|
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 |
On December 13 2023 07:37 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 04:24 KwarK wrote:
His arguments are frequently incredibly bad such as insisting that people identify exactly where the line is (this is always a bad faith argument) that would cause people to abandon electoralism without adding any of the necessary context for what that would mean (are we talking armed revolts, general strikes, terrorism, what?).
. The crux of the issue, imo. GH's posts very often lack the substance of what the revolution looks like, or really any details of any kind. The vast majority of his posts are just "look at this disagreeable thing your party did that you're complicit in, whereas I'm above the fray because I don't support either party or even the political system they exist in." I haven't been following this thread since its inception. It's possible he has shared more details of what he's hoping to accomplish beyond trying to get people on a gaming forum to agree with him.
In this context I'd put the crux of the issue at where we are.
That is to say what you're seeing/describing is my attempt to argue basically that the US system is irreparably broken within the bounds of its own framework. Others argue it isn't.
That makes the substance of the discussion largely "what's broken about it?" and "can it repair itself within its own constraints, and how?". Since I'm on the side that says it is irreparably broken, and that to some degree these exploits are intentionally designed, my focus tends to be on the "what's broken about it?" part. That's accompanied by the belief that it can't repair itself within its own constraints supported by examples of it failing.
On December 13 2023 07:51 Fleetfeet wrote:
Refusing to participate seems consistent with revolutionary socialism, as the party currently more likely to incite a level of revolution necessary to give socialism any hold is the party further from his political ideals. The argument that dems will largely maintain status quo seems fair. However, the path to socialism being "Let Repubs win, enstate a fascist revolution, lose to a socialist counterpush and then hooray socialism" seems like an idea worthy of ridicule. I don't know what Gh's plan is or if he even has one (I lean towards no?), but if it's revolution you're after, then I see that coming through Repubs one way or another sooner than dems.
Also I fully reject any notions that GH is stupid and/or lazy. I know how much activism GH has done as well as I know how many hugs Kwark gets in a month.
I'm still not an accelerationist and don't believe "Let Repubs win, enstate a fascist revolution, lose to a socialist counterpush and then hooray socialism".
It is also self-evident that Republicans/Trump winning and instating a fascist takeover with Trump as dictator would resolve the debate on "where we are" I described to BJ.
That's not how I want it to get resolved (and increasingly losing confidence it would even be self-evident to Democrats) but the polls, odds, policy prescriptions, etc are certainly pointing toward us heading to that fascist future.
|
On December 13 2023 09:03 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 07:51 Fleetfeet wrote:
Also I fully reject any notions that GH is stupid and/or lazy. I know how much activism GH has done as well as I know how many hugs Kwark gets in a month.
If GH had done any successful socialist revolutions in the US I feel like I’d have noticed. I’m reasonably certain he’s still at zero.
Maybe he was playing Monopoly with friends one day and successfully revolutionized the game into a collaborative european-style board game instead. You'd never know.
Has GH singlehandedly enacted a socialist revolution and instated a new form of government on the US? No, but you wouldn't suggest that's the barrier to calling oneself a revolutionary socialist. That'd be stupid.
@GH (too lazy to quote more via mobile)
How DO you want it to get resolved? I ask this very reluctantly, because I do not expect a concrete answer. If you were willing or able to give one, I expect we would not be here.
|
On December 13 2023 09:46 Fleetfeet wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 13 2023 09:03 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 07:51 Fleetfeet wrote:
Also I fully reject any notions that GH is stupid and/or lazy. I know how much activism GH has done as well as I know how many hugs Kwark gets in a month.
If GH had done any successful socialist revolutions in the US I feel like I’d have noticed. I’m reasonably certain he’s still at zero. Maybe he was playing Monopoly with friends one day and successfully revolutionized the game into a collaborative european-style board game instead. You'd never know. Has GH singlehandedly enacted a socialist revolution and instated a new form of government on the US? No, but you wouldn't suggest that's the barrier to calling oneself a revolutionary socialist. That'd be stupid. @GH (too lazy to quote more via mobile) How DO you want it to get resolved? I ask this very reluctantly, because I do not expect a concrete answer. If you were willing or able to give one, I expect we would not be here.
By agreeing that the "dysfunctional capitalist democracy that is the US governmental structure" is irreparably broken + Show Spoiler +(though I'd probably go with "irreconcilably exploitative and oppressive" because I think a lot of what we identify as "broken" was designed and considered a feature The electoral college for example)
I honestly thought being forced to vote for a Zionist that's openly aiding and abetting Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign would be a bridge too far to rationalize for more people around here.
Which is why I'm starting to worry Trump literally entrenching himself as dictator for life (whatever odds people want to assign to that possibility) somehow might still not be enough for people to agree that actually, we're not going to vote our way out of this, because the people that control our voting process won't allow us (because they are fascists, led by a megalomaniacal dictator)
|
On December 13 2023 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 09:46 Fleetfeet wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 13 2023 09:03 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 07:51 Fleetfeet wrote:
Also I fully reject any notions that GH is stupid and/or lazy. I know how much activism GH has done as well as I know how many hugs Kwark gets in a month.
If GH had done any successful socialist revolutions in the US I feel like I’d have noticed. I’m reasonably certain he’s still at zero. Maybe he was playing Monopoly with friends one day and successfully revolutionized the game into a collaborative european-style board game instead. You'd never know. Has GH singlehandedly enacted a socialist revolution and instated a new form of government on the US? No, but you wouldn't suggest that's the barrier to calling oneself a revolutionary socialist. That'd be stupid. @GH (too lazy to quote more via mobile) How DO you want it to get resolved? I ask this very reluctantly, because I do not expect a concrete answer. If you were willing or able to give one, I expect we would not be here. By agreeing that the "dysfunctional capitalist democracy that is the US governmental structure" is irreparably broken + Show Spoiler +(though I'd probably go with "irreconcilably exploitative and oppressive" because I think a lot of what we identify as "broken" was designed and considered a feature The electoral college for example) within the bounds of its own framework and for folks to stop arguing it isn't. Ideally before we get hit by this reality via a fascist bus to the face. I honestly thought being forced to vote for a Zionist that's openly aiding and abetting Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign would be a bridge too far to rationalize for more people around here. Which is why I'm starting to worry Trump literally entrenching himself as dictator for life (whatever odds people want to assign to that possibility) somehow might still not be enough for people to agree that actually, we're not going to vote our way out of this, because the people that control our voting process won't allow us (because they are fascists, led by a megalomaniacal dictator)
People might not notice it but this is a huge breakthrough for GH. Hes finally starting to understand the reality he lives in and realizes that trump winning is bad. Hes catching on as well that people who believe in democracy don't just drop it the moment the person they don't like gets elected. He should catch on that his personal crusade against anyone who engages in US politics is, in clear effect, simply effort to get Trump and more republicans elected.
Anyone want to take bets to see if he comes around on voteing for biden is better than voteing for trump?
|
On December 13 2023 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 09:46 Fleetfeet wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 13 2023 09:03 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 07:51 Fleetfeet wrote:
Also I fully reject any notions that GH is stupid and/or lazy. I know how much activism GH has done as well as I know how many hugs Kwark gets in a month.
If GH had done any successful socialist revolutions in the US I feel like I’d have noticed. I’m reasonably certain he’s still at zero. Maybe he was playing Monopoly with friends one day and successfully revolutionized the game into a collaborative european-style board game instead. You'd never know. Has GH singlehandedly enacted a socialist revolution and instated a new form of government on the US? No, but you wouldn't suggest that's the barrier to calling oneself a revolutionary socialist. That'd be stupid. @GH (too lazy to quote more via mobile) How DO you want it to get resolved? I ask this very reluctantly, because I do not expect a concrete answer. If you were willing or able to give one, I expect we would not be here. By agreeing that the "dysfunctional capitalist democracy that is the US governmental structure" is irreparably broken + Show Spoiler +(though I'd probably go with "irreconcilably exploitative and oppressive" because I think a lot of what we identify as "broken" was designed and considered a feature The electoral college for example) within the bounds of its own framework and for folks to stop arguing it isn't. Ideally before we get hit by this reality via a fascist bus to the face. I honestly thought being forced to vote for a Zionist that's openly aiding and abetting Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign would be a bridge too far to rationalize for more people around here. Which is why I'm starting to worry Trump literally entrenching himself as dictator for life (whatever odds people want to assign to that possibility) somehow might still not be enough for people to agree that actually, we're not going to vote our way out of this, because the people that control our voting process won't allow us (because they are fascists, led by a megalomaniacal dictator)
I think it'd be interesting for you and Kwark (Or whichever educated party is willing) to debate WHY it is broken. I don't have a lot of insight into those particulars, being largely detached from the US and its structures.
From my perspective, others are very willing to indicate that the US is busted, but I feel like getting to the root of it would end in a nature vs nurture style disagreement - my instinct is to say that the people of the US are a major part of the brokenness, likely by decades of reinforced 'american dream' capitalism, institutionalized racism, implicit and explicit prejudice honed through the inflexible lens of a two-party structure. I do not see a revolution that removes these flawed structures (it couldn't.) as enough. The issues are baked into the populace. With that as preface, I would at best hope for a 'revolution' that better allows incremental change to dismantle these structures. In the meantime I'd likely vote for shitty incremental change, if not "Not the fascists"
|
On December 13 2023 11:35 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 13 2023 09:46 Fleetfeet wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 13 2023 09:03 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 07:51 Fleetfeet wrote:
Also I fully reject any notions that GH is stupid and/or lazy. I know how much activism GH has done as well as I know how many hugs Kwark gets in a month.
If GH had done any successful socialist revolutions in the US I feel like I’d have noticed. I’m reasonably certain he’s still at zero. Maybe he was playing Monopoly with friends one day and successfully revolutionized the game into a collaborative european-style board game instead. You'd never know. Has GH singlehandedly enacted a socialist revolution and instated a new form of government on the US? No, but you wouldn't suggest that's the barrier to calling oneself a revolutionary socialist. That'd be stupid. @GH (too lazy to quote more via mobile) How DO you want it to get resolved? I ask this very reluctantly, because I do not expect a concrete answer. If you were willing or able to give one, I expect we would not be here. By agreeing that the "dysfunctional capitalist democracy that is the US governmental structure" is irreparably broken + Show Spoiler +(though I'd probably go with "irreconcilably exploitative and oppressive" because I think a lot of what we identify as "broken" was designed and considered a feature The electoral college for example) within the bounds of its own framework and for folks to stop arguing it isn't. Ideally before we get hit by this reality via a fascist bus to the face. I honestly thought being forced to vote for a Zionist that's openly aiding and abetting Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign would be a bridge too far to rationalize for more people around here. Which is why I'm starting to worry Trump literally entrenching himself as dictator for life (whatever odds people want to assign to that possibility) somehow might still not be enough for people to agree that actually, we're not going to vote our way out of this, because the people that control our voting process won't allow us (because they are fascists, led by a megalomaniacal dictator) I think it'd be interesting for you and Kwark (Or whichever educated party is willing) to debate WHY it is broken. I don't have a lot of insight into those particulars, being largely detached from the US and its structures. From my perspective, others are very willing to indicate that the US is busted, but I feel like getting to the root of it would end in a nature vs nurture style disagreement - my instinct is to say that the people of the US are a major part of the brokenness, likely by decades of reinforced 'american dream' capitalism, institutionalized racism, implicit and explicit prejudice honed through the inflexible lens of a two-party structure. I do not see a revolution that removes these flawed structures (it couldn't.) as enough. The issues are baked into the populace. With that as preface, I would at best hope for a 'revolution' that better allows incremental change to dismantle these structures. More realistically, I'd just do what I do here, which is recognize that my needs are met and values protected, and toss my vote to someone I care about whose needs and values aren't as secure.
Unclear whether that answer was "concrete" enough to upset your assumption that I didn't have one or wasn't willing to share it, but I hope it was.
"busted, shit, trash, broken, dysfunctional, etc." That's not really the dispute, it's whether that "busted, shit, trash, broken, dysfunctional, etc" system can fix itself within the context of the US, particularly amid the odds favoring Trump to win and him openly musing about being a dictator.
As to the idea about a discussion around "Why it is this way" I've done a lot of that over the last ~7 years. A lot of it was around explaining to Hillary supporters how actually the US could very well choose Trump over her. Not despite shit like his, "grab her by the pussy" and "I prefer war heroes that don't get captured", but because of it.
People have forgotten, but the idea that the US was too decent to elect Trump was pretty widely held well into the general and even pretty widely held up to election day. I don't want to go on a diatribe, but I will say I agree that
the people of the US are a major part of the brokenness, likely by decades of reinforced 'american dream' capitalism, institutionalized racism, implicit and explicit prejudice honed through the inflexible lens of a two-party structure.
Though I wouldn't say the people themselves are broken, just mislead with deeply held bad ideas. I'd add a bunch of things I've discussed over the years (though many could arguably fit under those umbrellas) . I also don't think there's an adjective-capitalism that avoids the core problems with any adaptation of capitalism generally.
Capitalism didn't happen overnight and it wasn't till the eve of the 1900's that something as obvious as legislating against monopolies became a thing in the US. Moving beyond it will likely have similar growing pains.
Lastly to the nature vs nurture debate. It's generally brought up because it underpins the rationale that we have to stick with some form of capitalism. Essentially because it accepts the myth that capitalism takes people's competing rational self-interests and places them into a fair market to arrive at mutually (albeit sometimes skewed) beneficial conclusions thanks to the "invisible hand".
The other is that greed/selfishness (and other negative traits) are inextricable from human nature, which to a degree I agree with (in that we're all capable of covering a wide spectrum of intrinsic capacity to "sin" so to speak). There the dispute is more about whether we should tailor society to incentivize our best traits or our worst. Capitalism incentivizes mostly the worst parts of us and can be considered a sort of fountain for the problematic " institutionalized racism, implicit and explicit prejudice honed through the inflexible lens of a two-party structure." and so on.
|
Northern Ireland26005 Posts
On December 13 2023 12:26 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 11:35 Fleetfeet wrote:On December 13 2023 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 13 2023 09:46 Fleetfeet wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 13 2023 09:03 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 07:51 Fleetfeet wrote:
Also I fully reject any notions that GH is stupid and/or lazy. I know how much activism GH has done as well as I know how many hugs Kwark gets in a month.
If GH had done any successful socialist revolutions in the US I feel like I’d have noticed. I’m reasonably certain he’s still at zero. Maybe he was playing Monopoly with friends one day and successfully revolutionized the game into a collaborative european-style board game instead. You'd never know. Has GH singlehandedly enacted a socialist revolution and instated a new form of government on the US? No, but you wouldn't suggest that's the barrier to calling oneself a revolutionary socialist. That'd be stupid. @GH (too lazy to quote more via mobile) How DO you want it to get resolved? I ask this very reluctantly, because I do not expect a concrete answer. If you were willing or able to give one, I expect we would not be here. By agreeing that the "dysfunctional capitalist democracy that is the US governmental structure" is irreparably broken + Show Spoiler +(though I'd probably go with "irreconcilably exploitative and oppressive" because I think a lot of what we identify as "broken" was designed and considered a feature The electoral college for example) within the bounds of its own framework and for folks to stop arguing it isn't. Ideally before we get hit by this reality via a fascist bus to the face. I honestly thought being forced to vote for a Zionist that's openly aiding and abetting Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign would be a bridge too far to rationalize for more people around here. Which is why I'm starting to worry Trump literally entrenching himself as dictator for life (whatever odds people want to assign to that possibility) somehow might still not be enough for people to agree that actually, we're not going to vote our way out of this, because the people that control our voting process won't allow us (because they are fascists, led by a megalomaniacal dictator) I think it'd be interesting for you and Kwark (Or whichever educated party is willing) to debate WHY it is broken. I don't have a lot of insight into those particulars, being largely detached from the US and its structures. From my perspective, others are very willing to indicate that the US is busted, but I feel like getting to the root of it would end in a nature vs nurture style disagreement - my instinct is to say that the people of the US are a major part of the brokenness, likely by decades of reinforced 'american dream' capitalism, institutionalized racism, implicit and explicit prejudice honed through the inflexible lens of a two-party structure. I do not see a revolution that removes these flawed structures (it couldn't.) as enough. The issues are baked into the populace. With that as preface, I would at best hope for a 'revolution' that better allows incremental change to dismantle these structures. More realistically, I'd just do what I do here, which is recognize that my needs are met and values protected, and toss my vote to someone I care about whose needs and values aren't as secure. Unclear whether that answer was "concrete" enough to upset your assumption that I didn't have one or wasn't willing to share it, but I hope it was. "busted, shit, trash, broken, dysfunctional, etc." That's not really the dispute, it's whether that "busted, shit, trash, broken, dysfunctional, etc" system can fix itself within the context of the US, particularly amid the odds favoring Trump to win and him openly musing about being a dictator. As to the idea about a discussion around "Why it is this way" I've done a lot of that over the last ~7 years. A lot of it was around explaining to Hillary supporters how actually the US could very well choose Trump over her. Not despite shit like his, "grab her by the pussy" and "I prefer war heroes that don't get captured", but because of it. People have forgotten, but the idea that the US was too decent to elect Trump was pretty widely held well into the general and even pretty widely held up to election day. I don't want to go on a diatribe, but I will say I agree that Show nested quote + the people of the US are a major part of the brokenness, likely by decades of reinforced 'american dream' capitalism, institutionalized racism, implicit and explicit prejudice honed through the inflexible lens of a two-party structure. Though I wouldn't say the people themselves are broken, just mislead with deeply held bad ideas. I'd add a bunch of things I've discussed over the years (though many could arguably fit under those umbrellas) . I also don't think there's an adjective-capitalism that avoids the core problems with any adaptation of capitalism generally. Capitalism didn't happen overnight and it wasn't till the eve of the 1900's that something as obvious as legislating against monopolies became a thing in the US. Moving beyond it will likely have similar growing pains. Lastly to the nature vs nurture debate. It's generally brought up because it underpins the rationale that we have to stick with some form of capitalism. Essentially because it accepts the myth that capitalism takes people's competing rational self-interests and places them into a fair market to arrive at mutually (albeit sometimes skewed) beneficial conclusions thanks to the "invisible hand". The other is that greed/selfishness (and other negative traits) are inextricable from human nature, which to a degree I agree with (in that we're all capable of covering a wide spectrum of intrinsic capacity to "sin" so to speak). There the dispute is more about whether we should tailor society to incentivize our best traits or our worst. Capitalism incentivizes mostly the worst parts of us and can be considered a sort of fountain for the problematic " institutionalized racism, implicit and explicit prejudice honed through the inflexible lens of a two-party structure." and so on.
Also I suppose in a crude sense capitalism has got better at doing capitalism, become more thoroughly ingrained. A century of say, marketers getting better at marketing to take just one sector. That has to have a cumulative effect.
Many, of course not all people’s worst traits will tend to come out if society is a relentless competition, and one that isn’t especially fair at that. How a system that accentuates many of the worst human qualities ends up on aggregate leading to the fairest, more equitable outcomes on aggregate is borderline alchemy to me.
|
On December 13 2023 12:26 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 11:35 Fleetfeet wrote:On December 13 2023 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 13 2023 09:46 Fleetfeet wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 13 2023 09:03 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 07:51 Fleetfeet wrote:
Also I fully reject any notions that GH is stupid and/or lazy. I know how much activism GH has done as well as I know how many hugs Kwark gets in a month.
If GH had done any successful socialist revolutions in the US I feel like I’d have noticed. I’m reasonably certain he’s still at zero. Maybe he was playing Monopoly with friends one day and successfully revolutionized the game into a collaborative european-style board game instead. You'd never know. Has GH singlehandedly enacted a socialist revolution and instated a new form of government on the US? No, but you wouldn't suggest that's the barrier to calling oneself a revolutionary socialist. That'd be stupid. @GH (too lazy to quote more via mobile) How DO you want it to get resolved? I ask this very reluctantly, because I do not expect a concrete answer. If you were willing or able to give one, I expect we would not be here. By agreeing that the "dysfunctional capitalist democracy that is the US governmental structure" is irreparably broken + Show Spoiler +(though I'd probably go with "irreconcilably exploitative and oppressive" because I think a lot of what we identify as "broken" was designed and considered a feature The electoral college for example) within the bounds of its own framework and for folks to stop arguing it isn't. Ideally before we get hit by this reality via a fascist bus to the face. I honestly thought being forced to vote for a Zionist that's openly aiding and abetting Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign would be a bridge too far to rationalize for more people around here. Which is why I'm starting to worry Trump literally entrenching himself as dictator for life (whatever odds people want to assign to that possibility) somehow might still not be enough for people to agree that actually, we're not going to vote our way out of this, because the people that control our voting process won't allow us (because they are fascists, led by a megalomaniacal dictator) I think it'd be interesting for you and Kwark (Or whichever educated party is willing) to debate WHY it is broken. I don't have a lot of insight into those particulars, being largely detached from the US and its structures. From my perspective, others are very willing to indicate that the US is busted, but I feel like getting to the root of it would end in a nature vs nurture style disagreement - my instinct is to say that the people of the US are a major part of the brokenness, likely by decades of reinforced 'american dream' capitalism, institutionalized racism, implicit and explicit prejudice honed through the inflexible lens of a two-party structure. I do not see a revolution that removes these flawed structures (it couldn't.) as enough. The issues are baked into the populace. With that as preface, I would at best hope for a 'revolution' that better allows incremental change to dismantle these structures. More realistically, I'd just do what I do here, which is recognize that my needs are met and values protected, and toss my vote to someone I care about whose needs and values aren't as secure. Unclear whether that answer was "concrete" enough to upset your assumption that I didn't have one or wasn't willing to share it, but I hope it was. "busted, shit, trash, broken, dysfunctional, etc." That's not really the dispute, it's whether that "busted, shit, trash, broken, dysfunctional, etc" system can fix itself within the context of the US, particularly amid the odds favoring Trump to win and him openly musing about being a dictator. As to the idea about a discussion around "Why it is this way" I've done a lot of that over the last ~7 years. A lot of it was around explaining to Hillary supporters how actually the US could very well choose Trump over her. Not despite shit like his, "grab her by the pussy" and "I prefer war heroes that don't get captured", but because of it. People have forgotten, but the idea that the US was too decent to elect Trump was pretty widely held well into the general and even pretty widely held up to election day. I don't want to go on a diatribe, but I will say I agree that Show nested quote + the people of the US are a major part of the brokenness, likely by decades of reinforced 'american dream' capitalism, institutionalized racism, implicit and explicit prejudice honed through the inflexible lens of a two-party structure. Though I wouldn't say the people themselves are broken, just mislead with deeply held bad ideas. I'd add a bunch of things I've discussed over the years (though many could arguably fit under those umbrellas) . I also don't think there's an adjective-capitalism that avoids the core problems with any adaptation of capitalism generally. Capitalism didn't happen overnight and it wasn't till the eve of the 1900's that something as obvious as legislating against monopolies became a thing in the US. Moving beyond it will likely have similar growing pains. Lastly to the nature vs nurture debate. It's generally brought up because it underpins the rationale that we have to stick with some form of capitalism. Essentially because it accepts the myth that capitalism takes people's competing rational self-interests and places them into a fair market to arrive at mutually (albeit sometimes skewed) beneficial conclusions thanks to the "invisible hand". The other is that greed/selfishness (and other negative traits) are inextricable from human nature, which to a degree I agree with (in that we're all capable of covering a wide spectrum of intrinsic capacity to "sin" so to speak). There the dispute is more about whether we should tailor society to incentivize our best traits or our worst. Capitalism incentivizes mostly the worst parts of us and can be considered a sort of fountain for the problematic " institutionalized racism, implicit and explicit prejudice honed through the inflexible lens of a two-party structure." and so on.
Sorry, yeah, I did you a disservice by not addressing my own concerns of concreteness. Your answer is 'concrete' enough for me, and I appreciate you taking the time. It's shorter of a plan than I'd hope for, but as someone who's been around addiction issues as well as mental health ones, I can very much appreciate "Admit and agree there is a problem" as THE first step.
For it to be regarded as concrete beyond my own perspective, though, I imagine there has to be more steps. In the case of addiction or mental health the next step is rehab/therapy. In the case of governmental structure I see "Harass your local Member of Parliament (If you'll excuse my Canadian)" / "Attend protests" / "Sign petitions" etc as viable options that work currently within democratic structures. I don't understand where the revolution comes in, which might just be me misunderstanding the gravity of the word and not fully agreeing it is beyond repair. For you to be able to convince ME that the system is broken beyond repair, I think you'd have to be able to demonstrate why the above next steps would never be sufficient. Given that I live in a different country that seems like a waste of your energy, but hopefully that stands as insight for how to better convince your fellow americans.
I don't know that it's fair to ask you for a concrete 'next step' past agreeing there is a problem, as I imagine the plan would involve a dialogue between the multitudes of people who have suddenly come to agree there's a problem, and from there discuss solutions.
Ultimately, I think I better understand where you're coming from, and better understand why people disagree with you. Thanks for taking the time to respond, and hopefully this has been useful for others as well!
If you want me to elaborate on any of my conclusions or anything, feel free to ask.
|
On December 13 2023 17:00 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 12:26 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 13 2023 11:35 Fleetfeet wrote:On December 13 2023 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 13 2023 09:46 Fleetfeet wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 13 2023 09:03 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 07:51 Fleetfeet wrote:
Also I fully reject any notions that GH is stupid and/or lazy. I know how much activism GH has done as well as I know how many hugs Kwark gets in a month.
If GH had done any successful socialist revolutions in the US I feel like I’d have noticed. I’m reasonably certain he’s still at zero. Maybe he was playing Monopoly with friends one day and successfully revolutionized the game into a collaborative european-style board game instead. You'd never know. Has GH singlehandedly enacted a socialist revolution and instated a new form of government on the US? No, but you wouldn't suggest that's the barrier to calling oneself a revolutionary socialist. That'd be stupid. @GH (too lazy to quote more via mobile) How DO you want it to get resolved? I ask this very reluctantly, because I do not expect a concrete answer. If you were willing or able to give one, I expect we would not be here. By agreeing that the "dysfunctional capitalist democracy that is the US governmental structure" is irreparably broken + Show Spoiler +(though I'd probably go with "irreconcilably exploitative and oppressive" because I think a lot of what we identify as "broken" was designed and considered a feature The electoral college for example) within the bounds of its own framework and for folks to stop arguing it isn't. Ideally before we get hit by this reality via a fascist bus to the face. I honestly thought being forced to vote for a Zionist that's openly aiding and abetting Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign would be a bridge too far to rationalize for more people around here. Which is why I'm starting to worry Trump literally entrenching himself as dictator for life (whatever odds people want to assign to that possibility) somehow might still not be enough for people to agree that actually, we're not going to vote our way out of this, because the people that control our voting process won't allow us (because they are fascists, led by a megalomaniacal dictator) I think it'd be interesting for you and Kwark (Or whichever educated party is willing) to debate WHY it is broken. I don't have a lot of insight into those particulars, being largely detached from the US and its structures. From my perspective, others are very willing to indicate that the US is busted, but I feel like getting to the root of it would end in a nature vs nurture style disagreement - my instinct is to say that the people of the US are a major part of the brokenness, likely by decades of reinforced 'american dream' capitalism, institutionalized racism, implicit and explicit prejudice honed through the inflexible lens of a two-party structure. I do not see a revolution that removes these flawed structures (it couldn't.) as enough. The issues are baked into the populace. With that as preface, I would at best hope for a 'revolution' that better allows incremental change to dismantle these structures. More realistically, I'd just do what I do here, which is recognize that my needs are met and values protected, and toss my vote to someone I care about whose needs and values aren't as secure. Unclear whether that answer was "concrete" enough to upset your assumption that I didn't have one or wasn't willing to share it, but I hope it was. "busted, shit, trash, broken, dysfunctional, etc." That's not really the dispute, it's whether that "busted, shit, trash, broken, dysfunctional, etc" system can fix itself within the context of the US, particularly amid the odds favoring Trump to win and him openly musing about being a dictator. As to the idea about a discussion around "Why it is this way" I've done a lot of that over the last ~7 years. A lot of it was around explaining to Hillary supporters how actually the US could very well choose Trump over her. Not despite shit like his, "grab her by the pussy" and "I prefer war heroes that don't get captured", but because of it. People have forgotten, but the idea that the US was too decent to elect Trump was pretty widely held well into the general and even pretty widely held up to election day. I don't want to go on a diatribe, but I will say I agree that the people of the US are a major part of the brokenness, likely by decades of reinforced 'american dream' capitalism, institutionalized racism, implicit and explicit prejudice honed through the inflexible lens of a two-party structure. Though I wouldn't say the people themselves are broken, just mislead with deeply held bad ideas. I'd add a bunch of things I've discussed over the years (though many could arguably fit under those umbrellas) . I also don't think there's an adjective-capitalism that avoids the core problems with any adaptation of capitalism generally. Capitalism didn't happen overnight and it wasn't till the eve of the 1900's that something as obvious as legislating against monopolies became a thing in the US. Moving beyond it will likely have similar growing pains. Lastly to the nature vs nurture debate. It's generally brought up because it underpins the rationale that we have to stick with some form of capitalism. Essentially because it accepts the myth that capitalism takes people's competing rational self-interests and places them into a fair market to arrive at mutually (albeit sometimes skewed) beneficial conclusions thanks to the "invisible hand". The other is that greed/selfishness (and other negative traits) are inextricable from human nature, which to a degree I agree with (in that we're all capable of covering a wide spectrum of intrinsic capacity to "sin" so to speak). There the dispute is more about whether we should tailor society to incentivize our best traits or our worst. Capitalism incentivizes mostly the worst parts of us and can be considered a sort of fountain for the problematic " institutionalized racism, implicit and explicit prejudice honed through the inflexible lens of a two-party structure." and so on. Sorry, yeah, I did you a disservice by not addressing my own concerns of concreteness. Your answer is 'concrete' enough for me, and I appreciate you taking the time. It's shorter of a plan than I'd hope for, but as someone who's been around addiction issues as well as mental health ones, I can very much appreciate "Admit and agree there is a problem" as THE first step. For it to be regarded as concrete beyond my own perspective, though, I imagine there has to be more steps. In the case of addiction or mental health the next step is rehab/therapy. In the case of governmental structure I see "Harass your local Member of Parliament (If you'll excuse my Canadian)" / "Attend protests" / "Sign petitions" etc as viable options that work currently within democratic structures. I don't understand where the revolution comes in, which might just be me misunderstanding the gravity of the word and not fully agreeing it is beyond repair. For you to be able to convince ME that the system is broken beyond repair, I think you'd have to be able to demonstrate why the above next steps would never be sufficient. Given that I live in a different country that seems like a waste of your energy, but hopefully that stands as insight for how to better convince your fellow americans. I don't know that it's fair to ask you for a concrete 'next step' past agreeing there is a problem, as I imagine the plan would involve a dialogue between the multitudes of people who have suddenly come to agree there's a problem, and from there discuss solutions. Ultimately, I think I better understand where you're coming from, and better understand why people disagree with you. Thanks for taking the time to respond, and hopefully this has been useful for others as well! If you want me to elaborate on any of my conclusions or anything, feel free to ask.
No problem, I appreciate you acknowledging it.
To use a bit of an addiction analogy: Imagine how frustrating it is to work with an addict that insists they'll get around to step 1 after (or claim they've already done it, so now) they explain how impossible this "reconciliation" step is because of ...**proceeds to tell 20 minute story that ends with concluding "Actually I don't need treatment! What I'm doing is working", oblivious/abrasively dismissive to the wake of destruction and devastated people that disagree.**
Not saying that's you, just one reason why that 'next step' conversation is typically not very productive before people acknowledge the problem sincerely.
As to specifically convincing you of 'the problem', well... For you to be able to convince ME that the system is broken beyond repair, I think you'd have to be able to demonstrate why the above next steps would never be sufficient. That's a problem. You can't be convinced. I'm confident someone else could explain this to you better than I could but it's basically an infinite monkey situation (unless you accept the science that basically says we're on a climate catastrophe timer, in which case, "never" should be "in time" and convincing you is back on the table).
Something I can do, is point to someone like Trump installing himself as dictator for life and ask "would that do it for you?" If not, there's not really much value in trying/chance to persuade someone that anything short of Trump installing himself as dictator for life should convince them it is "irreconcilably and inextricably exploitative/oppressive" or "broken beyond repair (within the confines of its own making)".
EDIT: @Wombat Also an excellent point. Please don't get me started about advertising though lol *he said as flashes of dozens of pharmaceutical ads started playing in his head*.
|
On December 13 2023 09:10 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 07:37 BlackJack wrote:On December 13 2023 04:24 KwarK wrote:
His arguments are frequently incredibly bad such as insisting that people identify exactly where the line is (this is always a bad faith argument) that would cause people to abandon electoralism without adding any of the necessary context for what that would mean (are we talking armed revolts, general strikes, terrorism, what?).
. The crux of the issue, imo. GH's posts very often lack the substance of what the revolution looks like, or really any details of any kind. The vast majority of his posts are just "look at this disagreeable thing your party did that you're complicit in, whereas I'm above the fray because I don't support either party or even the political system they exist in." I haven't been following this thread since its inception. It's possible he has shared more details of what he's hoping to accomplish beyond trying to get people on a gaming forum to agree with him. In this context I'd put the crux of the issue at where we are. That is to say what you're seeing/describing is my attempt to argue basically that the US system is irreparably broken within the bounds of its own framework. Others argue it isn't. That makes the substance of the discussion largely "what's broken about it?" and "can it repair itself within its own constraints, and how?". Since I'm on the side that says it is irreparably broken, and that to some degree these exploits are intentionally designed, my focus tends to be on the "what's broken about it?" part. That's accompanied by the belief that it can't repair itself within its own constraints supported by examples of it failing. .
I guess I agree. It makes sense that you need people to acknowledge that the US system is irreparably broken before moving on to the details of your socialist revolution that you wish to replace it with. I'm sure that what you're offering is so shitty that you need your audience to be properly hopeless and desperate to be receptive to your pitch. I'm sure we agree that even a broken system with a glimmer of hope for improvement is still preferable to socialism so the "broken beyond repair" concession is actually a crucial first step for your revolution.
|
On December 13 2023 19:52 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2023 09:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 13 2023 07:37 BlackJack wrote:On December 13 2023 04:24 KwarK wrote:
His arguments are frequently incredibly bad such as insisting that people identify exactly where the line is (this is always a bad faith argument) that would cause people to abandon electoralism without adding any of the necessary context for what that would mean (are we talking armed revolts, general strikes, terrorism, what?).
. The crux of the issue, imo. GH's posts very often lack the substance of what the revolution looks like, or really any details of any kind. The vast majority of his posts are just "look at this disagreeable thing your party did that you're complicit in, whereas I'm above the fray because I don't support either party or even the political system they exist in." I haven't been following this thread since its inception. It's possible he has shared more details of what he's hoping to accomplish beyond trying to get people on a gaming forum to agree with him. In this context I'd put the crux of the issue at where we are. That is to say what you're seeing/describing is my attempt to argue basically that the US system is irreparably broken within the bounds of its own framework. Others argue it isn't. That makes the substance of the discussion largely "what's broken about it?" and "can it repair itself within its own constraints, and how?". Since I'm on the side that says it is irreparably broken, and that to some degree these exploits are intentionally designed, my focus tends to be on the "what's broken about it?" part. That's accompanied by the belief that it can't repair itself within its own constraints supported by examples of it failing. . I guess I agree. It makes sense that you need people to acknowledge that the US system is irreparably broken before moving on to the details of your socialist revolution that you wish to replace it with. I'm sure that what you're offering is so shitty that you need your audience to be properly hopeless and desperate to be receptive to your pitch. I'm sure we agree that even a broken system with a glimmer of hope for improvement is still preferable to socialism so the "broken beyond repair" concession is actually a crucial first step for your revolution.
For clarity sake, I don't want to replace US racial capitalist hegemony with a socialist revolution, but with socialism. Revolutionary socialism is how I advocate we make that happen. I'm am willing to consider other paths. Revolutionary socialism certainly wasn't the first I've tried, but it is the best I've found.
As to receptiveness, that's a bit complicated. I've touched on this before though.
Opposition to socialism itself is somewhat separate from people that are hesitant/oppositional to revolutionary socialism for reasons 2-5.
|
|
|
I think he believes true socialism cannot be achieved without a revolution that overturns the current order, which is trying to do everything it can to stop socialism.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland26005 Posts
On December 14 2023 15:18 gobbledydook wrote:
I think he believes true socialism cannot be achieved without a revolution that overturns the current order, which is trying to do everything it can to stop socialism.
I mean history thru today very much does validate him on this point
|
|
|
On December 13 2023 12:26 GreenHorizons wrote:
As to the idea about a discussion around "Why it is this way" I've done a lot of that over the last ~7 years. A lot of it was around explaining to Hillary supporters how actually the US could very well choose Trump over her. Not despite shit like his, "grab her by the pussy" and "I prefer war heroes that don't get captured", but because of it.
Until Trump got elected I didn't realize people like this existed. I think a big part of how he won is he got people who normally don't vote (the "ironic" neo-Fascists) to pay attention. I can remember when the front page of Reddit was full of Ron Paul supporters and when it was full of r/TheDonald posts. I think those people, who normally are disengaged from politics (because their political leanings aren't in line with mainstream Republican ideas) were the tipping point for Trump. He roused the rabble of people who usually just sit back and say stuff like "both parties are the same" (they aren't)
|
Northern Ireland26005 Posts
On December 16 2023 13:04 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2023 11:56 WombaT wrote:On December 14 2023 15:18 gobbledydook wrote:
I think he believes true socialism cannot be achieved without a revolution that overturns the current order, which is trying to do everything it can to stop socialism. I mean history thru today very much does validate him on this point No it doesn’t. No revolution has ever created his system, or really came that close.
So the Cold War didn’t happen? Or the US’ rather chequered history in central/South America? Etc
You don’t have to be on the same page as GH to agree that there’s a hell of a lot of pushback against attempts to institute socialism, often external to a state.
|
|
|
On December 16 2023 17:08 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2023 13:04 JimmiC wrote:On December 16 2023 11:56 WombaT wrote:On December 14 2023 15:18 gobbledydook wrote:
I think he believes true socialism cannot be achieved without a revolution that overturns the current order, which is trying to do everything it can to stop socialism. I mean history thru today very much does validate him on this point No it doesn’t. No revolution has ever created his system, or really came that close. So the Cold War didn’t happen? Or the US’ rather chequered history in central/South America? Etc You don’t have to be on the same page as GH to agree that there’s a hell of a lot of pushback against attempts to institute socialism, often external to a state. Are we already back to "communism is great, just no one has ever done it properly"? What does the Cold War have to do with socialism? The USSR was not socialist.
The closest we have to socialism is probably the Nordic social democracy and I'm reasonably sure they didn't get there via a revolution.
Where in the world did we get actual socialism, and not a dictatorship or oligarchy by a different name, following a revolution by the people?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
