Politics Generations

[ComradeYellow]

1 hour ago, ComradeMaster said:

I guess it's the Western way to try to balance hard realism with idealism, yet they can't seem to figure it out. xD

No wait I take this back.  It's the Western Way to try to incorporate some awkward form of idealism in liberal unfettered global, planetary destructive capitalism but they can't seem to figure it out. xD

Edited November 4, 2019 by ComradeMaster

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

12 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

But there is no getting around this one: anywhere two humans are gathered there is going to be a "government" and therefore a "state".  And there is going to be compulsion backed by violence.

That's an ahistorical view and only applies if you believe the government is a necessary component of any human interaction and the state is any form of organization, which is an awfully strange take from someone who repeatably calls for getting the government out of people's lives.

12 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

 In a "capitalist" system you at least own what you own. 

And frequently, that is nothing.  To say nothing of seizure by the state or financial entities that is perfectly legal.

12 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

And I say that with the caveat that there is no such thing as a "capitalist" society nor any that is all of one thing or another.

The last couple of centuries would beg to differ.

12 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

And yes you need a government to enforce the laws that protect that ownership. Back to Thomas Paine saying is was but a necessary evil. 

Then your problem with socialism restricting liberty is inconsistent, because you are supporting the restriction of liberty in the name of property.

12 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

But the labor of your hands than the proceeds of it ARE yours in the country we have now.

It's immediately stolen by the state and inevitably paid in fees required for living. The days of the small craftsman are almost all over, for the majority of the world labor is alienated from life.

12 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

The US system actually does a pretty good job arbitrating between the citizens and other organized entities

I'll believe that when Texas executes a corporation.

9 hours ago, alanschu said:

Watching my MIL in Texas stay in a job with an abusive boss because she depended on the health care that the job provided in order to get necessary medication was one of those eye opening moment for me.

Yeah, my mom going through cancer was a pretty big eye opener for me. Right now a friend of the family has stage 4 cancer with large lumps growing on her and has to go to work in this miserable condition or Home Depot will pull her insurance. 

And damn dude, it's been a real long time since you've been around these parts. How's it been going?

[Skarpen]

17 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

In a "capitalist" system you at least own what you own.  And I say that with the caveat that there is no such thing as a "capitalist" society nor any that is all of one thing or another. 

Well there never will be a capitalistic society for a simple reason that capitalism is not a political system it's economical one and doesn't expand outside of economical scope.

People think it is because of the socialism vs capitalism debate, because socialism is a political system influencing all scopes of life in a country.

In that regards capitalism is criticized for the overall system of a country that uses capitalism as their economical system.

[BruceVC]

On 11/3/2019 at 3:56 PM, Guard Dog said:

Nope. It does not annoy me even a little bit. I understand the rest of your point. No one likes to be on the receiving end of unfair criticism bad characterization. Especially when it is meant to drive a wedge between groups of people. But there is something to be gained and taken from all criticism and all opinions no matter how unfair, inflammatory, or just plain wrong. There is a push here in the US to silence some free speech with "hate speech" laws. That is a terrible idea that will lead to far more than stopping hate speech. Most people are not prejudiced and recoil from racism when they hear it. Race baiters in the US like Duke and Farrakhan turn far more people away from them than they ever attract. But even if that were not so it is still better to suffer their venom that it would be to silence them. The notion that free expression can be selectively limited is a lie people tell themselves. 

I have come to appreciate these types of posts because they give me a better understanding of the differences in our views on what makes societies better but also I have changed my personal views on certain SJ debates after realizing certain views  I had were wrong or rather I wasn't aware of certain realities....and for me when you and others share your views on the USA it is important because its representative of valid concerns that are real and or perceived. 

And sometimes in life when we want to make things better through a well meaning view of a particular SJ objective we unintentionally can make things more dichotomous and we can actually alienate people who are not part of the problem or the perceived problem. So in other words, and this is just one small example,  when people use terms or assume that comments like "white   male privileged " are  the most effective ways to  implement any change or to build real understanding of issues . For me if you want to address certain historical imbalances it would seem logical that you would work with all people who share this view and or believe in direct ways to do this and that would surly include  white people who are like minded

But my observation around most examples of people using " "white   male privileged  " is that it is used more to criticize and make certain generalizations around how white people achieved, if relevant,  financial success and then really counterproductive comments can be made like " white people cant possibly comment about racism " or " white people have no agency to understand historical injustice " 

This is the most unhelpful framing of these points because every single human being of course has empathy and the ability to understand any historical injustice or why for example any form of bigotry is unacceptable. You may need to research certain events but that is not hard to do if you want to understand these things. But this does not mean white people cant understand these things and be part of the solution. Also  you cant assume all white people must or will necessarily be part of a certain SJ movement, and the reasons for this will vary but thats not the same thing as making assumptions about what most white people believe 

Finally part of the Trump victory was because there are some of his support base that  do believe that there is this unfair or unreasonable attack on white people and generally wanting to change or undermine established  cultural. Now I dont support this in the final assessment of how relevant this criticism is  because even though there are certain narratives or SJ movements that absolutely generalize and play the race card but that doesnt  mean anyone needs to believe these  views are actually going to change what is normal to many of us. My advice is just ignore these comments but focus on societal changes that you can influence in a  normal way

For example in SA its not uncommon for some to say things like " all white people are responsible for Apartheid and Colonialism " but the problem with this view is it ignores the historical reality of when Europeans arrived in South Africa and more importantly it conflates the genesis of who was responsible for the actual implementation of these systems so the entire point becomes more of  an unhelpful view that we must just accept responsibility for things because ...we have the same race. 

Its easy to understand when your ancestors came to Africa but there reasons would vary and not everyone will have the same family connection to these things or rather you wouldnt necessarily have any resources or ways to address this 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 4, 2019 by BruceVC

[smjjames]

18 hours ago, Skarpen said:

Well there never will be a capitalistic society for a simple reason that capitalism is not a political system it's economical one and doesn't expand outside of economical scope.

People think it is because of the socialism vs capitalism debate, because socialism is a political system influencing all scopes of life in a country.

In that regards capitalism is criticized for the overall system of a country that uses capitalism as their economical system.

The Ferengi maybe? Theirs seems hypercapitalistic with capitalism woven into their society (or at least an attempt to create one. Theres definetly other examples of similarily capitalistic/merchantile races in science fiction). In all seriousness, a capitalistic society as a political system would probably resemble something like The Hansa, but that's the closest thing I can think of and even those weren't fully fledged states.

Anyways, yea, the reason it gets treated like a political system is because Capitalism (also because capitalism=FREEDOM=America) got used as a proxy for an opposite to socialism during the Cold War.

Edited November 5, 2019 by smjjames

[Guard Dog]

On ‎11‎/‎3‎/‎2019 at 9:35 PM, KaineParker said:

That's an ahistorical view and only applies if you believe the government is a necessary component of any human interaction and the state is any form of organization, which is an awfully strange take from someone who repeatably calls for getting the government out of people's lives.

And frequently, that is nothing.  To say nothing of seizure by the state or financial entities that is perfectly legal.

The last couple of centuries would beg to differ.

Then your problem with socialism restricting liberty is inconsistent, because you are supporting the restriction of liberty in the name of property.

It's immediately stolen by the state and inevitably paid in fees required for living. The days of the small craftsman are almost all over, for the majority of the world labor is alienated from life.

I'll believe that when Texas executes a corporation.

Yeah, my mom going through cancer was a pretty big eye opener for me. Right now a friend of the family has stage 4 cancer with large lumps growing on her and has to go to work in this miserable condition or Home Depot will pull her insurance. 

And damn dude, it's been a real long time since you've been around these parts. How's it been going?

OK, I'm about done punching this tar baby. Are you seriously suggesting that the existence (and protection) of private property is an infringement on liberty? If so we have such radically different definitions of that word there is no path foreword. And the seizure of things that are exclusively yours are the #1 thing I complain about when it comes to this subject. And I absolutely want the government out of our lives but also understand that without the existence of a government of some sort then I WILL be shooting everyone who comes down my road. No one wants that. 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

41 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

Are you seriously suggesting that the existence (and protection) of private property is an infringement on liberty?

Yes, if it requires the existence of a state with the ability to imprison, kill, and otherwise punish then it infringes upon liberty. You yourself claimed, quoting Paine, that this was a necessary evil. If your conception of liberty doesn't consider getting imprisoned, killed, or punished by an authoritative entity that will imprison or kill you for noncompliance an infringement then I have to question its coherence.

41 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

And I absolutely want the government out of our lives but also understand that without the existence of a government of some sort then I WILL be shooting everyone who comes down my road.

If you think that without a state to enforce rule of law you would kill anyone that comes across your path, I think that says more about you than the necessity of the government.

Edited November 5, 2019 by KaineParker

[Raithe]

You really have to wonder if we're in the 21st century at times...

BBC - Spanish anger as five men accused of gang-raping a teenager are acquitted since she was unconscious and did not resist them

[Hurlshort]

What the heck happened to Rand Paul?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

6 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

What the heck happened to Rand Paul?

After getting his ass kicked by his neighbor, he's slowly been losing his mind.

[HoonDing]

Send every Russian asset back and Congress would be half empty.

[Amentep]

New thread: