the neoliberal vision of the future

[butchersapron]

Robert De Niro is waiting.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Oh and while it isn't as vomit-inducing as his statements about the Holocaust, it's clear from his web-site that he's also some sort of global warming contrarian too. I'm dependent on Google translate but key phrases from the US right's lexicon appear clearly enough.

"Hockey stick is junk science" etc.

 

[butchersapron]

Go away for a few hours and this happens...i reckon A norwegian speaker could find worse from conan somewhere hidden away on the web.

 

[8ball]

Name names, cite publications, reference documents.

It's far simpler to clear the argument up by asking a straight numbers question.

Doing both would also be fine.

 

[Idris2002]

It's can't be that hard since you've been doing it throughout the thread.

The grown-ups are talking now, dear.

 

[Thalgar]

That's not exactly an extermination plan, is it?


No, again this is not the same as a plan to exterminate the Jews. During the 1920s and 1930s forced eugenics and killing of "useless" people was very popular, not just in Germany, but throughout all of the West.

While it it is true that eugenics were popular, killing people was not. That's the core difference between Nazi policies and what others pursued. The Norwegian sterilisation law of 1934, for instance, while hardly a proud moment in Norwegian history, explicitly stated that sterilisation (the worst that happened in Norway) was only to be performed on a voluntary basis. Even in Germany there was an uproar when the Nazis began killing people. This worried the Nazis to such an extent that they officially stopped the program.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_T4

And BTW, you should keep quiet about eugenics. After all, you are the one who thinks "it's immoral to ask others to pay for bringing a disabled child to the world", (Yes, this is Onar's position).

 

[Louis MacNeice]

It's can't be that hard since you've been doing it throughout the thread.

What political narrative have I been pushing?

Louis MacNeice

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Oh and while it isn't as vomit-inducing as his statements about the Holocaust, it's clear from his web-site that he's also some sort of global warming contrarian too. I'm dependent on Google translate but key phrases from the US right's lexicon appear clearly enough.

"Hockey stick is junk science" etc.

It does seem to be pathological, this kind of thinking. Just as psychosis tends to take the same forms – invisible rays and the like – so this kind of political 'libertarianism' seems to always come fully fitted with all the standard idiocies.

 

[Dillinger4]

It does seem to be pathological, this kind of thinking. Just as psychosis tends to take the same forms – invisible rays and the like – so this kind of political 'libertarianism' seems to always come fully fitted with all the standard idiocies.

 

[Kizmet]

The grown-ups are talking now, dear.

Yes, but talking like children.

 

[SpineyNorman]

It's can't be that hard since you've been doing it throughout the thread.

Now really isn't the time for your tedious windups.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

It does seem to be pathological, this kind of thinking. Just as psychosis tends to take the same forms – invisible rays and the like – so this kind of political 'libertarianism' seems to always come fully fitted with all the standard idiocies.

Well, I think there's what you might call a market-driven explanation for that

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Wingnut_welfare

The point being that certain opinions are quite marketable on the fringe right and someone who can do a half-decent job of espousing such views articulately can be subsidised by right-wing headcases like the Koch brothers, the Scaife and Olin foundations and assorted other sources of ideologically motivated largesse, in the highly desirable role of "writer and thinker", a role in which Onar clearly fancies himself, but which requires considerable academic or journalistic ability to sustain yourself in without benefit of wingnut welfare.

On the other hand if you're willing to parrot the climate change contrarians, propagate the John Birch Society's every slur on socialists and perhaps flirt a bit with racism ... then you've a good chance of becoming a wingnut welfare receipient and eventually getting on Fox News, even if you're an obvious swivel-eyed maniac.

While the big money in wingnut welfare is in the US, no doubt there are some rich cranks in Scandinavia too and Bjørn Lomborg for one has certainly made it onto the international wingnut welfare circuit, so I have little doubt Onar also fancies a go.

 

[8ball]

It does seem to be pathological, this kind of thinking. Just as psychosis tends to take the same forms – invisible rays and the like – so this kind of political 'libertarianism' seems to always come fully fitted with all the standard idiocies.

I think that's probably why you get people who say things that are interesting, or at least different, and then after a while they tend to club together with semi like-minded types into a monothought clique that accepts the most idiotic things and forms spontaneous circle-jerk mobs to crush any dissent.

Hmmm - where does that remind me of . . .

 

[butchersapron]

If we assume for the sake of argument that you are right Onar about the lack of physical evidence for the holocaust (broadly used with no distinction between the work camps/the death camps/ the Einsatzgruppen etc) what do you think this means? What does it tell you?

 

[Dillinger4]

Jonanism is the logical fallacy of believing that everyone you hate is the same. The term comes from the name of Jonah Goldberg, and Onanism.

Definition

The belief that everybody you hate is exactly the same.
The belief that evidence that nobody takes you seriously means you are very serious.
Any attempt to popularize these beliefs in book and associated website form.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Jonanism

 

[SpineyNorman]

I'd also like to know whether it's only the extermination of the Jews that Onar thinks was evil - the total figure for the Nazi exterminations is closer to 12 million (others with better knowledge will no doubt be able to give a better estimate). A very large proportion of whom were socialists, communists and trade unionists. Can we assume from Onar's position on Pinochet that this is defensible in the name of anti-communism?

 

[diptera]

Oh and while it isn't as vomit-inducing as his statements about the Holocaust, it's clear from his web-site that he's also some sort of global warming contrarian too. I'm dependent on Google translate but key phrases from the US right's lexicon appear clearly enough.

"Hockey stick is junk science" etc.

Here's Onar asking a very predictable question to Rachendra Pachauri. It basically says it all about Onar and climatescience. I'm not at all surprised that he's becoming more and more anti-science in other fields as well.

 

[Dillinger4]

I'd also like to know whether it's only the extermination of the Jews that Onar thinks was evil - the total figure for the Nazi exterminations is closer to 12 million (others with better knowledge will no doubt be able to give a better estimate). A very large proportion of whom were socialists, communists and trade unionists. Can we assume from Onar's position on Pinochet that this is defensible in the name of anti-communism?

And the disabled.

 

[ViolentPanda]

It may interest you very little, but those who are respectful, open-minded and try to be objective find that I can argue quite well. The problem is that I have some 20 years of experience with socialists, and what I have discovered is that the vast majority of them argue along two lines:

Onar, would you mind telling me the breadth of your education?

I ask because you don't appear to understand a basic premise that most new college students are taught - that extrapolating one's own experience to constitute a general rule, i.e. "the vast majority of males style their hair as I do", or "the vast majority of socialists argue along two lines" is both ignorant and foolish..

1) they have a fair understanding of what the liberals want (i.e. decide over their own life, liberty and property so long as they grant others the same freedom) but say with a smile "I understand, but I disagree. I don't want that." Which is the upper class way of saying "shut the fuck up, cunt. Obey me or I'll smash your face in."

How so?
On this board (as on many, although not your own blog, I notice), if you make a claim, even one as ridiculous as "Which is the upper class way of saying 'shut the fuck up, cunt. Obey me or I'll smash your face in.' ", it's incumbent on you to substantiate it. Tedious for a visionary, I know, but good etiquette nonetheless.

2) the others (which make up the majority) say lots of really weird things, like "oh no! I'm not a socialist! Absolutely not! But of course we can't let there be a jungle out there. There has to be SOME rules. We have to have a public school of course, and public health care, and public roads, and public pensions, and public social security, and redistributive taxes, and of course we have to regulate all industry, and of course we have to have tolls and subsidies to protect our local industry..." Then there are those who flagrantly deny that they are using force. "Force? What do you mean force? I'm not using force on you." And after a long and contortious debate about police they end up agreeing that they do use force, and THEN they smile and say "Ok, now I understand, but I disagree. I don't want you to be free." Which again is the upper class way of telling a slave to shut up and obey.

My meeting with this type of obfuscation followed by a mind blowing power arrogancehas certainly shaped my way of debating. I understand that there is absolutely NOTHING I can say to an average socialist that will change his mind. The reason is very simple: even if I can prove without a shred of doubt that capitalism exterminates poverty, and that everyone is better off in a capitalist system in all ways, a socialist would STILL just shrug it all off as irrelevant. All he has to do is to find ONE person in the whole world who for some reason was unlucky in the world and was not able to pay for his medical expenses or take care of his family, and that will justify a complete toppling of the capitalist system, and let the politicians and technocrats take over and regulate and tax people and industry until they cringe. It doesn't matter if this has all sorts of bad effects and that people will be dying or suffering in government waiting lines, because that is irrelevant to a socialist as long as the misery is spread equally. The socialist puts an EXTREME burden of proof on liberals to prove with a supernatural level of precision that capitalism is not only the BEST system but also PERFECT in a supernatural sense. That's the kind of burden of evidence they require for PEACEFUL activity. Yet, the burden of evidence they demand from using government FORCE (i.e. threatening people with jail) is very close to zero. All it takes in fact is that the socialist FEELS that it is right or that it has the right intentions or if some cherry picked anectdote can be used to support their contention.

Why do they have so lax standards for their own actions but extreme demands for all others that disagree with them? It is definitely a form of altruistic narcissism. Socialists don't think of this as a reversed form of burden of evidence (i.e. guilty until proven innocent). Oh no, they just think that THEIR worldview by default is the innocent one and that anyone that disagrees with them by default is guilty. In other words, they think they are the center of the moral universe and that they can use their own emotions and intuitions rather than logic as the basis of making judgments. This is not only true of average socialists, but it is especially true of the intellectual socialists.


Now, you may of course say that I am wrong (of course you will, you are socialists) but this is just my observation of how socialists behave.

So it's not a "discovery", as claimed above, but a personal observation, coloured by all your preconceived prejudices and personal animosities.

Ge kecken ofen Yam, Onar. You're a snake-oil salesman playing buzzword bingo to rook the rubes into thinking you're a visionary.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I think that's probably why you get people who say things that are interesting, or at least different, and then after a while they tend to club together with semi like-minded types into a monothought clique that accepts the most idiotic things and forms spontaneous circle-jerk mobs to crush any dissent.

Hmmm - where does that remind me of . . .

I don't know. Doesn't remind me of anywhere particularly.

 

[TruXta]

Go away for a few hours and this happens...i reckon A norwegian speaker could find worse from conan somewhere hidden away on the web.

Don't look at me, I honestly haven't the energy. Maybe one of the newbs - diptera? - who know his stuff a bit better.

 

[Kizmet]

Now really isn't the time for your tedious windups.

... not while there's a lynchin' a comin', eh?

 

[TruXta]

... not while there's a lynchin' a comin', eh?

Oh do shut it you drama queen.

 

[diptera]

You don't belong to the minority in the majority of cases. The "democratic" system (i.e. majority dictatorship) is designed in such a way that it favors those who are most average, i.e. agree with the majority most of the time. So in Norway for instance, all of the parties in the parliament are 90% identical in practical politics. This means that the vast majority of people who vote get their way in the vast majority of cases, regardsless of which party is in power. (Norway has a virtual one-party system, the social democratic party) But if you happen to be far from average then you will experience that you are in the minority most of the time. I know how that feels like because *I* am in the minority in 90-95% of the cases, and I can tell you it is not fun.

How the fuck do you know about whether I'm in a political minority or not? You're really grasping at straws here Onar. You've been told repeatedly on your blog how this works. We all have only one vote, and if you think I tend to agree with the current technocrat-shitheads that are in power, you're delusional. Oh right. You ARE!

Here's the thing. You have painted yourself into a corner as a permanent victim. Everyone, besides yourself and your ridiculous followers are fascists, according to you. Even my mum! Fascists everywhere!

Oh, I'll have to remember to remind you about the Ubuntu (not the linux distro) blog post you made. It was really hilarious and showed how very very little you actually know, dimwit.

Basically the entire population of Norway, except your fringe loons are out to get you in your dysfunctional little mind. If you and your favorite goon TK would ever get anywhere near political influence I would emigrate. Until then I'll do my best to keep you out of it. Somehow I think you'll manage that well enough on your own though...

And reading the rest of the thread as it has developed, I'm disgusted. You've really lost the plot now.

 

[Kizmet]

... all I'm saying is make sure he's not a pediatrician before you all hang him as a pedophile.

 

[Kizmet]

Oh do shut it you drama queen.

Why don't you just donate a years worth of hair gel to Onar's state? I reckon you might be able to fund an army.



Drama queen - sez the guy who selectively quoted so he could have a nice little shriek.

 

[TruXta]

How the fuck do you know about whether I'm in a political minority or not? You're really grasping at straws here Onar. You've been told repeatedly on your blog how this works. We all have only one vote, and if you think I tend to agree with the current technocrat-shitheads that are in power, you're delusional. Oh right. You ARE!

Here's the thing. You have painted yourself into a corner as a permanent victim. Everyone, besides yourself and your ridiculous followers are fascists, according to you. Even my mum! Fascists everywhere!

Basically the entire population of Norway, except your fringe loons are out to get you in your dysfunctional little mind. If you and your favorite goon TK would ever get anywhere near political influence I would emigrate. Until then I'll do my best to keep you out of it. Somehow I think you'll manage that well enough on your own though...

And reading the rest of the thread as it has developed, I'm disgusted. You've really lost the plot now.

Says a lot really that even FrP wouldn't touch these guys with a shit-stick.

 

[TruXta]

Drama queen - sez the guy who selectively quoted so he could have a nice little shriek.

Selectively quoted what?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Just ignore kizmet. He isn't contributing anything of any value.

 

[TruXta]

Might as well I suppose. Shit troll is shit.