Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Greek elections

phildwyer said:
It's immoral to approach the Greek crisis from a pragmatic perspective. This is a matter of principle.
Click to expand...

I think it's immoral to be anything other than pragmatic when your people are suffering, and that principles are an obscene luxury for a politician to indulge in at a time of genuine crisis. So we're probably going to struggle to agree on this.
 
Maurice Picarda said:
I think it's immoral to be anything other than pragmatic when your people are suffering, and that principles are an obscene luxury for a politician to indulge in at a time of genuine crisis. So we're probably going to struggle to agree on this.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid so--despite my general respect for your opinions. I believe that spiritual suffering is worse than physical suffering, and that knuckling under to usurers will cause tremendous spiritual suffering.

Mind you, I also believe that the Greeks would be economically better off in the long term if they defy the Troika.
 
phildwyer said:
I'm afraid so--despite my general respect for your opinions. I believe that spiritual suffering is worse than physical suffering, and that knuckling under to usurers will cause tremendous spiritual suffering.

Mind you, I also believe that the Greeks would be economically better off in the long term if they defy the Troika.
Click to expand...

Yes.
To act as the sons and daughters of the archon Solon.
 
Maurice Picarda said:
I think it's immoral to be anything other than pragmatic when your people are suffering, and that principles are an obscene luxury for a politician to indulge in at a time of genuine crisis. So we're probably going to struggle to agree on this.
Click to expand...

Of course this nonsense doesn't allow for situations where not following principles worsens the suffering, that other principles (ones that you hold actually) have led to the suffering and so need to be challenged by other principles in order to alleviate or end the suffering. In fact, it's argument is so just amounts to saying principles = suffering for others. Which is true in a way but not the way that you meant.
 
butchersapron said:
Of course this nonsense doesn't allow for situations where not following principles worsens the suffering, that other principles (ones that you hold actually) have led to the suffering and so need to be challenged by other principles in order to alleviate or end the suffering. In fact, it's argument is so just amounts to saying principles = suffering for others. Which is true in a way but not the way that you meant.
Click to expand...

Jesus. Anyone care to have a bash at translating?
 
Meant to post this the other day but forgot, was reminded by this article this morning:

This is from James Mackintosh, Investment Editor at the Financial Times:


James MackintoshVerified account‏@jmackin2

Deutsche Bank on Greece deal: "The proposals barely stop short of demanding that Greece becomes a vassal state of Brussels"

Source was a private DB client note.

Obv it's not just the content of the quote but where it's coming from that's worthy of note.
 
Santino said:
Isn't that a Neville Chamberlain quotation?
Click to expand...

Quite possibly. And what's wrong with that? Chamberlain aimed to delay war with Germany until British rearmament had advanced, and he knew that 1938 was the wrong time to pick a fight. Bad news for Czechs at the time, but a very sensible (and pragmatic) decision in the long term.
 
Santino said:
Isn't that a Neville Chamberlain quotation?
Click to expand...

Neville Chamberlain did at least have a plan 'B' up his sleeve if plan 'A' went tits up - it was Chamberlain who was responsible for the vast majority of UK re-armament in the run up to WWII (pre-Munich).

the concept of a 'Plan B' seems to have been a somewhat significant hole in the Greek governments' strategy...
 
Maurice Picarda said:
Quite possibly. And what's wrong with that? Chamberlain aimed to delay war with Germany until British rearmament had advanced, and he knew that 1938 was the wrong time to pick a fight. Bad news for Czechs at the time, but a very sensible (and pragmatic) decision in the long term.
Click to expand...
As ill-equipped as we were, letting Hitler annex Czechoslovakia gave him all the raw materials he needed to make the war last as long as it did. Daladier had it right.
 
I just keep thinking of cotton plantations, slave owners brutality, field slaves and house slaves.
 
Maurice Picarda said:
Quite possibly. And what's wrong with that? Chamberlain aimed to delay war with Germany until British rearmament had advanced, and he knew that 1938 was the wrong time to pick a fight. Bad news for Czechs at the time, but a very sensible (and pragmatic) decision in the long term.
Click to expand...

Oh ffs. A yet more pragmatic decision would have been not to fight Hitler at all. Let him destroy the Soviets for us, let him have continental Europe in return for guaranteeing our empire. Bad news for the Jews at the time, but a very sensible (and pragmatic decision) in the long term.
 
phildwyer said:
Oh ffs. A yet more pragmatic decision would have been not to fight Hitler at all. Let him destroy the Soviets for us, let him have continental Europe in return for guaranteeing our empire. Bad news for the Jews at the time, but a very sensible (and pragmatic decision) in the long term.
Click to expand...
madness to not think he wouldn't have turned on us in the end though, he was radio rental after all.
 
DotCommunist said:
madness to not think he wouldn't have turned on us in the end though, he was radio rental after all.
Click to expand...

So obviously the thing to do would have been to lull him into a false sense of security. Wait until he'd fucked up Stalin and all the continental Commies, invite him over to a celebratory state banquet at Buck House and slip cyanide into his schnapps. Job's a good 'un.
 
How bad are things for the people of Greece?
16 July 2015
greece_deprivation_zpsl3nwowq3.png
 
kebabking said:
Neville Chamberlain did at least have a plan 'B' up his sleeve if plan 'A' went tits up - it was Chamberlain who was responsible for the vast majority of UK re-armament in the run up to WWII (pre-Munich).

the concept of a 'Plan B' seems to have been a somewhat significant hole in the Greek governments' strategy...
Click to expand...

I sadly agree. Right from the off when Syriza was elected folks were saying they had `backed down/sold out` as they didn't immediately leave the euro.

Personally I thought it was way too early, these things have to be organised, `orderly` as they say. But I just don't understand why they didn't at least plan for it. Whatever they felt their mandate was/is (to stay in the euro), however big a load of cunts most other eurozone govts are (really big) not having back-up, at least having it as a weapon, however lopsided the fight, seems a sizeable oversight.

I would also like Syriza not to split and to have its fight internally in the party - the Tories are experts at this and coming back to be massive wankers again - to collapse now would really be the icing on the cake for the neo-liberals. Unseat Tsipras etc, whatever, but to split would be way too short termist imo.
 
Coolfonz said:
I sadly agree. Right from the off when Syriza was elected folks were saying they had `backed down/sold out` as they didn't immediately leave the euro...
Click to expand...

the fundamental problem of their negotiating position was that they didn't have an 'or else', it was 'agree to something more reasonable/sustainable/long-term, or we'll just run out of money, have no back up plan and end up accepting the 'deal' we rejected a week ago'.

they have - not just in order to negotiate, but for a serious option if they don't get a much more sustainable agreement soon (which they aren't going to get) - got to come up with a leaving-the-Euro plan, they need to get the work done on planning it and managing the transition (the what-is-everyone-going-to-use-for-currency? question), and they need to put together a hard currency fund to pay for the essentials - food, power, fuel etc.. when the new currency goes through its initial 'not worth the paper its written on' stage.

they did none of this, and were suprised when everyone else in the room knew that they'd have no option but to agree to whatever conditions the bail-out came with, and just sat them out while things got increasingly fraught at home.
 
phildwyer said:
Oh ffs. A yet more pragmatic decision would have been not to fight Hitler at all. Let him destroy the Soviets for us, let him have continental Europe in return for guaranteeing our empire. Bad news for the Jews at the time, but a very sensible (and pragmatic decision) in the long term.
Click to expand...

Wtf?

Even leaving out the morality hitler was a huge threat to stability of europe, he was invading countries left right and centre and stirring up nationalism in the german community across europe. What choice did the british state and capital realistically have?

I'm not saying it was right but how was ignoring the threat hitler posed and letting the german army march into anywhere they liked, disrupting supplies to britain and the british economy, "pragmatic" from the state's point of view?

Actually this explains a lot about your view of ISIS...
 
frogwoman said:
Wtf?

Even leaving out the morality hitler was a huge threat to stability of europe, he was invading countries left right and centre and stirring up nationalism in the german community across europe. What choice did the british state and capital realistically have?

I'm not saying it was right but how was ignoring the threat hitler posed and letting the german army march into anywhere they liked, disrupting supplies to britain and the british economy, "pragmatic" from the state's point of view?

Actually this explains a lot about your view of ISIS...
Click to expand...

He is reductio ad absurduming, Froggie.
 
kebabking said:
the fundamental problem of their negotiating position was that they didn't have an 'or else', it was 'agree to something more reasonable/sustainable/long-term, or we'll just run out of money, have no back up plan and end up accepting the 'deal' we rejected a week ago'.

they have - not just in order to negotiate, but for a serious option if they don't get a much more sustainable agreement soon (which they aren't going to get) - got to come up with a leaving-the-Euro plan, they need to get the work done on planning it and managing the transition (the what-is-everyone-going-to-use-for-currency? question), and they need to put together a hard currency fund to pay for the essentials - food, power, fuel etc.. when the new currency goes through its initial 'not worth the paper its written on' stage.

they did none of this, and were suprised when everyone else in the room knew that they'd have no option but to agree to whatever conditions the bail-out came with, and just sat them out while things got increasingly fraught at home.
Click to expand...

Yup I think some of the articles posted up on here by Butcho et al suggest exactly that, a point in one of them about how Tsipras/Varoufakis had coherent arguments, good ideas, but were met by people, finance ministers etc, who didn't care and just said `these are the rules`.

I really hope Syriza doesn't splinter though. Too predictably lefty-bollocks. Keep it to the dressing room fam.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

O
European parliament elections
2 3
Replies
71
Views
3K
Hotel Chocolate
H
P
Mexico Presidential Elections 2/6/24
Replies
7
Views
550
planetgeli
P
kebabking
  • Poll
US 2028 election?
2
Replies
48
Views
1K
Dogsauce
Dogsauce
ska invita
USA 2024 Election Stats
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
ska invita
ska invita
Idris2002
Zimbabwe Elections 2023
Replies
4
Views
493
Bingoman
Bingoman
Back
Top Bottom