserves a Trump presidency.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Name one time accelerationism has worked anywhere. The French revolution. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:I believe in Accelerationism, not because I believe or even hope that the world will suddenly realize that they've been going wrong all this time, but because I believe the human species as a whole is fundamentally unworthy of continued existence so the sooner we gently caress off and let others have a chance the better off the world, and all its inhabitants who aren't us, will be. hey i know it sucks that dad wouldnt let you borrow the car tonight to go to the mudvayne show, but youre gonna get through this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 17:04
|
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:i gotta say, i've never been happier to be a straight white man This sentence angers a certain internet-community, be warned sir.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
lol if the extent of your politics is voting in national elections and posting about them on the internet
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 18:08
|
|
Saeku posted:OK, that's one answer. But how is the working class going to come together globally? Is there even a unified global working class? The conditions of a US service worker, Chinese factory worker, and Congolese miner are completely different, and the American worker reaps benefits (in the form of cheap food and goods) from the exploitation of the non-Western worker. Classes aren't handed down by the hand of God at Mt. Sinai. We can define "working class" in Marxian terms, as people who make their living by wage and salaried labor under an employer, and suddenly all three of those people are part of a global working class. We can define it broader, and incorporate self-employed people that nevertheless make their living primarily by working under a contracting employer, and catch an even broader group of people. Hell, we can even define "working class" in terms of "makes majority of income by labor as opposed to collection of rents" and get a broad, broad base of people globally, though this might be counterproductive. As for how to bring this group together, just like any mass movement, you need people doing things to raise consciousness of this shared class identity. You need people talking on an individual level with friends, family, and coworkers. You need propaganda. You need parallel media. You need demonstrations and other events to spread the existence of such a movement. You need a general platform to ensure broad unity. You need an internal group to kick out fascists and nationalists trying to hijack things. Developing those things will, of course, be difficult. But the basic plan is there for developing mass consciousness of this shared identity.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Or you could classify them by their Chinese calendar animal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Doomtalker posted:Compelling arguments, all. What alternative is there to accelerationism, after every attempt to move the Overton Window left is met with homophobia, Islamophobia, death threats, claims of treason, and just general crankiness, with the reactionaries getting daily infusions of hate? How can the reactionaries be convinced? Politics you silly whiner. And you don't need to convince the reactionaries, you just need to convince enough other people that they are wrong and should be ignored, and lo, progress will happen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 07:35 |
|
|
Effectronica posted:Classes aren't handed down by the hand of God at Mt. Sinai. We can define "working class" in Marxian terms, as people who make their living by wage and salaried labor under an employer, and suddenly all three of those people are part of a global working class. We can define it broader, and incorporate self-employed people that nevertheless make their living primarily by working under a contracting employer, and catch an even broader group of people. Hell, we can even define "working class" in terms of "makes majority of income by labor as opposed to collection of rents" and get a broad, broad base of people globally, though this might be counterproductive. This group seems so broad that any "shared identity" would depend more on the propaganda than common, immediate interests. And, at that point, you're constructing an identity from scratch, so you could do it based on pretty much anything. It's not clear that "class" is much easier than national identity, religious solidarity, or even just a common sense of humanity. Take Jackie Chan, a school district admin, and a guy who owns septic-tank cleaning service. It's not at all clear that Jackie Chan and the admin should feel the special bond. Sure, they both make money from salary. But, day-to-day, the admin will have a lot more in common with the small-business owner. Those two will be the ones impacted if global warming creates stronger hurricanes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:09
|
|
