US Politics III

[corianderstem]

That's not a meme, it's a reaction gif.

Duh.

 

[AEON]

FYM, what are your thoughts on Economic Nationalism? Here is an intriguing article:

nasdaq.com "A new approach has to start from the idea that the basic responsibility of government is to maximise the welfare of citizens, not to pursue some abstract concept of the global good," Larry Summers

Larry Summers: There's nothing wrong with economic nationalism - Nasdaq.com

 

[AEON]

That's not a meme, it's a reaction gif.

Duh.

I adjusted fire. Thank you.

 

[AEON]

you guys are all too nice

Absolutely agree

 

[AEON]

What? It's just an opposing view.

Although you got called out by a mod...I thought your response was very funny (given the context). For the record, not only was I not offended, I actually laughed out loud.

Like I said, you have developed a sense of humor over the years...

 

[BVS]

FYM, what are your thoughts on Economic Nationalism? Here is an intriguing article:



Larry Summers: There's nothing wrong with economic nationalism - Nasdaq.com

It talks about the abstract global good, yet offers nothing but abstract domestic good.

Nothing interesting about the article.

 

[BVS]

Although you got called out by a mod...I thought your response was very funny (given the context). For the record, not only was I not offended, I actually laughed out loud.



Like I said, you have developed a sense of humor over the years...

But did you get it? That's the question? It's the summary of your posts; you make up what you want to argue out of thin air, and then bitch about how no one wants to hear "an opposing view".

So you can laugh all you want, but if you remain clueless then I failed and got a Cori gif for nothing. No one wants to be on the other side of her gifs.

No one.

 

[corianderstem]

To be fair, the gif was a reaction to the turn this thread has taken in general, not to BVS.specifically.

 

[AEON]

But did you get it? That's the question? It's the summary of your posts; you make up what you want to argue out of thin air, and then bitch about how no one wants to hear "an opposing view".

So you can laugh all you want, but if you remain clueless then I failed and got a Cori gif for nothing. No one wants to be on the other side of her gifs.

No one.

Yeah, I got what you were trying to say. Of course I don't agree with it, but I'm cool with that. I can appreciate a witty remark when I see it - without agreeing with it. As the great comedians preach (btw - I LOVE stand-up comedy!) - know the crowd. This crowd...well...let's say it has certainly changed over the years...and...you have either intellectually destroyed or simply annoyed away all that oppose you...we will let the universe decide which one of those are actually true...

Until then, I have to help my 7th grade son with algebra...

 

[Vincent Vega]

How does one shove values like Reason and Humanism down one's throat?

The world isn't that black and white, as you admitted in your response to me.
Western values as we understand and defend them today are great. At the same time, it is perfectly possible for these very values having spread in a way that was detrimental to others. The US is the arbiter of Western values. At the same time, it was a torture regime under Bush. Does that negate everything good that has come out of the US? No. But it's impossible to brush over the fact. This is not such a foreign concept.

The attitude of the European colonialists was not to bring freedom, reason and humanism and leave a better people. It was enslavement, Christianising, exploitation, power and a general feeling of superiority. The peoples conquered were not to participate in these values. They were to feed the engine.

Or take Kant. Great philosopher. Highly revered. No one here wouldn't defend the moral imperative. Yet, this very same person did have some very despicable views when it came to people of a different skin colour:

Another two decades on, Immanuel Kant, considered by many to be the greatest philosopher of the modern period, would manage to let slip what is surely the greatest non-sequitur in the history of philosophy: describing a report of something seemingly intelligent that had once been said by an African, Kant dismisses it on the grounds that “this fellow was quite black from head to toe, a clear proof that what he said was stupid.”

https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/why-has-race-survived/?mcubz=1

That doesn't make everything else he said or did bad. It doesn't mean we turn our backs on him and don't think that personal liberties are not worth defending.

There was an irony when you said all the progress during the Islamic era came by them taking advantage of the places they conquered. Yet, you simultaneously look at European progress as if it came just by our brains being wired so greatly. In other words, completely ignoring, or if forced, downplaying the way that Europeans took advantage of the resources they acquired in Latin America and Africa in order to advance their economies and societies. Roman progress, already, was built upon knowledge and technologies taken from the conquered peoples. Why was it wrong for Islamic societies to do so, but when the Romans, or later the British etc. did it, it's somehow proof of our inherent greatness?

You said in Europe freedom of speech is no more. Let me tell you: Nothing you said thus far would land you in court in any country in Europe. It's perfectly legal to say what you said. But most people by now would have left the table.

 

[Salome]

FYM, what are your thoughts on Economic Nationalism? Here is an intriguing article:



Larry Summers: There's nothing wrong with economic nationalism - Nasdaq.com

"A new approach has to start from the idea that the basic responsibility of government is to maximise the global good, not to pursue some abstract concept of welfare of citizens,"

Would work about as well. It's all just words.

 

[IWasBored]

I just wanted to say that I've been reading anitram as anti ram all this time (despite knowing it's supposed to be Martina backwards).

 

[Diemen]

Sure, rams are bad, but it wouldn't be an issue if antiram wasn't always there trying to shut them down.

 

[Vlad n U 2]

I always thought of trams if I'm honest.

 

[iron yuppie]

I just wanted to say that I've been reading anitram as anti ram all this time (despite knowing it's supposed to be Martina backwards).

Here's something I learned in this thread, alongside what "sealioning" is and that white people apparently don't have a history.

 

[IWasBored]

I missed the conversation about sea lions because I was too busy realizing I've been reading her name wrong for over a decade.

 

[corianderstem]

Okay, I knew Namkcur was the poster's last name backwards, despite not knowing the guy from Adam, but never realized anitram was the same concept.

 

[Irvine511]

It's really sad that the white supremacy we see with AEON is now seen in some circles as being edgy and anti-authoritarian, that it's evidence of "courage" to stand up against the supposed PC mob.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Okay, I knew Namkcur was the poster's last name backwards, despite not knowing the guy from Adam, but never realized anitram was the same concept.

Quiet down, Metsrednairoc

 

[corianderstem]

You have spoken my name backwards, and now I have lost my power.

GOD DAMN IT HEADACHE.

 

[mama cass]

It's really sad that the white supremacy we see with AEON is now seen in some circles as being edgy and anti-authoritarian, that it's evidence of "courage" to stand up against the supposed PC mob.

some of his posts are disgusting - i can't believe people are still trying to engage with him - they have more patience than i

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

Don't you mean Esactius a ni Ehcadaeh?

 

[BVS]

It's really sad that the white supremacy we see with AEON is now seen in some circles as being edgy and anti-authoritarian, that it's evidence of "courage" to stand up against the supposed PC mob.

This coupled with their entitlement of you'll keep losing elections if you ignore me, is a scary and dangerous cocktail.

 

[anitram]

some of his posts are disgusting - i can't believe people are still trying to engage with him - they have more patience than i

It's disheartening to have him follow in Orgie's footsteps. This is why I have been saying that this whole "economically downtrodden white man grievances" have been complicated far too much, when beneath it all we know what drove them to vote for Trump. AEON is just validating that theory, possibly to his chagrin.

 

[AEON]

It's really sad that the white supremacy we see with AEON is now seen in some circles as being edgy and anti-authoritarian, that it's evidence of "courage" to stand up against the supposed PC mob.

I do not consider myself a white supremacist. I would have no issues with claiming that if that was my view.

But I am anti-authoritarian (when the "power" is in the wrong) and I certainly think it is courageous (especially in American universities) to stand-up to the PC mob.

 

[Irvine511]

I do not consider myself a white supremacist. I would have no issues with claiming that if that was my view.



But I am anti-authoritarian (when the "power" is in the wrong) and I certainly think it is courageous (especially in American universities) to stand-up to the PC mob.

Your posts are absolutely white supremacist.

 

[AEON]

The world isn't that black and white, as you admitted in your response to me.
Western values as we understand and defend them today are great. At the same time, it is perfectly possible for these very values having spread in a way that was detrimental to others. The US is the arbiter of Western values. At the same time, it was a torture regime under Bush. Does that negate everything good that has come out of the US? No. But it's impossible to brush over the fact. This is not such a foreign concept.

I agree with this. Western values have certainly had both positive and detriment effects . Perhaps my contention is more about the tone when we speak of anything "Western" - that there is certainly more of a focus on the bad.

The attitude of the European colonialists was not to bring freedom, reason and humanism and leave a better people. It was enslavement, Christianising, exploitation, power and a general feeling of superiority. The peoples conquered were not to participate in these values. They were to feed the engine.

Please correct me if I am wrong, the entire human experience up that point had included slavery - and a good part of the West (the Northern States of America and Western Europe) were the first major societies to abolish slavery.

Or take Kant. Great philosopher. Highly revered. No one here wouldn't defend the moral imperative. Yet, this very same person did have some very despicable views when it came to people of a different skin colour:

https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/why-has-race-survived/?mcubz=1

That doesn't make everything else he said or did bad. It doesn't mean we turn our backs on him and don't think that personal liberties are not worth defending. .

And Martin Luther spent the last years of his life dedicated to antismetism, but I would not throw out everything else he wrote.

It is certainly odd to look back in time at some great minds and come across some strikingly off view, but then I try to put myself in that place and time (what was society's view? what was the "scientific" view of the time ?Darwin had some controversial views on Africans...

There was an irony when you said all the progress during the Islamic era came by them taking advantage of the places they conquered. Yet, you simultaneously look at European progress as if it came just by our brains being wired so greatly. In other words, completely ignoring, or if forced, downplaying the way that Europeans took advantage of the resources they acquired in Latin America and Africa in order to advance their economies and societies. Roman progress, already, was built upon knowledge and technologies taken from the conquered peoples. Why was it wrong for Islamic societies to do so, but when the Romans, or later the British etc. did it, it's somehow proof of our inherent greatness? .

The quick answer is that "no" - Islam was not "wrong" in the historical context to utilize the resources of their conquered lands. My point was that when these resources (especially the Hellenestic progress) ran out, their culture lacked a certain ability to self-sustain and improve.

You said in Europe freedom of speech is no more. Let me tell you: Nothing you said thus far would land you in court in any country in Europe. It's perfectly legal to say what you said. But most people by now would have left the table.

I do occasionally work in Europe. After a few beers, the patriotism of my host usually emerges. And there is certainly an anti refugee "vibe" as it relates to crime, the loss of certain neighborhoods, and the economy. I don't these men are racist for feeling that way - it is a healthy concern. There is now a problem that exists that did not exist before...it is only natural to ask "why?"

 

[AEON]

Your posts are absolutely white supremacist.

Well, if you continue to think that way, you will have hard time engaging with non-liberals for the foreseeable future.

 

[Irvine511]

Well, if you continue to think that way, you will have hard time engaging with non-liberals for the foreseeable future.

I'm not terribly interested in engaging with people who work under the assumption that whiteness conveys superiority.

I'm also not terribly impressed by your thinking and arguments, so I'm not sure the juice would be worth the squeeze in engaging with your posts. There is some merit in arguing in order to discredit your posts to the assumed lurkers, but other people can do that better than I at this point.

 

[anitram]

Well, if you continue to think that way, you will have hard time engaging with non-liberals for the foreseeable future.

Another totally dishonest post from you.

He didn't say anything about non-liberals all being white supremacists.

He said that YOUR posts are. Which they 100% are.