the neoliberal vision of the future
- Thread starter Dillinger4
- Start date
But u guys better prepare for new times...the western uprising is already in its beginning...soon we're gonna wipe out all the suckers who want to destroy us...u fucking wait...
invisibleplanet
porter des cornes
But u guys better prepare for new times...the western uprising is already in its beginning...soon we're gonna wipe out all the suckers who want to destroy us...u fucking wait...
First they came for the Muslims, and I did not speak out, because I was not a Muslim ...
u r totally wrong! First they came for the jews...then they came for the christians etc...the muslims are the perpetrators here...don't u know that millons of christians already are being persecuted and murdered in many islamic countries? No u dont know that, because mainstream PC socialist media in the west do not report on that...
Louis MacNeice
Autumn Journalist
A small tribute.
An angry finger stabbing inchoate shouts,
Forcefully propelled by an empty mind.
Done, the dulled eye returns to its virtual collections
Of naked women and dismembered bodies.
Dissatisfied his frame arches, hawking bitter yellow bile,
Over pallid flesh and soured clothes.
Preparing for the coming apocalypse is a demanding business
And he has paid a crushing, lead heavy price.
We should be thankful for his offetory,
Which saves us from his fetid denouement.
Louis MacNeice
invisibleplanet
porter des cornes
The first line of the poem is actually:
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out, because I was not a Communist ...
If Niemoller were alive today, he would be fine with adding a further line about Muslims. I am not in any doubt about that.
“What do I think of Western civilisation? I think it would be a very good idea.” Gandhi
Nah...u could do better than that???
Gandhi was a pathetic hippocrite and liar...supposedly living a celibate life...while fucking his own grand daughters...
Louis MacNeice
Autumn Journalist
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
Wow, you really are a massive cunt aren't you poetrixx?
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
I think that's quite enough of that sort of thing.
Louis MacNeice
Autumn Journalist
invisibleplanet
porter des cornes
This swung it for me:
poetrixx said:
Although I admit the 'coming war' spiel was reminiscent of the ultraright extremism one sees in US (KKK/Neo-Fascism), UK (Neo-Fascism, neo-nazism, NF, BNP and other ultraright groupiscules), etc.
And therein lies the problem with obscuring the nature of Fascism and using it apropos as a fallacious political insult (mistakenly equating Nazism with Socialism, for example). Poetrixx hasn't yet realised the commonality that their current worldview shares with International Fascism. Poetrixx accused the writers here of being brainwashed, which unfortunately can only mean one thing ... that deep down they realise they've been 'brainwashed' and backing away from this adopted ultrarightwing worldview to a more objective position would entail a considerable loss (of social circle, of friends, of faith in one's ability to determine which is truth and which is lies).
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Hong Kong is unique, but it's hardly a beacon that should attract the likes of Onar, given how very structured the capitalist practice that takes place there is.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Sounds a bit porno, Jeff.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
and fuck ur sister in law as well::
Why not? I've already fucked your mother, grandmother, and pet Lhasa Apso.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
The best-known persecution of millions of Christians takes place in India, a Hindu state, on a scale that no country with a majority Muslim population has ever achieved. Perhaps Hindus are secret Muslims, Hmmm? The greatest persecution of Jews was carried out by nominal Christians. Perhaps they were secret Muslims, Hmmm?
Kill yourself. You know it makes sense.
I agree that concept stretching and other forms of concept warping (even inversion) is quite common, but who is doing the stretching? And who is trying to fix the stretching getting the concepts back to its objective meaning?
Already at this point the intellectuals who speak of conceptual stretching would balk, for they deny that concepts have any objective meaning that is rooted in reality. They would claim that there is nothing more to concepts than intersubjective consensus. But this is an example of a "just so"-story, i.e. of an intellectual smuggling their premises in the backdoor while nobody is noticing and then creating some fairytale that fits their assumptions. Essentially they are saying "I am right, and here's a fairytale I've conjured to prove it." This is simply myth making, and is no different than people who explained thunder with the hammer of Thor.
Subjectivists typically follow the following pattern of "reasoning": "there is no objective truth, and since everything is subjective the majority needs to decide what is right, and oh, by the way, I just by extraordinary coincidence happen to be in the majority and you are not. Therefore you are wrong, and I am right. Therefore you must shut the fuck up and obey or I'll kick your face in you bigoted worthless piece of shit."
In short, subjectivism is just one of the useful myths that bullies have created to justify treating minorities that disagree with them as crap. (Whenever these bullies themselves are in the minority, they concoct other stories to justify that they should be in power anyways.)
I on the other hand reject such myths as subjectivism. There IS such a thing as conceptual stretching, and it is typically performed by the subjectivist intellectuals themselves. I'll give an example of such conceptual stretching, namely social dumping.
Social dumping today is used to mean to exploit the desperation of poor people to give them crappy wages. However, originally the term had a different meaning, that derived from the neo-Marxist term "dumping." "Dumping" is the Marxist myth that big companies acquire monopolies by "dumping" the prices when a new competitor tries to enter the market and is pushed out by the unsustainably low prices. When the competitor is driven out of business, the monopolist drives the prices up again.
The term "social dumping" was coined by labor unions as analogous to "dumping." The employers brought in cheap labor from poor countries and was thereby able to "dump" wages. The fat union members in rich countries could only compete with this "dumping" by lowering their salaries and according to the Marxist myth this is part of the "race to the bottom."
The fact of the matter is that there is no race to the bottom. Capitalism is the great equalizer and causes a race to the MIDDLE. Fat superrich superspoiled workers in the West have been able to keep their salaries artificially high (just like the upper class in the feudal age) by shutting out the poor workers with medieval-style immigration and toll barriers. When the poor are given the ability to directly compete with Western fat-cats, two things happen: 1) the poor dramatically jump in wages, they race UPWARDS toward the middle, and 2) the rich workers have to go down in wages, they race DOWNWARDS toward the middle. Redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor at work, the capitalist way.
But when the ultrarich and superfat superspoiled people who find their wealth redistributed by competition are union workers and not rich industrialists, then redistribution of wealth is no longer applauded. On the contrary, then redistribution of wealth is called "social dumping" and the fat unionists do everything in their power to shut the poor out and push them back into the swamps where they came from. And the worst part is that they do it with a self-righteous chip on their shoulders and a stiff upperlip, believing that they have done a Good Thing (tm). Now THAT's conceptual stretching for ya!
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Could you answer my questions regarding property and interest, please?
Many thanks.
Many thanks.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
It's like a parallel fantasy universe that onarchy lives in.
Louis MacNeice
Autumn Journalist
What happens in the dots is so weak; no reference to support/evidence any of the positions outlined, construction of binary oppositions (e.g. either objectivist truth or subjectivist swamp), presentation of ahistrocial opinion as fact, use of subjective emotive categories (e.g. super rich fatcats) while simultaneously claiming the objectivist high ground. With all this going on conceptual stretching is just one of your many worries.
Louis MacNeice
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
You really have no capacity for self-awareness, do you? And what's a subjectivist anyway? Anyone who isn't a randroid drone like you perchance? Read the post above the one of mine you linked - it describes perfectly what you're doing - in fact it could have been written in response to the incoherent keyboard flatulence you've displayed in this thread. Read the Sartori article linked to (people may not approve of Sartori's views, but he's one of the most important and influential political scientists in the world). What are words, what are concepts? They're explanatory devices and data containers, they don't exist in the material world - we invent them to suit our needs. There can be no "objective" meaning of a word - the closest you can ever get is a kind of inter-subjective consensus on meaning, like we have for words like dog. The meaning of a word is derived from its history and the agreed contemporary definition. Without this they're useless. And since your definitions differ from those used by every scholar I have ever read, along with the majority of "normal" people who care enough to think about it then it's you who is stretching. Your McCarthy-esque reds under the bed rant isn't really relevant.
Also, please answer littlebabyjesus's question - I'd be interested to hear your answer too.
The standard answer to this given by the proponents of FRB is that interest repayment is solved by increasing the rate of circulation of money so that the rate of circulation matches repayment+interest.
TruXta
tired
Dude, he's an objectivist. Do you really think he's gonna listen to any of your relativist, consensualist clap-trap? He's seen reality bitches, and we should bow down and lap it up like good little penitent fascist bullies.
invisibleplanet
porter des cornes
Similar threads
