Politics thread (USA Elections 2016) - Page 301

Should be constant across nations and timelines then. It's not. I haven't ever heard of a Norwegian socialist magazine that fired workers for trying to unionize. Before our labor party first gained political prominence (say, pre 1920), there were a lot of really strong conflicts between unions/unionized workers and employers/non-unionized workers. During the period where our labor party was the dominant political force in Norway (say, 1945-1980), stories like these almost never circulated. However, in the past 8 years, where we've had a considerably more right-wing government, suddenly stories about workers being 'strongly discouraged' (for example losing out on bonuses) to not unionize become a lot more common.

Even 'human nature' is remarkably malleable. I'm not saying 'greed' and wanting more than your fellow man is ever something that's truly gone from a society (maybe it is in smaller hunter-gatherer societies but I'm guessing that even if those people aren't/weren't concerned with having more material goods than their fellow tribesmen, people still enjoyed the respect derived from being more skillful than their peers), but how prevalent it is differs hugely based on which traits are highlighted as positive or negative. A society that celebrates greed and competition will have more greedy and competitive people than one that celebrates solidarity and cooperation. I'm not surprised to find that there are more American leftists that are 'corrupt' than what we see in Norway, as I believe American society is more corrupting than what Norwegian society is. Furthermore, the actions of an individual do not invalidate a movement.

I think they tried to make it a co-op and seize all the equity, not just unionize. If you have a norwegian oppressor with his life's work tied up in the business he owns and you sagely redistribute it to his employees he's unfortunately gonna struggle against cosmic justice too, greedy fucker. Honestly this is why we need a bearded strong man and gulags

On August 22 2021 11:09 Jelle wrote: Honestly this is why we need a bearded strong man and gulags

I'm fine, thanks.

On August 22 2021 09:57 Liquid`Drone wrote: Should be constant across nations and timelines then. It's not. I haven't ever heard of a Norwegian socialist magazine that fired workers for trying to unionize. Before our labor party first gained political prominence (say, pre 1920), there were a lot of really strong conflicts between unions/unionized workers and employers/non-unionized workers. During the period where our labor party was the dominant political force in Norway (say, 1945-1980), stories like these almost never circulated. However, in the past 8 years, where we've had a considerably more right-wing government, suddenly stories about workers being 'strongly discouraged' (for example losing out on bonuses) to not unionize become a lot more common. Even 'human nature' is remarkably malleable. I'm not saying 'greed' and wanting more than your fellow man is ever something that's truly gone from a society (maybe it is in smaller hunter-gatherer societies but I'm guessing that even if those people aren't/weren't concerned with having more material goods than their fellow tribesmen, people still enjoyed the respect derived from being more skillful than their peers), but how prevalent it is differs hugely based on which traits are highlighted as positive or negative. A society that celebrates greed and competition will have more greedy and competitive people than one that celebrates solidarity and cooperation. I'm not surprised to find that there are more American leftists that are 'corrupt' than what we see in Norway, as I believe American society is more corrupting than what Norwegian society is. Furthermore, the actions of an individual do not invalidate a movement.

Appeals to human nature are almost always negative. In my view, it would be a great philosophy/psychology phd topic to just survey all the appeals to human nature in the media doing some database search. I see even climate scientists make these kinds of appeal to human nature, (that we aren't biologically built to care enough about climate change). There's some deep rationalization behind it, imo it's very convenient for everyone else to be inherently selfish/greedy, because it absolves you of any responsibility and allows you to convince yourself that everything is hopeless. In reality, the things we absolutely know about human nature is the stuff biologists have studied, and then there are the malleable parts that come down to cultural upbringing, politics, ect. It's another interesting fact that almost every political system has sought to convince themselves that humans are far more malleable than they really are.

There is a clear-cut case of this a few pages back. Take J.J.Rousou-his 2nd discourse on inequality he basically points out there is an instinct for freedom in humans and it's strong enough that people are willing to die for it, (as many did during his time), and you can see that from every day experience, history, ect. Not many people want to be slaves. His view's were considered so offensive that he was not allowed to finish his lecture. Then take Nietzsche, his view that humans have a will to power has some evidence as well, but it's the one that gets cited far more often than Roussou's view. Why? It's far easier to view human beings as power-seeking individuals than people who want freedom.

On August 22 2021 00:29 RiKD wrote: Hasan just bought a $3 million house. I think I remember one of the leaders (?) of Black Lives Matter buying a string of real estate when they were all pumped up. What do we make of all of this?

There are lots of examples of people who have been involved in left-politics for a long time and have not let it go to their head, Pepe Mujica is one. But most of them are not famous at all. Often the people who lead political movements are the dumbest and most ego-driven people in the movement, there's nothing new there and they can easily be identified by their loud rhetoric, and lack of experience. So I think what we make of this is start by asking yourself why are you picking these particular examples to discuss instead the whole sample.

I thought it might be fun and/or I might learn something.

It wasn't particularly fun but if I ever get around to google'ing Pepe Mujica I will learn something.

Andrew Cuomo gave a parting gift to San Francisco DA Chesa Boudin by granting clemency to his father that has been in prison for murder. Really warms to the heart to see someone use their position of power to do a personal favor to an ally and help get their murdering father out of prison.

Looked up Pepe Mujica today...

Respek.

On August 22 2021 09:57 Liquid`Drone wrote: Should be constant across nations and timelines then. It's not. I haven't ever heard of a Norwegian socialist magazine that fired workers for trying to unionize. Before our labor party first gained political prominence (say, pre 1920), there were a lot of really strong conflicts between unions/unionized workers and employers/non-unionized workers. During the period where our labor party was the dominant political force in Norway (say, 1945-1980), stories like these almost never circulated. However, in the past 8 years, where we've had a considerably more right-wing government, suddenly stories about workers being 'strongly discouraged' (for example losing out on bonuses) to not unionize become a lot more common. Even 'human nature' is remarkably malleable. I'm not saying 'greed' and wanting more than your fellow man is ever something that's truly gone from a society (maybe it is in smaller hunter-gatherer societies but I'm guessing that even if those people aren't/weren't concerned with having more material goods than their fellow tribesmen, people still enjoyed the respect derived from being more skillful than their peers), but how prevalent it is differs hugely based on which traits are highlighted as positive or negative. A society that celebrates greed and competition will have more greedy and competitive people than one that celebrates solidarity and cooperation. I'm not surprised to find that there are more American leftists that are 'corrupt' than what we see in Norway, as I believe American society is more corrupting than what Norwegian society is. Furthermore, the actions of an individual do not invalidate a movement.

Of course we are malleable, isn't that the noblest of pursuits? Religions have been offering the ultimate prize, eternal joy for the ones who manage to resist the deadly sins, yet, if it existed, paradise would be a lonely place, and what already is an herculean task for the individual, now imagine the hubris required to think that a society on a scale by the millions can be constructed in such way through coercion.

But don't think what I'm saying is that a society that is the most "sinful" is the best one, I'm not going full Rand here, on the contrary, just dont build top down systems that go against the most basics of our flaws.

On August 22 2021 22:27 Stroggoz wrote: There's some deep rationalization behind it, imo it's very convenient for everyone else to be inherently selfish/greedy, because it absolves you of any responsibility and allows you to convince yourself that everything is hopeless. In reality, the things we absolutely know about human nature is the stuff biologists have studied, and then there are the malleable parts that come down to cultural upbringing, politics, ect. It's another interesting fact that almost every political system has sought to convince themselves that humans are far more malleable than they really are.

You got it backwards.

The right in general terms about personal responsibility, actually isn't Jord Peterson's mantra "Clean your room" and "hopelessness leads to cynicism and resentfulness"

The left puts the responsibility in systems, not the individual, afterall being fat isn't your fault... and many examples like that.

Since there is a lot of right-wing ideology people here I wanna review the results of rightwing politicians in the Western World:

- Trump lost after a single mandate ( quite rare in American history )
- Erdogan bankrupted the country
- Orban got kicked out of the EPP, while his rightwing mates that run anti-gay politics are caught in gay orgies (how pathetic of a human being do you have to be)
- Salvini won the election by a landslide and ... departed after 1 year
- Slovakia and Czech Republic both got rid of their right-wing leaders
- UK - pushed Brexit but didn't take responsibility for the aftermath and simply bolted
- Bolsanaro - a hard leftwing ideology opposer that ... goes full mode into social welfare and financial subsidies and will most likely lose the re-election
- France - Le Pen lost her election chances before the election has begun .. even though Macron is not exactly a president that people like


And all of that during times of uncertainty, migration crisis, pandemic, and heavy market fluctuation. The ideology that people default to when they need stability. Why is it that it lost so hard?

Also, can someone explain to me why are all those shitheads such good friends with Putin?

serious question for my respected left-wing friends here
-how can we constrain the unionization of labor to avoid cronyism to benefit the worker and not just big business interests
-is your only interest in rights at the level of government or are you willing to pay more than lip service to defend individual liberty against corporations, despite when these corporations adopt a progressive facade for marketing convenience
-how can you reduce deficit spending and perpetual government waste caused by the ever increasing entitlements and welfare state?
-in considering immigration policy why are the effects on gross GDP which would invariably be positive not weighed against quality of life, GDP per capita, and effects on the government budget
-how can we support progressivism while not kowtowing to fascists around the world in china, cuba, north korea, who have coopted the revolutionary ideology

also, why is spitfiree poopy?

How to counter most of rightwing's ideologies in 12 minutes

i keep thinking about this

intelligence and upbringing is 100% luck

even something like creating own luck is a certain part of intelligence or circumstance or being

what am i missing?

FINALLY youtube has solved politics

we can shut down the internet now

On August 29 2021 02:21 RiKD wrote: i keep thinking about this intelligence and upbringing is 100% luck even something like creating own luck is a certain part of intelligence or circumstance or being what am i missing?

Nothing really, it's true. The real hard part comes when you realize that and start making conscious decisions for yourself and own the hand you've been dealt, but realizing that itself is huge.

On August 27 2021 02:28 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On August 22 2021 22:27 Stroggoz wrote: There's some deep rationalization behind it, imo it's very convenient for everyone else to be inherently selfish/greedy, because it absolves you of any responsibility and allows you to convince yourself that everything is hopeless. In reality, the things we absolutely know about human nature is the stuff biologists have studied, and then there are the malleable parts that come down to cultural upbringing, politics, ect. It's another interesting fact that almost every political system has sought to convince themselves that humans are far more malleable than they really are. You got it backwards. The right in general terms about personal responsibility, actually isn't Jord Peterson's mantra "Clean your room" and "hopelessness leads to cynicism and resentfulness" The left puts the responsibility in systems, not the individual, afterall being fat isn't your fault... and many examples like that.

I put the share of responsibility for many problems on both individual people and systems, after all, it is people's life choices that perpetuate a political or economic system. If someone wants to be responsible for their individual actions, usually many other people are too, and often the best way to be responsible for them is to deal with them on a political scale. One of the main political ideologies of the last 50 years has been to shift most responsibility of citizens to politicians. In reality, the top 20% of society are mostly responsible for ecological crises, that's just a fact, and a big part of neoliberalism has been to absolve ones sins by just blaming it on whichever politician is in charge. It is partially their fault, but their share of the responsibility isn't big enough to let people go about their daily lives ignoring politics and patting themselves on the back for thinking that it's all someone elses fault.

One of the reasons I don't take the individual responsibility rhetoric from the right very seriously is that no one who preaches it practices it. If they did then I think it's a fine thing to talk about. I've never really liked the idea that the left is about protecting weak people. The idea of the welfare state is actually to enable everyone to empower themselves-that's the end goal.

On August 28 2021 00:01 Spitfiree wrote: Since there is a lot of right-wing ideology people here I wanna review the results of rightwing politicians in the Western World: - Trump lost after a single mandate ( quite rare in American history ) - Erdogan bankrupted the country - Orban got kicked out of the EPP, while his rightwing mates that run anti-gay politics are caught in gay orgies (how pathetic of a human being do you have to be) - Salvini won the election by a landslide and ... departed after 1 year - Slovakia and Czech Republic both got rid of their right-wing leaders - UK - pushed Brexit but didn't take responsibility for the aftermath and simply bolted - Bolsanaro - a hard leftwing ideology opposer that ... goes full mode into social welfare and financial subsidies and will most likely lose the re-election - France - Le Pen lost her election chances before the election has begun .. even though Macron is not exactly a president that people like And all of that during times of uncertainty, migration crisis, pandemic, and heavy market fluctuation. The ideology that people default to when they need stability. Why is it that it lost so hard? Also, can someone explain to me why are all those shitheads such good friends with Putin?

If the "liberal left" keep to their state of denial on the problems of neoliberalism, then I think It will be back for round 2 before long. The fascist elements that began in the 1920's were pretty unsuccessful to begin with, but managed to win thanks to the exact same decisions the capitalists in power back then are making now. I'm sure there will be big differences this time around though.

On August 29 2021 06:56 Santafairy wrote: FINALLY youtube has solved politics we can shut down the internet now

Although i dislike pop-science, this guy is actually a legitimate scientist. His video on godel's incompleteness theorems is the only decent video on the topic, though i don't enjoy watching a 20minute video as much as reading whole textbooks 10-15 times until you get it, that's what real education is about.

On August 30 2021 18:59 Stroggoz wrote: Show nested quote + On August 29 2021 06:56 Santafairy wrote: FINALLY youtube has solved politics we can shut down the internet now Although i dislike pop-science, this guy is actually a legitimate scientist. His video on godel's incompleteness theorems is the only decent video on the topic, though i don't enjoy watching a 20minute video as much as reading whole textbooks 10-15 times until you get it, that's what real education is about.

I agree, his videos are top quality. The recent series he did about the wind-powered vehicle that can travel faster than the wind was fascinating. Though it does seem like the video that Spitfire posted is kind of a ripoff of Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers.