|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Northern Ireland24430 Posts
On January 07 2020 09:21 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2020 07:31 Sermokala wrote:On January 06 2020 17:16 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 06 2020 16:09 Sermokala wrote:
Don't you see how you are still deflecting any perceived need to defend yourself though? That other people need to change their minds on order to have a conversation with you?
I have no idea what your last paragraph is supposed to tell me. It's so far out of left field the umps are useing video replay to see if its fair or foul. This perfectly demonstrates my point. I'm not deflecting. You don't have to change your mind, you have to understand the related words and concepts even if you don't agree with them. You didn't have to do that with what you currently believe because you're inundated with it from birth so you just accept it as what "is". That's cultural hegemony. Your position is not really much different than those that accepted feudalism as the immutable will of God or practically indistinguishable from God's will. It appeals to the practical failure of alternatives that opposed feudalism as evidence of the futility of seeking/improving others, the immutability of sin/greed, and in some ways, the divinity of it all(to the degree one believes in intelligent creation and rhetoric about leaders being chosen/sent by God). You are deflecting. Instead of doing what everyone else does with everything else they discuss in this thread you refuse to even begin to defend socialism or provide a single legitimate reason for people to support it. Instead according to you it's up to everyone else to do the work to change their minds. It's up to everyone else to do research on the topic. You can't be bothered to explain the holy scriptures until everyone else accepts them into their hearts and acknowledges that they are the only true word and way forward. People don't get to have real conversation with you beacuse don't have real conversation with them. You advocate for nothing real so no one can dispute them. You refuse to define anything so any talkback to your sermon gets funneled into the same "you're just an ignorant brainwashed capitalist that hasn't seen the light of socialism". If you stopped posting no arguments would ever be effected by it. If by real you mean "practical" as opposed to "theoretical", then you don't want GH to advocate for socialism anymore, you want him to advocate for something more particular, anarchism, libertarian socialism, democratic socialism, marxism-leninism, maoism... Because of the types of people that I've seen make this argument in general, my initial reaction is always that they want something concrete so that they can attack it. It's very hard to defend capitalism because it's becoming increasingly apparent that capitalism, on top of being generally terrible and failing at upholding liberal ideals, is also on the verge of destroying the planet. But if instead of defending capitalism, you can just attack the concrete thing that random people with no power elaborate on forums to build an alternative, you can convince yourself that this justifies not actively fighting to create a less awful system. That being said, in your case specifically I don't know that this is what you're doing, since I remember that you reacted quite positively to democratic socialism when I presented it some time ago. So I'm getting the sense that maybe you are actually worried about which type of socialism GH would prefer. Is that accurate? If it is, I'd like to ask... why? Do you genuinely think he's a tankie or something?
Pretty much that.
|
|
|
The problem is that I have no idea what he actually is,If he was a tankie that would be a thing. If he was a democratic socialist that would be a thing. If he was for any of those ideologies that nailed down even a shred of what he's actually trying to get at those would be real things to discuss. But instead, we never get past "socialism" or the great revolution that he has planned to totally work that isn't trying to be violent but will be violent because the people he's revolting against will use violence so he needs everyone to be on board to use violence from the start to defend the revolution.
Its like the entire saga around "abolish the police" where he shouted at anyone defending even the most basic premise of what the police did and called them nothing more than an ocupying force. Then once we finally got him to crack that shell he revealed that his entire plan was to replace one police organization with dozens if not more organizations doing the exact same thing as the police. We all had a laugh at this and how insane it was but it took weeks and weeks of intense drilling down to get there.
I don't agree with the people in the thread more often than not. But everyone else is under the pretense that you have to provide arguments for your points and to explain your opinion when someone questions it. GH is not under this pretense and refuses to provide the most basic explanations or arguments for what he advocates for most if not all the time.
So yeah I'll admit it would be nice to attack what he advocates for. Its what everyone else does.
|
On January 07 2020 10:22 Sermokala wrote:
The problem is that I have no idea what he actually is,If he was a tankie that would be a thing. If he was a democratic socialist that would be a thing. If he was for any of those ideologies that nailed down even a shred of what he's actually trying to get at those would be real things to discuss. But instead, we never get past "socialism" or the great revolution that he has planned to totally work that isn't trying to be violent but will be violent because the people he's revolting against will use violence so he needs everyone to be on board to use violence from the start to defend the revolution.
Its like the entire saga around "abolish the police" where he shouted at anyone defending even the most basic premise of what the police did and called them nothing more than an ocupying force. Then once we finally got him to crack that shell he revealed that his entire plan was to replace one police organization with dozens if not more organizations doing the exact same thing as the police. We all had a laugh at this and how insane it was but it took weeks and weeks of intense drilling down to get there.
I don't agree with the people in the thread more often than not. But everyone else is under the pretense that you have to provide arguments for your points and to explain your opinion when someone questions it. GH is not under this pretense and refuses to provide the most basic explanations or arguments for what he advocates for most if not all the time.
So yeah I'll admit it would be nice to attack what he advocates for. Its what everyone else does.
Do you not believe that "This is bad, I'd like something else, but I don't want to build something else alone, I'd like us to create the specificities of the something else together among the people who agree that this is bad" is a valid position? I find that to be a much better starting point for honest discussion than imposing any specific version of change as the basis for the conversation. What if I'm talking with someone who likes socialism as an idea but also strongly wants less government? If I shut down libertarian socialism and anarchism from the discussion, then I shut them down, and they're someone who would have been strong allies in what we're trying to achieve.
You say defending their ideal practical vision is what everyone else does but I seriously don't think that's true at all. For most of the posters of this forum I have a very vague idea of what they're for and a very clear idea of what they're against. I know much more about GH wants than I do about what you want. And in discourse overall, not just this forum, the most common defenses of capitalism rely on pointing the finger to the other systems and arguing against them, rather than arguing for capitalism.
|
On January 07 2020 09:21 Nebuchad wrote:...
Because of the types of people that I've seen make this argument in general, my initial reaction is always that they want something concrete so that they can attack it. It's very hard to defend capitalism because it's becoming increasingly apparent that capitalism, on top of being generally terrible and failing at upholding liberal ideals, is also on the verge of destroying the planet. But if instead of defending capitalism, you can just attack the concrete thing that random people with no power elaborate on forums to build an alternative, you can convince yourself that this justifies not actively fighting to create a less awful system.
...
I'd feel better about this argument if I could think of a single form of government, society, etc. that I thought was in any sense realistic and would, has, or potentially could uphold liberal ideals, not destroy the planet, and not be generally terrible. I can't.
On that basis, I am going to have to know some things about what I am supposed to be actively fighting for before I try to make civilisation spin the wheel again.
On January 07 2020 10:37 Nebuchad wrote:...
Do you not believe that "This is bad, I'd like something else, but I don't want to build something else alone, I'd like us to create the specificities of the something else together among the people who agree that this is bad" is a valid position? I find that to be a much better starting point for honest discussion than imposing any specific version of change as the basis for the conversation.
...
I don't really see how your "honest discussion" is supposed to proceed without somebody putting forward a basis for discussion. If nobody puts forward any basis for discussion then all you can do is sit around and say "Capitalism is bad", which is a useless phrase without the context of a better system. Every system for society heretofore attempted is pretty spectacularly bad in at least some ways.
|
On January 07 2020 10:40 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2020 09:21 Nebuchad wrote:...
Because of the types of people that I've seen make this argument in general, my initial reaction is always that they want something concrete so that they can attack it. It's very hard to defend capitalism because it's becoming increasingly apparent that capitalism, on top of being generally terrible and failing at upholding liberal ideals, is also on the verge of destroying the planet. But if instead of defending capitalism, you can just attack the concrete thing that random people with no power elaborate on forums to build an alternative, you can convince yourself that this justifies not actively fighting to create a less awful system.
... I'd feel better about this argument if I could think of a single form of government, society, etc. that I thought was in any sense realistic and would, has, or potentially could uphold liberal ideals, not destroy the planet, and not be generally terrible. I can't. On that basis, I am going to have to know some things about what I am supposed to be actively fighting for before I try to make civilisation spin the wheel again.
The argument isn't that we just spin the wheel and you trust us to do well. If you agree with us, join us in our attempt to figure out the best way to spin the wheel, and figure out where the wheel should end up, before the wheel is spun. Don't just demand the full plan ahead so that you can criticize the map and feel better about having done nothing, participate in the creation of the trajectory so that it avoids the obstacles that you see.
On January 07 2020 10:40 Aquanim wrote:
I don't really see how your "honest discussion" is supposed to proceed without somebody putting forward a basis for discussion. If nobody puts forward any basis for discussion then all you can do is sit around and say "Capitalism is bad", which is a useless phrase without the context of a better system. Every system for society heretofore attempted is pretty spectacularly bad in at least some ways.
It's not useless, it moves the Overton window. The more people agree that capitalism is bad, the stronger our position becomes. It also means that more minds are working on creating this alternative, which is going to make the alternative better. This all seems quite unarguable to me, I don't know?
|
|
|
On January 07 2020 10:45 Nebuchad wrote:
The argument isn't that we just spin the wheel and you trust us to do well. If you agree with us, join us in our attempt to figure out the best way to spin the wheel, and figure out where the wheel should end up, before the wheel is spun. Don't just demand the full plan ahead so that you can criticize the map and feel better about having done nothing, participate in the creation of the trajectory so that it avoids the obstacles that you see.
I don't think I'll be "joining" you. But that doesn't mean I can't participate in the conversation, if it ever actually happens.
It's not useless, it moves the Overton window. The more people agree that capitalism is bad, the stronger our position becomes. It also means that more minds are working on creating this alternative, which is going to make the alternative better. This all seems quite unarguable to me, I don't know?
At this point no minds are working on it. You're sitting there saying "capitalism is bad", I'm sitting here saying "I don't see that it's likely we can do meaningfully better". Unless I have some brainwave, the only way for this conversation to proceed is for you to put forward something material.
|
On January 07 2020 11:00 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2020 10:45 Nebuchad wrote:
The argument isn't that we just spin the wheel and you trust us to do well. If you agree with us, join us in our attempt to figure out the best way to spin the wheel, and figure out where the wheel should end up, before the wheel is spun. Don't just demand the full plan ahead so that you can criticize the map and feel better about having done nothing, participate in the creation of the trajectory so that it avoids the obstacles that you see.
I don't think I'll be "joining" you. But that doesn't mean I can't participate in the conversation, if it ever actually happens. Show nested quote +
It's not useless, it moves the Overton window. The more people agree that capitalism is bad, the stronger our position becomes. It also means that more minds are working on creating this alternative, which is going to make the alternative better. This all seems quite unarguable to me, I don't know?
At this point no minds are working on it. You're sitting there saying "capitalism is bad", I'm sitting here saying "I don't see that it's likely we can do meaningfully better". Unless I have some brainwave, the only way for this conversation to proceed is for you to put forward something material.
Then I'll be talking to other people. This is fine.
|
On January 07 2020 11:01 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2020 11:00 Aquanim wrote:On January 07 2020 10:45 Nebuchad wrote:
The argument isn't that we just spin the wheel and you trust us to do well. If you agree with us, join us in our attempt to figure out the best way to spin the wheel, and figure out where the wheel should end up, before the wheel is spun. Don't just demand the full plan ahead so that you can criticize the map and feel better about having done nothing, participate in the creation of the trajectory so that it avoids the obstacles that you see.
I don't think I'll be "joining" you. But that doesn't mean I can't participate in the conversation, if it ever actually happens.
It's not useless, it moves the Overton window. The more people agree that capitalism is bad, the stronger our position becomes. It also means that more minds are working on creating this alternative, which is going to make the alternative better. This all seems quite unarguable to me, I don't know?
At this point no minds are working on it. You're sitting there saying "capitalism is bad", I'm sitting here saying "I don't see that it's likely we can do meaningfully better". Unless I have some brainwave, the only way for this conversation to proceed is for you to put forward something material. Then I'll be talking to other people. This is fine.
If you aren't prepared to have a conversation with people who have the thought "Are we actually improving the world?" then I am, frankly, terrified of whatever societal system you come up with in the end.
|
I think I've made clear several times now that I think some of the first steps after "capitalism is bad..." (though more critically it's unsustainable and unacceptable imo) are "raising class consciousness and ubiquitous critical pedagogy".
I'm not sure if people going on about me not explaining myself don't know what that means, oppose it, or what? I just figure I'd mention it again for anyone that didn't know.
|
On January 07 2020 11:25 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2020 11:01 Nebuchad wrote:On January 07 2020 11:00 Aquanim wrote:On January 07 2020 10:45 Nebuchad wrote:
The argument isn't that we just spin the wheel and you trust us to do well. If you agree with us, join us in our attempt to figure out the best way to spin the wheel, and figure out where the wheel should end up, before the wheel is spun. Don't just demand the full plan ahead so that you can criticize the map and feel better about having done nothing, participate in the creation of the trajectory so that it avoids the obstacles that you see.
I don't think I'll be "joining" you. But that doesn't mean I can't participate in the conversation, if it ever actually happens.
It's not useless, it moves the Overton window. The more people agree that capitalism is bad, the stronger our position becomes. It also means that more minds are working on creating this alternative, which is going to make the alternative better. This all seems quite unarguable to me, I don't know?
At this point no minds are working on it. You're sitting there saying "capitalism is bad", I'm sitting here saying "I don't see that it's likely we can do meaningfully better". Unless I have some brainwave, the only way for this conversation to proceed is for you to put forward something material. Then I'll be talking to other people. This is fine. If you aren't prepared to have a conversation with people who have the thought "Are we actually improving the world?" then I am, frankly, terrified of whatever societal system you come up with in the end.
That makes sense, change is quite terrifying overall.
|
As someone who acknowledges capitalism as we know it fuckin' sucks and is unlikely to be made better without murderlating the modern robber barons, but basically feels like voting will accomplish essentially nothing, what am I even doing past acknowledging capitalism sucks?
At this point the only thing I think to do is just leave countries that utilize systems I disapprove of as best I can.
|
On January 07 2020 11:36 Zambrah wrote:
As someone who acknowledges capitalism as we know it fuckin' sucks and is unlikely to be made better without murderlating the modern robber barons, but basically feels like voting will accomplish essentially nothing, what am I even doing past acknowledging capitalism sucks?
At this point the only thing I think to do is just leave countries that utilize systems I disapprove of as best I can.
Yeah, I hope there is a deeply violent revolution against billionaires at some point, but it doesn't seem to be coming soon. Hopefully I am wrong. After trying to work out the economics of how to have a kid, probably headed to Canada soon, lol.
|
On January 07 2020 11:40 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2020 11:36 Zambrah wrote:
As someone who acknowledges capitalism as we know it fuckin' sucks and is unlikely to be made better without murderlating the modern robber barons, but basically feels like voting will accomplish essentially nothing, what am I even doing past acknowledging capitalism sucks?
At this point the only thing I think to do is just leave countries that utilize systems I disapprove of as best I can. Yeah, I hope there is a deeply violent revolution against billionaires at some point, but it doesn't seem to be coming soon. Hopefully I am wrong. After trying to work out the economics of how to have a kid, probably headed to Canada soon, lol.
If Canada was more affordable for me I'd be attempting to join you. I'm more prone to Asia, I was living in China for a good while, but China's capitalism is just as shitty as the US' and the internet is truly fucking miserable to deal with when the government decides it doesnt want VPNs to function.
Maybe Japan or South Korea or somewhere in Southeast Asia or something.
|
On January 07 2020 11:36 Zambrah wrote:
As someone who acknowledges capitalism as we know it fuckin' sucks and is unlikely to be made better without murderlating the modern robber barons, but basically feels like voting will accomplish essentially nothing, what am I even doing past acknowledging capitalism sucks?
At this point the only thing I think to do is just leave countries that utilize systems I disapprove of as best I can.
Can you expand on why you don't think voting accomplishes anything (especially in the US)? I unironically think electing Bernie is one of the last hopes we have (globally).
|
On January 07 2020 11:44 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2020 11:36 Zambrah wrote:
As someone who acknowledges capitalism as we know it fuckin' sucks and is unlikely to be made better without murderlating the modern robber barons, but basically feels like voting will accomplish essentially nothing, what am I even doing past acknowledging capitalism sucks?
At this point the only thing I think to do is just leave countries that utilize systems I disapprove of as best I can. Can you expand on why you don't think voting accomplishes anything (especially in the US)? I unironically think electing Bernie is one of the last hopes we have (globally).
I dont think voting accomplishes anything because the US populace is abusable enough to systematically prevent the overall will from reaching governmental power.
I live in Virginia right now, so I at least vote in a state where my vote kind of matters, but realistically speaking, I dont know a single person save one who voted or votes Republican who will vote anything other than Republican for literally any reason.
The best I believe the US can hope to achieve is some brand of minute incremental change and I dont want to wait a century to see basic improvements get worked out.
|
On January 07 2020 11:47 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2020 11:44 Nebuchad wrote:On January 07 2020 11:36 Zambrah wrote:
As someone who acknowledges capitalism as we know it fuckin' sucks and is unlikely to be made better without murderlating the modern robber barons, but basically feels like voting will accomplish essentially nothing, what am I even doing past acknowledging capitalism sucks?
At this point the only thing I think to do is just leave countries that utilize systems I disapprove of as best I can. Can you expand on why you don't think voting accomplishes anything (especially in the US)? I unironically think electing Bernie is one of the last hopes we have (globally). I dont think voting accomplishes anything because the US populace is abusable enough to systematically prevent the overall will from reaching governmental power. I live in Virginia right now, so I at least vote in a state where my vote kind of matters, but realistically speaking, I dont know a single person save one who voted or votes Republican who will vote anything other than Republican for literally any reason. The best I believe the US can hope to achieve is some brand of minute incremental change and I dont want to wait a century to see basic improvements get worked out.
I can't disagree with your stance but I would contend that leftwing activism and visibility can shape the next generation of voters and thinkers. I would be a different person today if Shaun, Contrapoints, Three Arrows, Innuendo Studios or even the socdems at TYT had never made videos. We can also appeal to populists, which typically vote republican (granted I doubt there are a ton of those in Virginia specifically).
|
On January 07 2020 11:59 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2020 11:47 Zambrah wrote:On January 07 2020 11:44 Nebuchad wrote:On January 07 2020 11:36 Zambrah wrote:
As someone who acknowledges capitalism as we know it fuckin' sucks and is unlikely to be made better without murderlating the modern robber barons, but basically feels like voting will accomplish essentially nothing, what am I even doing past acknowledging capitalism sucks?
At this point the only thing I think to do is just leave countries that utilize systems I disapprove of as best I can. Can you expand on why you don't think voting accomplishes anything (especially in the US)? I unironically think electing Bernie is one of the last hopes we have (globally). I dont think voting accomplishes anything because the US populace is abusable enough to systematically prevent the overall will from reaching governmental power. I live in Virginia right now, so I at least vote in a state where my vote kind of matters, but realistically speaking, I dont know a single person save one who voted or votes Republican who will vote anything other than Republican for literally any reason. The best I believe the US can hope to achieve is some brand of minute incremental change and I dont want to wait a century to see basic improvements get worked out. I can't disagree with your stance but I would contend that leftwing activism and visibility can shape the next generation of voters and thinkers. I would be a different person today if Shaun, Contrapoints, Three Arrows or even the socdems at TYT had never made videos. We can also appeal to populists, which typically vote republican (granted I doubt there are a ton of those in Virginia specifically).
I feel that we are far away from the next generation being powerful enough to outweigh the current old guard who would gladly see the world burn during their last few minutes of life assuming it didnt reach them during that time.
Eventually change will get there but it will have to navigate so much that we may as well do nothing til the old people die off in droves.
|
On January 07 2020 11:47 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2020 11:44 Nebuchad wrote:On January 07 2020 11:36 Zambrah wrote:
As someone who acknowledges capitalism as we know it fuckin' sucks and is unlikely to be made better without murderlating the modern robber barons, but basically feels like voting will accomplish essentially nothing, what am I even doing past acknowledging capitalism sucks?
At this point the only thing I think to do is just leave countries that utilize systems I disapprove of as best I can. Can you expand on why you don't think voting accomplishes anything (especially in the US)? I unironically think electing Bernie is one of the last hopes we have (globally). I dont think voting accomplishes anything because the US populace is abusable enough to systematically prevent the overall will from reaching governmental power. I live in Virginia right now, so I at least vote in a state where my vote kind of matters, but realistically speaking, I dont know a single person save one who voted or votes Republican who will vote anything other than Republican for literally any reason. The best I believe the US can hope to achieve is some brand of minute incremental change and I dont want to wait a century to see basic improvements get worked out.
My thoughts are there's two issues at play that need to be solved first at a local level before it affects at a national level. First one is how dense cities are, and how rural areas are under populated. This can hopefully be solved by allowing remote work for mostly all types of jobs. Two, vote out the corrupted politicians at local, by hopefully solving 1, we can increase the likely chance of solving 2 since there's much more population spread out that actually have their voices heard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
