Yatogami Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 2 hours ago, ThaHoward said: But that is a specific regulation.. That is not regulation in general. If one do contractive financial politics and/or do inflation reducing or controlling monetary policies, for example increasing rent, the inflation will have a lower increase. So I still don't see how regulations in general increase inflation. Read yourself up on inflation and economical policies first. I was using it as an example to show how complex just one insignificant change can cause in everything. Regulations can range from tiny individual things to straight up processes one must follow. Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 2 hours ago, m4rble said: There are things they pump into American food that would never be allowed elsewhere. It's disturbing. They also ban things still used in other countries. Each country has its own unique set. Stevia is a good example, though recently unbanned because they originally had it as a carcinogen. Link to post Share on other sites
Prufrock, but like, worse Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 On 6/27/2017 at 12:42 PM, ♣Ryan♣ said: Oh you find it hilarious people take issue with an ideology that has left over a hundred million dead and even more poor and is still happening in some parts of the world today. That's interesting. Urk, I hate this argument. "true communism has never been tried" is a common rebuttal. And "human nature ensures the horrors caused in the name of communism" is a common explanation by capitalists. And sure, I see that. People are greedy. Human nature also includes rape and murder, I don't see you defending those. Saying they are inevitable, perhaps, but not demanding that we restructure our society to exalt bloodlust or regular-lust. Marx did fuck up there by not planning for this possibility. Have a look at this, the blog is somewhat to the right of me so this probably constitutes virtue signaling neutrality or something. http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/13/book-review-singer-on-marx/ Quote I figured that Marx had just fallen into a similar trap. He’d probably made a few vague plans, like “Oh, decisions will be made by a committee of workers,” and “Property will be held in common and consensus democracy will choose who gets what,” and felt like the rest was just details. That’s the sort of error I could at least sympathize with, despite its horrendous consequences. But in fact Marx was philosophically opposed, as a matter of principle, to any planning about the structure of communist governments or economies. He would come out and say “It is irresponsible to talk about how communist governments and economies will work.” He believed it was a scientific law, analogous to the laws of physics, that once capitalism was removed, a perfect communist government would form of its own accord. There might be some very light planning, a couple of discussions, but these would just be epiphenomena of the governing historical laws working themselves out. Just as, a dam having been removed, a river will eventually reach the sea somehow, so capitalism having been removed society will eventually reach a perfect state of freedom and cooperation. Singer blames Hegel. Hegel viewed all human history as the World-Spirit trying to recognize and incarnate itself. As it overcomes its various confusions and false dichotomies, it advances into forms that more completely incarnate the World-Spirit and then moves onto the next problem. Finally, it ends with the World-Spirit completely incarnated – possibly in the form of early 19th century Prussia – and everything is great forever. Marx famously exports Hegel’s mysticism into a materialistic version where the World-Spirit operates upon class relations rather than the interconnectedness of all things, and where you don’t come out and call it the World-Spirit – but he basically keeps the system intact. So once the World-Spirit resolves the dichotomy between Capitalist and Proletariat, then it can more completely incarnate itself and move on to the next problem. Except that this is the final problem (the proof of this is trivial and is left as exercise for the reader) so the World-Spirit becomes fully incarnate and everything is great forever. And you want to plan for how that should happen? Are you saying you know better than the World-Spirit, Comrade? It's possible to be a socialist without agreeing with every single word Marx ever wrote or everything that happened because of it. Fun fact. edit over a year later, for archivists or people looking for dirt: should probably add that the author of this blog has become more overtly racist in the time since he made this post, though i should have recognized the warning signs at the time Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 47 minutes ago, Cthulhu said: It's possible to be a socialist without agreeing with every single word Marx ever wrote or everything that happened because of it. Fun fact. And we already have it in the form it works best in. That is mixed with Capitalism. Link to post Share on other sites
SorryNotSorry Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 11 hours ago, m4rble said: Which just shows that corporations need regulation. I think what needs deregulation is the common people. Stop illegalizing petty things that hurt no one. Take away immunity for lawmakers and law enforcement personnel who fuck up. Put bounties on sworn officers who try to enforce the Old Regime's laws. Link to post Share on other sites
Mostly Peaceful Ryan Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 On 6/27/2017 at 6:48 PM, Cthulhu said: It's possible to be a socialist without agreeing with every single word Marx ever wrote or everything that happened because of it. Fun fact. Right I don't think you would agree with everything Marx said. He would be against what many of his own followers did. But It's important to realize that there is no socialist society that works in the real world and there will always be the excuse "Oh that government wasn't 'real socialism'" and at what point will socialist admit it doesn't work and give up? Link to post Share on other sites
ThaHoward Posted July 2, 2017 Share Posted July 2, 2017 Fortunately many realised, already in the late 1800s and early 1900s, that it don't really work. And embraced liberal democracy and capitalism and sought to reduce class differences and do social politics in those frames. Link to post Share on other sites
ChillaKilla Posted July 2, 2017 Share Posted July 2, 2017 27 minutes ago, ThaHoward said: Fortunately many realised, already in the late 1800s and early 1900s, that it don't really work. And embraced liberal democracy and capitalism and sought to reduce class differences and do social politics in those frames. I think you're the only person on this site who calls themselves a centrist that is actually a centrist, rather than a conservative in denial Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted July 2, 2017 Share Posted July 2, 2017 26 minutes ago, ChillaKilla said: I think you're the only person on this site who calls themselves a centrist that is actually a centrist, rather than a conservative in denial Waddaya talking about. Im a radical centrist. Link to post Share on other sites
ChillaKilla Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 2 hours ago, Maou-sama said: Waddaya talking about. Im a radical centrist. *insert raspberry sound here* Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 1 hour ago, ChillaKilla said: *insert raspberry sound here* https://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/thumb/1476/08/1476080721255s.jpg Link to post Share on other sites
ChillaKilla Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 1 hour ago, Maou-sama said: https://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/thumb/1476/08/1476080721255s.jpg Aren't you the one who's admitted to using the word "cuck" unironically in the past? Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 Just now, ChillaKilla said: Aren't you the one who's admitted to using the word "cuck" unironically in the past? I still do use it, just not on here. I use all words, because that is what they are used for. If insults were legal here, you'd be seeing me use it every other sentance xD Link to post Share on other sites
The Terrible Travis Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 On 6/23/2017 at 1:18 PM, Sally said: Jill Stein won enough votes in three particular states that if Clinton had won those votes, she would have won the Electoral College (as well as the popular vote). They weren't very many, but they took those states away from the Dems. It was Stein we have to thank for Trump being President. We do have a certain female presidential candidate to thank for Trump being President. That candidate isn't Stein though. Link to post Share on other sites
ThaHoward Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 11 hours ago, ChillaKilla said: I think you're the only person on this site who calls themselves a centrist that is actually a centrist, rather than a conservative in denial Or a social-democrat in denial? But didn't know I have said I'm a centrist here Not saying that I haven't though. But it's irritating for me to see people misuse ideological terms and theories so much on this site. The worst is the saying the (right-wing) libertarianism is centrist Link to post Share on other sites
Kelpie Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 8 hours ago, Maou-sama said: https://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/thumb/1476/08/1476080721255s.jpg Always a good idea do depict Jews to show your superiority. Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 2 hours ago, Kelpie said: Always a good idea do depict Jews to show your superiority. What are you talking about? Link to post Share on other sites
Kelpie Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 54 minutes ago, Maou-sama said: What are you talking about? Sorry but this picture looks like a popart interpretation of every Nazi Jew Propaganda made. Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 1 minute ago, Kelpie said: Sorry but this picture looks like a popart interpretation of every Nazi Jew Propaganda made. Are you seriously going out of your way to say these cartoon chatacters are Jewish, based on stereotypical appearance? With zero implication of religious affiliation? It couldn't just be a random person could it? Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 https://www.mail.com/int/news/europe/5321000-germany-passes-law-online-hate-speech.html#.1258-stage-hero1-1 I'm not even going to sugar coat it anymore. This flavor of Liberalism is evil. Germany just can't do anything right, can they? Everything they touch, they have to sprinkle some Totalitarianism all over it. It's eye-opening to read this on Independence Day. Link to post Share on other sites
Homer Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 CY, let me just add three things to the link you just posted. One, this law is being discussed A LOT over here and the overwhelming majority of people does not agree with this bs. It's vague, it's impossible to put in practice and it's designed to interfere with free speech (which is a thing over here, which I am thankful for). Leading to Two, this "law" is VERY likely to be overruled by our Supreme Court. The question is when, not if. Three, our "minister of justice" is a clueless jerk who sucks everywhere he goes. If he tried to throw a rock on the ground, he'd miss. He's the epitome of incompetence. This is not "Germany" fucking stuff up, it is one braindead politician running amok. (I do not think that this system is truly democratic anyway. This very law is a perfect example of what is wrong in this country.) Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 37 minutes ago, Homer said: CY, let me just add three things to the link you just posted. One, this law is being discussed A LOT over here and the overwhelming majority of people does not agree with this bs. It's vague, it's impossible to put in practice and it's designed to interfere with free speech (which is a thing over here, which I am thankful for). Leading to Two, this "law" is VERY likely to be overruled by our Supreme Court. The question is when, not if. Three, our "minister of justice" is a clueless jerk who sucks everywhere he goes. If he tried to throw a rock on the ground, he'd miss. He's the epitome of incompetence. This is not "Germany" fucking stuff up, it is one braindead politician running amok. (I do not think that this system is truly democratic anyway. This very law is a perfect example of what is wrong in this country.) Don't you guys elect people though? Link to post Share on other sites
Sally Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 24 minutes ago, Maou-sama said: Don't you guys elect people though? The US elects people. The result is Trump. Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 Just now, Sally said: The US elects people. The result is Trump. I'mn talking about German. EU is anti-democratic too. Link to post Share on other sites
ThaHoward Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 20 minutes ago, Maou-sama said: I'mn talking about German. EU is anti-democratic too. Anti-democratic in what regard? Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 Just now, ThaHoward said: Anti-democratic in what regard? They are not elected. Link to post Share on other sites
Homer Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 47 minutes ago, Maou-sama said: Don't you guys elect people though? Not really. We elect parties and we elect a local representative for the national parliament. So we get to choose who gets a seat, but not which position they end up in. Lobbyism is a huge issue causing a fair share of the fuckups. Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 1 minute ago, Homer said: Not really. We elect parties and we elect a local representative for the national parliament. So we get to choose who gets a seat, but not which position they end up in. Yeah thats not shady or anything. What's to stop them from making people that could make a difference, and shunning them into shitty positions? (Note im not from there, and don't know how it works really) Link to post Share on other sites
Homer Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 That's the system for you. You just won't get into a certain position without a certain mindset. Comfort is key. Link to post Share on other sites
ThaHoward Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 30 minutes ago, Maou-sama said: They are not elected. They are. EU-parliament members are elected by direct EU elections. Then each nation send their own representant to the executive branch - each of the government's being democratically elected. Then all EU membership are voluntairly, as proven by Brexit and the European nations who are not members due to popular elections where EU membership were turned down, and then of course the member nations who elected to be part of it.. So no, you have read fake news. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.