| Forum Index > General Forum |
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 | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5453 Posts
Communism = no state, no classes, everything organized from bottom up, everything magically works out Socialism = "the people" own the means of production either through the state or in form of co-ops and the economy is meant to satisfy the needs of the people and not generate profit Capitalism = the means of production are owned by private owners or the state (state capitalism) and the goal is to make profit | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland11933 Posts
On April 26 2020 06:47 Nevuk wrote: The definition being used for socialism in this recent conversation is far different from the one I learned in ... name any political science or history class. Maybe it's a US thing? The basic idea was : Communism = state owns all means of production. Socialism = State owns some ("important") means of production (utilities was the classic example). Capitalism = State owns no means of production. Of course, defining what is important/essential means of production is its own area of debate, but I've never considered the West to be anything but a socialized group of countries that occasionally makes claims as to otherwise.. I'm using one of the most traditional definitions, in which capitalism is when the means of production are privately owned, by a specific class of people that are called capitalists or bosses. Socialism is when the means of production are publicly owned, which can be either by the state (tried before several times and was not successful) or by having the workers owning their companies (some implementations here and there but mostly new: I like this). Gonna get some sleep now. It was fun playing ping-pong between the people who tell me that I have utopian thoughts and the people who tell me that because an utopian vision that they have assigned to me is not entirely achieved by the system I advocate, then it follows that I should give up any effort in that direction. I'm not sure what that fallacy is called but it's pretty cringe. Hey guys, anarchism is impossible! You can't not have a state at all, lol! That's why I now favor totalitarianism. I am very intelligent. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22739 Posts
On April 26 2020 02:47 IgnE wrote: This is why people should read Marx. Rather than go in circles we need to understand the terms of the debate in order to understand what’s at stake. What is a coffee shop? C-M-C or M-C-M’? How would we know? Is it a mere difference in intention or a structural difference producing a different material configuration? Who is “the people”? What is correct governance? Ranciere (a post-Marxist?) would say that politics is an activity that changes the “distribution of the sensible”: it changes what is seen and what remains unseen. What are we seeing in connection to this term “market”? or for that matter “coffee shop”? What really is a coffee shop? So true. I can't believe we're still having to explain that markets =/= capitalism and address arguments based on categorical comprehension errors of basic conceptual frameworks. Kudos to Neb for his patience and I encourage you to keep trying to explain this stuff to them. The idea of conversational critique of socialism actually appeals to me, but not when the arguments are so rudimentary and tired. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
"But that isn't truly [insert system in question]!" Is used by every side of the political debate to try to trivialize the historical failures of their preferred system. Communists, libertarians, socialists, capitalists, you name it. These discussions invariably fail to take into account human behavior and how it will warp a given system. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22739 Posts
On April 26 2020 08:24 Stratos_speAr wrote: At a certain point, playing semantics becomes useless. "But that isn't truly [insert system in question]!" Is used by every side of the political debate to try to trivialize the historical failures of their preferred system. Communists, libertarians, socialists, capitalists, you name it. These discussions invariably fail to take into account human behavior and how it will warp a given system. It isn't a "but that isn't truly" situation nor are the wholly unscientific appeals to human nature/behavior appropriate or convincing to anyone who isn't already a devout adherent of capitalism. That systems are composed of humans is a consideration people would understand is integrated into socialist thought if they bothered to spend a fraction of the time they spent being indoctrinated with capitalist propaganda (suggesting it wasn't/isn't considered) on engaging with socialist scholarship. One of my favorite examples is from Freire's work where he describes how Harvard professors and the like struggled more with his work than a janitor and child. The plea for competent critique from those skeptical of socialism isn't one based in elitism or class at all. It's one based on genuine good-faith engagement and curiosity for truth. People wouldn't (not that they do anyway lol) take my critiques of capitalism seriously if I refused to learn the differences between revenue, profit, and expenses. It's not different for people that critique socialism without a clue of the basic lexicon and framework (whether they agree with it or not). | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Sermokala
United States13754 Posts
On April 26 2020 06:15 Nebuchad wrote: Don't know, don't care. That's on them. Not gonna tell them how to run their business. Because there is no rational reason not to hire someone from another racial gender or sexual orientation group? These aren't actually arguments. You can't just handwave when someone makes a simple question. If you seriously think coops owning the majority of the economy is a legitimate argument you have to care about the way people would make decisions about how they'd run those coops. God knows how you imagine major corporations like airlines car companies and defense companies working but this weird assistance that Humans are rational actors and that large groups of humans are rational actors capable of collectively agreeing on a single "best" method is mindblowing to most people. I'm not afraid to say that as a White straight man I have socio-economic advantages that I don't see the reason why I would hire women, gay people, or people of another ethnicity for inclusion to my company due to the structural advantages that hiring other straight white males would give my company and would be best for me. In the world today the company would be sued, in your world I would either not be punished or the government would have to be in control of my coop making it no different the communism. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7130 Posts
If he gave you an answer you'd just bitch that, "OH so ALL businesses would operate that way huh, that's authoritarian see you love authoritarianism!" Why is it that people can't argue with the words they're seeing and have to insert their own bullshit specificities. The racism part is also ridiculous, its no different from how shit works now, it's perfectly reasonable to have government intervention in coops to prevent discrimination and sexual harassment and murder and child molestation. Yet we aren't living in a communist wasteland are we? Next you'll ask who does the policing and Neb could say, "probably a police force," and you'd complain that socialism incentivizes the gestapo and how Neb wants to gulag people. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22739 Posts
On April 26 2020 09:40 Sermokala wrote: + Show Spoiler + These aren't actually arguments. You can't just handwave when someone makes a simple question. If you seriously think coops owning the majority of the economy is a legitimate argument you have to care about the way people would make decisions about how they'd run those coops. God knows how you imagine major corporations like airlines car companies and defense companies working but this weird assistance that Humans are rational actors and that large groups of humans are rational actors capable of collectively agreeing on a single "best" method is mindblowing to most people. I'm not afraid to say that as a White straight man I have socio-economic advantages that I don't see the reason why I would hire women, gay people, or people of another ethnicity for inclusion to my company due to the structural advantages that hiring other straight white males would give my company and would be best for me. In the world today the company would be sued, in your world I would either not be punished or the government would have to be in control of my coop making it no different the communism. I'm just curious if this is literal or you're using "I/me" to make it easier to communicate the argument grammatically? | ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6221 Posts
On April 26 2020 06:15 Nebuchad wrote: Don't know, don't care. That's on them. Not gonna tell them how to run their business. Because there is no rational reason not to hire someone from another racial gender or sexual orientation group? Since when have rational reasons ever been relevant to this topic? In the era of Brexit and Trump, with right-wing demagogues popping up all over the world thanks to the votes of the very people they are working to disenfranchise, the burden is on you to explain how democracy in the workplace would function differently to democracy elsewhere. Instead we get "don't know, don't care". Try again. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On April 26 2020 08:30 GreenHorizons wrote: It isn't a "but that isn't truly" situation nor are the wholly unscientific appeals to human nature/behavior appropriate or convincing to anyone who isn't already a devout adherent of capitalism. That systems are composed of humans is a consideration people would understand is integrated into socialist thought if they bothered to spend a fraction of the time they spent being indoctrinated with capitalist propaganda (suggesting it wasn't/isn't considered) on engaging with socialist scholarship. One of my favorite examples is from Freire's work where he describes how Harvard professors and the like struggled more with his work than a janitor and child. The plea for competent critique from those skeptical of socialism isn't one based in elitism or class at all. It's one based on genuine good-faith engagement and curiosity for truth. People wouldn't (not that they do anyway lol) take my critiques of capitalism seriously if I refused to learn the differences between revenue, profit, and expenses. It's not different for people that critique socialism without a clue of the basic lexicon and framework (whether they agree with it or not). GH, I have a degree is social and political philosophy, so don't try to lecture me on what is and isn't in these writings. It makes you look like a fucking tool and an elitist ass-hat. I promise you, I am well-read on this topic, and across the spectrum (not just in socialist thought). Just because I don't like to be a condescending asshole like you doesn't mean that I don't "get it". You are the embodiment of everything that is wrong with the progressive movement and why it is so hard for us to convince people to join our cause. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13754 Posts
On April 26 2020 10:10 Zambrah wrote: How was he handwaving? Why do you all require these immensely detailed plans that no single human being is going to be capable of creating? If he gave you an answer you'd just bitch that, "OH so ALL businesses would operate that way huh, that's authoritarian see you love authoritarianism!" Why is it that people can't argue with the words they're seeing and have to insert their own bullshit specificities. The racism part is also ridiculous, its no different from how shit works now, it's perfectly reasonable to have government intervention in coops to prevent discrimination and sexual harassment and murder and child molestation. Yet we aren't living in a communist wasteland are we? Next you'll ask who does the policing and Neb could say, "probably a police force," and you'd complain that socialism incentivizes the gestapo and how Neb wants to gulag people. Hes handwaving, Like the two sentences that I quoted, By saying that he doesn't care how people making decisions or why they'd make decisions when the workers making the decisions is the core benefit of his argument. If he doesn't care about their decisions and ignores my perfectly rational reasons why you wouldn't hire outside of your ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation, that's hand waving. If I didn't want to hire women or minorities the company would be sued and it would lose money for it. What's stopping the coops from doing the same without government involvement in the exact decision making that is supposed to be the core benefit of socialism. I'm asking for a simple answer to an obvious phenomenon that's going on today that the government has had to deal with for the last few decades up until today. On April 26 2020 10:14 GreenHorizons wrote: I'm just curious if this is literal or you're using "I/me" to make it easier to communicate the argument grammatically? A little of both. I'm trying to make an argument based on what I would do if there were 20 of me in a metal shop and what decisions I/we would make. I'm chiefly trying to example a simple difference between what a group of me's would do vs what a company I would work at would do. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22739 Posts
On April 26 2020 10:57 Stratos_speAr wrote: GH, I have a degree is social and political philosophy, so don't try to lecture me on what is and isn't in these writings. It makes you look like a fucking tool and an elitist ass-hat. I promise you, I am well-read on this topic, and across the spectrum (not just in socialist thought). Just because I don't like to be a condescending asshole like you doesn't mean that I don't "get it". You are the embodiment of everything that is wrong with the progressive movement and why it is so hard for us to convince people to join our cause. Only the first paragraph was responding directly to you (it's my fault for not making that more clear). The rest was commentary on the discussion generally. That said I encourage/welcome you to bring that experience/knowledge to the content of your posting on the subject rather than tone policing. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Zambrah
United States7130 Posts
Hes handwaving, Like the two sentences that I quoted, By saying that he doesn't care how people making decisions or why they'd make decisions when the workers making the decisions is the core benefit of his argument. If he doesn't care about their decisions and ignores my perfectly rational reasons why you wouldn't hire outside of your ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation, that's hand waving. If I didn't want to hire women or minorities the company would be sued and it would lose money for it. What's stopping the coops from doing the same without government involvement in the exact decision making that is supposed to be the core benefit of socialism. I'm asking for a simple answer to an obvious phenomenon that's going on today that the government has had to deal with for the last few decades up until today. You know that a lawsuit is enforced by... THE GOVERNMENT right? Otherwise lawsuits would mean nothing, they're enforced by the government saying do it or we'll force you to do it. Its exactly the same fucking thing for the socialist model, you're working from this mindset that the world has to be built from the bottom up from socialism, when you could instead simply look at it as taking the existing good things that don't need to change staying but with that Wealth Hoarding Draconic Douchebag replaced with a coalition of you know, all the people working at the business. You can have managers and any trappings of modern businesses, you just don't have a fucking leech sapping all of the wealth for him/her/theirselves. So again, if a normal business has to face the threat of gov't force for doing discrimination-y-things RIGHT NOW (which is what happens, literally it is what happens, youve already admitted modern companies would be sued and weve established that lawsuits are enforced through the government) then congratulations a coop that was experiencing clear discrimination-y things could be subject to the same thing. Its still a company, just because its owned by a collection of people instead of a few rich bitches doesn't mean that the fundamental fabric of reality needs to be altered. "Im asking for a simple answer to... gov't has had to deal with for the last few decades." Then it doesn't sound like there IS a simple answer is there? Do you see the bizarre and asinine burden you put on Neb? He obviously isnt some governmental god-king savant that can cure all ails of modern governance. Stop expecting anyone to be, its an unfair burden to place on anyone and its a prime example of why these discussions turn to such shit. Modern businesses don't deal with being told how to run their businesses because its not any of anyone else's damn business until it becomes illegal, or until the company has to start being accountable to shareholders, etc. If you took a step back and asked this shit about what we currently have going on you'd realize a. These "easy simple" questions are in fact not solved and thus probably not that easy, b. already solved in which case great we have a way to solve the problem! So please, ask these questions of your current system and see if these problems still exist, or have been solved before you start demanding answers from Neb. You'll probably find that there is plenty of translation to be done from what we see in modern society to a world akin to the socialism Neb describes. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13754 Posts
The lawsuits for discrimination are against the company I don't know why you think I don't know its supported by the government but my point with the whole thing is about how the government is supposed to prevent discrinination. You get super aggressive about me narrowing down my question by saying I want the whole thing rebuilt. You say to imagine taking the good things but instead just changing the entire thing. These things make no sense. This whole "just hire manager" nonsense is just the same system as before but with extra steps. How making office politics super high stakes being a good thing I'll never understand. I was referring a problem beacuse theres a lot to draw from not some weird attempt to get neb to try and tackle a decades long struggle. Then you go into a truly bizarre tangent where you tell me to ask questions about the differences between our world we live in and socialism world. As if that's not what we've been doing for pages and pages now. I'm reading the thing one last time and I'm really failing to see anything that resembles a reasoned or logical argument to anything at all. I truly wish to know what you were trying to do there. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7813 Posts
It's really like having a toddler in charge. The whole thing could be a satirical surrealist novel or play, he would be just about fine. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16044 Posts
On April 26 2020 15:48 Biff The Understudy wrote: So after telling people to drink bleach, Trump now say that journalists are mean and that he won't do daily briefings anymore because it's not worth his time. It's really like having a toddler in charge. The whole thing could be a satirical surrealist novel or play, he would be just about fine. It's probably for the best honestly. The less he speaks in front of a camera the less likely he is to say something harmful and stupid. Trump supporters are hilarious though. When the New York Center for Poison Control had a spike in calls about Bleach related poisonings Trump Supporters got mad that Trump was being blamed for it. "He obviously was not serious" "He never suggested drinking Bleach." It's hilarious to me. If Trump supporters don't want him to be blamed for people actually acting on the stupid shit he says then the answer should be obvious. JUST STOP SAYING STUPID SHIT! | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7130 Posts
On April 26 2020 15:24 Sermokala wrote: I really don't get this super hostile water carrying you're doing for neb but you completely whiff what I said for some truly baffling arguments. The lawsuits for discrimination are against the company 2. I don't know why you think I don't know its supported by the government but my point with the whole thing is about how the government is supposed to prevent discrinination. You get super aggressive about me narrowing down my question by saying I want the whole thing rebuilt. You say to imagine taking the good things but instead just changing the entire thing. These things make no sense. 1. This whole "just hire manager" nonsense is just the same system as before but with extra steps. How making office politics super high stakes being a good thing I'll never understand. I was referring a problem beacuse theres a lot to draw from not some weird attempt to get neb to try and tackle a decades long struggle. Then you go into a truly bizarre tangent where you tell me to ask questions about the differences between our world we live in and socialism world. As if that's not what we've been doing for pages and pages now. I'm reading the thing one last time and I'm really failing to see anything that resembles a reasoned or logical argument to anything at all. I truly wish to know what you were trying to do there. 1. Its not the same system with extra steps, its the same system but the workers get paid more and there isn't a billionaire hoarding wealth at the top. Its a system that can look VERY similar to what we have now, just with more wealth equality. You're looking at this like it has to be some hugely enormously different system where nothing is the same. A lot of things can be the same. You don't have to have management be nonexistent because you won't also have Jeff Bezos' and Bill Gates' with billions and billions of dollars. If a coop needs the skillset of a middle manager then they can have one, if they make the company more successful then not only some mega-rich boss at the top gets the money, but all of the worker-owners of the company get to enjoy that success and money. Thats the upside of a coop. You literally asked him for a simple solution to a problem that you admitted is a decades long struggle, those are your words. This is a common thing from people who attack GH and Neb in this thread for having unrealistic world views, they seem to be expected to build fully functioning utopian societies in order to meet the standards you have for their basic assertions that capitalism as we know it is fucked up and their belief that socialism or systems akin to socialism are a better solution. 2. If lawsuits are government enforcement why do you jump to governmental control being your example of a method to stop discrimination? To me it seems like you're trying to imply a descent into communism being some sort of inevitability if you want to solve problems in Neb's world. This ties into the issues I have with people tackling their beliefs about socialism from this vantage point of "wipe the slate clean and start society fresh with socialism," you wouldn't bother demanding a solution to racist hiring practice if you weren't doing this. A solution to racist hiring practices thats easy and simple does not exist, but we have some basic things we can do, for instance, a lawsuit. I bring a lawsuit into it because you said, "In the world today the company would be sued, in your world I would either not be punished or the government would have to be in control of my coop making it no different the communism." This is a bizarre statement because nothing about Nebs post indicates that the government has to control the coop or that nothing can punish racist or sexist hiring practices in a coop. You bring up a perfectly viable way for Neb's world to counteract racist or sexist hiring practices. With lawsuits. Why jump to assuming two of the worst case scenarios when you clearly understand that there are things that can be done to start to handle sexism and racism in the work place that doesn't boil down to doing nothing or crushing governmental oversight? Again, my point with this tirade is that you seem and often others seem to approach these discussions about what socialism would look like through the lens of "socialism isnt capitalism so nothing can be the same," plenty can be the same, if you would apply what works from capitalism to socialism a lot of it meshes fine, especially in the detail range, being mildly charitable in considering other's views goes a long way. And I don't carry any hostile water (Im not even sure what this really refers to, but I'm assuming you mean, "why do I get so irritated about the way Nebs posts are treated") for Neb in particular, just acting as a counterweight to the way Neb and GH tend to get treated. Not that they need my white knighting but it chaps my ass when I see a page of interesting discussion where Neb gets to answer questions and then it derails into this typical "you never answer any questions, gah" shtick after a perfectly nice round of questions, in fact, being answered. Its not entirely you, and I dont even think youre the most egregious offender, but it'd be nice to see a discussion be held in good faith for longer than like, a page. Actually I may carry hostile water for the way progressivism gets treated in the US. Yeah, that feels kind of right. Twitter has made me an angrier person, I hope quarantine ends soon so I can peel my ass away from it forever. Unfortunately I'm not as good at being concise as other better posters, so you'll have to suffer through my overlong rambly wall-of-texts. Don't worry though, I'll go back to lurking more than posting when June 10th hits and Virginia lifts it's lockdown.  | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games Organizations Other Games StarCraft 2 Other Games StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
Online Event
HupCup
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
Kung Fu Cup
SOOP
Dark vs MaxPax
Replay Cast
PiG Sty Festival
Serral vs MaxPax
ByuN vs Clem
PiG Sty Festival
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs SHIN
The PondCast
[BSL 2025] Weekly
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
