EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 3749
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 06 2016 04:08 IgnE wrote: I don't intend to argue the point but you guys realize that whitedoge's post was not primarily a semantic one right? It was a substantive one about Marx's arguments for an internationalism centered around home-based economic units. Your cringe-worthy responses are exactly the reason that we end up with well-meaning but unsophisticated candidates like Bernie instead of incisive European-style lefists like they had in Syriza. You can't speak the language and seemingly don't have the patience for anything beyond a seventh grade reading level. Trump at least knows his audience. You confuse being unwilling with inability. Internet debates that lack moderation(real moderation, not all points are valid style of TL/reddit, where you are only told to stop if you super offensive over and over) hold little interest for me when they deal with such abstract concepts with 70+ years of history and development. Especially debates where people bring up the bait with the PC crowd, bring up internationalism themselves and then proceed to try to drag the discussion to Marx. That entire progression was a one man show. An attempt to drag some EU politics thread to the US thread in a single page. I just called a spade a spade. But if you want deep, rich discussion about a topic, I am all for it. Get a moderator who understands the topic, the required reading and the scope and limitations of the discussion. But that isn’t this thread and no one should act like it ever will be. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On May 06 2016 04:19 CannonsNCarriers wrote: Do you see how Trump is killing intellectual Conservatism? He is systematically throwing cherished Conservative policy positions overboard. Free trade, unions, minimum wage, abortion, supply side tax cuts, you name it, Trump is willing to toss it for votes. Of course I do. I first commented on what he was doing last year. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On May 06 2016 04:08 IgnE wrote: I don't intend to argue the point but you guys realize that whitedoge's post was not primarily a semantic one right? It was a substantive one about Marx's arguments for an internationalism centered around home-based economic units. Your cringe-worthy responses are exactly the reason that we end up with well-meaning but unsophisticated candidates like Bernie instead of incisive European-style lefists like they had in Syriza. You can't speak the language and seemingly don't have the patience for anything beyond a seventh grade reading level. Trump at least knows his audience. It's pretty ironic though to use the German Social Democrats as an example here because the preference for nationalist or "home based" support including the historical support for the WW I war effort was what broke the party's spine, just like Syriza failed horribly with the same kind of nationalist populist course against European institutions. I really don't know how often this kind of left wing politics needs to fail before the advocates come up with an alternative. From the perspective of the international worker in this century liberals are preferable to socialists. Bernie's policies would be horrible for the developing world. | ||
|
CannonsNCarriers
United States638 Posts
On May 06 2016 04:22 IgnE wrote: Trump has plenty of supply side tax cuts. Depends. Trump says he wants taxes to go up on rich guys like himself. Trump's website says the opposite. I take his words over stuff he had other people write for him. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On May 06 2016 04:26 Plansix wrote: You confuse being unwilling with inability. Internet debates that lack moderation(real moderation, not all points are valid style of TL/reddit, where you are only told to stop if you super offensive over and over) hold little interest for me when they deal with such abstract concepts with 70+ years of history and development. Especially debates where people bring up the bait with the PC crowd, bring up internationalism themselves and then proceed to try to drag the discussion to Marx. That entire progression was a one man show. An attempt to drag some EU politics thread to the US thread in a single page. I just called a spade a spade. But if you want deep, rich discussion about a topic, I am all for it. Get a moderator who understands the topic, the required reading and the scope and limitations of the discussion. But that isn’t this thread and no one should act like it ever will be. I disagree with the idea that it is EU politics, seems like it's more US than anything. Look at the BLM or modern feminism in the US, and see how a minority within the minority has succeeded in decridibilizing the whole movement with violent behavior and stupid arguments that lacks nuance. Personally, I see a huge ties between Trump misoginy and the argument of modern "feminist" that discuss about rape culture and assign all men, whatever their position in the production or their wealth, as dominant (and potential rapists). Misoginy is, in part, enabled by violent and stupid arguments. On May 06 2016 04:31 Nyxisto wrote: It's pretty ironic though to use the German Social Democrats as an example here because the preference for nationalist or "home based" support including the historical support for the WW I war effort was what broke the party's spine, just like Syriza failed horribly with the same kind of nationalist populist course against European institutions. I really don't know how often this kind of left wing politics needs to fail before the advocates come up with an alternative. From the perspective of the international worker in this century liberals are preferable to socialists. Bernie's policies would be horrible for the developing world. Entirely untrue. The idea that protectionnism would be horrible for the developping world is only true if you're a liberal and believe trade is beneficial for the poor. In reality, as I pointed in many previous posts, mondialization as it exist today is a state of dependancy of the poorest countries (mostly africa) towards the demand of the biggest, with no autonomy in terms of policy (look at the % of imports and exports in GDP and who have the highest %, it's mostly very very poor countries). A protectionnism from developped country could very well be a blessing for such countries, if it was linked with some kind of help (to support demand and production in non developped countries). You also misunderstand Marx argument, he is specifically opposed to Lassale style of socialism that lead to their support for the WW I war effort. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On May 06 2016 04:50 Plansix wrote: Oh, can we please have an in-depth debate of modern feminism with a bunch of dudes on an internet forum. I am sure the views on this shit will be enlightening and nothing I have not heard before. It will be a super productive discussion with zero women involved. Why do we need an in depth debate on modern feminism ? I was not, I was just pointing out the fact that the rather violent tone some of their members created a violent reaction defending "men" and whatnot. How is that discussing modern feminism, it's just a fact. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 06 2016 04:53 WhiteDog wrote: Why do we need an in depth debate on modern feminism ? I was not, I was just pointing out the fact that the rather violent tone some of their members created a violent reaction defending "men" and whatnot. How is that discussing modern feminism, it's just a fact. Ok, so you do know that the phrase “kill all men” is a joke, right? It is a response to the 100 year old accusations that feminist hate men. That people have been accusing feminist of wanting to murder men and babies for over a century, ever since they started looking for the vote. So modern feminists started to say they need to Kill All Men so anti-feminist would, like the idiots they are, claim they had been right all along and that it was proof feminist were evil. Its not a great joke, but it is not something anyone should take seriously. None of this stuff is new. The arguments made against feminists are the same arguments that have been made since the term was coined. None of what you are saying is face. It is, in every way, your personal opinion on feminism. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
gh you know these people hate hillary because she is not a white supremacist right | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On May 06 2016 05:00 Plansix wrote: Ok, so you do know that the phrase “kill all men” is a joke, right? It is a response to the 100 year old accusations that feminist hate men. That people have been accusing feminist of wanting to murder men and babies for over a century, ever since they started looking for the vote. So modern feminists started to say they need to Kill All Men so anti-feminist would, like the idiots they are, claim they had been right all along and that it was proof feminist were evil. Its not a great joke, but it is not something anyone should take seriously. None of this stuff is new. The arguments made against feminists are the same arguments that have been made since the term was coined. None of what you are saying is face. It is, in every way, your personal opinion on feminism. Do you know anything about modern feminism ? Like I don't know the idea of rape culture for exemple ? The concept of gender ? The valorization of non "cis" identities ? I'm not saying it's dumb nor unfounded, I actually value the concept of rape culture in some situation and I like Butler to a certain degree, just that the way it is used in actual debate / to describe actual interactions created a backlash, effectively enabling of giving credibility to some misogynist behaviors / theories. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On May 06 2016 05:00 Plansix wrote: Ok, so you do know that the phrase “kill all men” is a joke, right? It is a response to the 100 year old accusations that feminist hate men. That people have been accusing feminist of wanting to murder men and babies for over a century, ever since they started looking for the vote. So modern feminists started to say they need to Kill All Men so anti-feminist would, like the idiots they are, claim they had been right all along and that it was proof feminist were evil. Its not a great joke, but it is not something anyone should take seriously. None of this stuff is new. The arguments made against feminists are the same arguments that have been made since the term was coined. None of what you are saying is face. It is, in every way, your personal opinion on feminism. Wow, strawoman much? I literally have no idea what this "kill all men" joke is that you are on about. It just sounds like you are just having a rant against something your heard in life, as opposed to whatever anybody has actually talked about here. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On May 06 2016 02:44 WhiteDog wrote: Nice picture farv, but Hillary is waving her hand a little too high, kwizach might not like it. I'd reply something, but you'd end up blaming feminism and political correctness for your own pettiness as well, so I guess it's not worth it  | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On May 06 2016 05:10 oneofthem wrote: like less than 30k people total even are actual crit theory style feminists and some of the stuff is legitly capable of contributing. this is just lets point at freaks and laugh tier analysis You actually don't need to know much about it to see the effect it has on people. That was my point : when you are too categoric, refuse any kind of nuance, and discard the feelings of others, you usually piss them more than actually helping anything. And that's partly how you get a Trump ; by discarding everything your base ask for, until they find someone that actually seem to "care". On May 06 2016 05:11 kwizach wrote: I'd reply something, but you'd end up blaming feminism and political correctness for your own pettiness as well, so I guess it's not worth it I'm not blaming "feminism" tho. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 06 2016 05:08 WhiteDog wrote: Do you know anything about modern feminism ? Like I don't know the idea of rape culture for exemple ? The concept of gender ? The valorization of non "cis" identities ? I'm not saying it's dumb nor unfounded, I actually value the concept of rape culture in some situation and I like Butler to a certain degree, just that the way it is used in actual debate / to describe actual interactions created a backlash, effectively enabling of giving credibility to some misogynist behaviors / theories. Whitedog, I avoid debating you on topics of high level economics simply because I acknowledge that you are better read than me on the topic. I sometimes question some of your assertions, but I keep them to myself simply because I acknowledge I don’t know what the fuck I am talking about. I feel safe in saying you should do the same for feminism in general. You sound like you got all your information and talking points from reddit memes and a 4chan. And with the standard “I support feminism, but not this kind that seems mean or makes me self conscious.” Edit: Um....you said that "modern feminism is part of the cause of the Trump support' and a couple equally dubious claims. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44316 Posts
On May 06 2016 04:19 CannonsNCarriers wrote: Do you see how Trump is killing intellectual Conservatism? He is systematically throwing cherished Conservative policy positions overboard. Free trade, unions, minimum wage, abortion, supply side tax cuts, you name it, Trump is willing to toss it for votes. And that's not surprising. He has no allegiance to any party, so he doesn't really care what he kills politically in the process. | ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10126 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 06 2016 05:30 Godwrath wrote: So, are you saying that fart rape is something of value that should be discussed ? Because that's the kind of stuff that we, the uneducated, actually end up reading. It is really unclear if that is a typo or you are simply a rhetorical question. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On May 06 2016 05:16 WhiteDog wrote: You actually don't need to know much about it to see the effect it has on people. That was my point : when you are too categoric, refuse any kind of nuance, and discard the feelings of others, you usually piss them more than actually helping anything. And that's partly how you get a Trump ; by discarding everything your base ask for, until they find someone that actually seem to "care". More accurately, that's how you lose popular support, which leads to a severe backlash (in the form of Trump). But whatever. I'm all for the idiot wing of the feminist movement continuing the label half the country as misogynists. It will only hasten their departure to the dustbin of history. | ||
| ||
