Controversial and/or Unpopular, Personal/Political opinions
They're a TERF because they hate men and see trans women as men but they never complain about trans men. Gee I wonder why.
I don't know how TERF in other countries behave.
Chinese TERF usually don't find trans men. If they found out, they would see trans men as unreasonable "traitors to women".
_________________
With the help of translation software.
Cover your eyes, if you like. It will serve no purpose.
You might expect to be able to crush them in your hand, into wolf-bone fragments.
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder
Are we supposed to pretend Alan Greenspan wasn't mainstream or just that he wasn't deeply influenced by Objectivism?
Greenspan wasn’t a mainstream economist, that was why Reagan liked him so much!
Greenspan is a punchline for mainstream economists. Bernanke and Yellen, as neo-classicists, are the Fed Chairs that they tend to admire. Even Jay Powell gets more recognition than Greenspan. Compare Yellen’s list of honours to Greenspan’s and you’ll get an idea for which of them is more highly thought of.
The problem is that while they're not 'mainstream' in the sense you're thinking, they're mainstream in that they're highly influential and trusted to the point that quite a number of people think that regurgitating their ideological preferences is the same as being informed about economics; and that should worry anyone who sees through their shtick because their influence is a significant factor in why so many struggle today.
/runon
Part of the problem is that the people who peddle these ideologies are able to present themselves as credible and authoritative and they pass their guano on to others who accept it as reasonable, and when that happens the end result seems to be a lot of people convinced that their bad idea is the only way forward. Ironically a lot of the criticisms end up being the same that's an ideological utopia that will only work on paper they often label other positions with.

That's right, capitalism is a system that largely works on paper but functionally needs substantial reforms to even be viable, as demonstrated by the entire period since Adam Smith first described it. It has never been implemented in any pure, large-scale form and generally speaking attempts at doing so are doomed to break down the closer they get.
All 'capitalist' economies in practice are mixed economies, just like most self-proclaimed socialist economies. Just like the economies that came before them, prior to those terms being defined.
_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.
Covid experimental injections, Black Lives Matter, Climate Change, LGBTQ are all psy-ops using mass formation (hypnosis). They are designed to reinforce each other by successively increasing and reducing the trance like state. They are all originated from the globalists associated with the World Economic Forum.
Mass formation how the left got duped
Mattias Desmet - Interview with Reiner Fuelmich
Professor Mattias Desmet
And should the globalists behind these agendas succeed in creating a New World Order they will exterminate blacks, LGBTQ and climate activists. Yuri Bezmenov warned you.
Are we supposed to pretend Alan Greenspan wasn't mainstream or just that he wasn't deeply influenced by Objectivism?
Greenspan wasn’t a mainstream economist, that was why Reagan liked him so much!
Greenspan is a punchline for mainstream economists. Bernanke and Yellen, as neo-classicists, are the Fed Chairs that they tend to admire. Even Jay Powell gets more recognition than Greenspan. Compare Yellen’s list of honours to Greenspan’s and you’ll get an idea for which of them is more highly thought of.
The problem is that while they're not 'mainstream' in the sense you're thinking, they're mainstream in that they're highly influential and trusted to the point that quite a number of people think that regurgitating their ideological preferences is the same as being informed about economics; and that should worry anyone who sees through their shtick because their influence is a significant factor in why so many struggle today.
/runon
Part of the problem is that the people who peddle these ideologies are able to present themselves as credible and authoritative and they pass their guano on to others who accept it as reasonable, and when that happens the end result seems to be a lot of people convinced that their bad idea is the only way forward. Ironically a lot of the criticisms end up being the same that's an ideological utopia that will only work on paper they often label other positions with.

That's right, capitalism is a system that largely works on paper but functionally needs substantial reforms to even be viable, as demonstrated by the entire period since Adam Smith first described it. It has never been implemented in any pure, large-scale form and generally speaking attempts at doing so are doomed to break down the closer they get.
All 'capitalist' economies in practice are mixed economies, just like most self-proclaimed socialist economies. Just like the economies that came before them, prior to those terms being defined.
So what is your proposed to alternative to capitalism
Personally I think the America economy has socialist and corporateism tendencies I think we should go back to the gilded age of the 1800s where have no social safety net and I think we should be as close to true gilded age capitalism as possible I think America should fund its government with tariffs too like it is used to
I think America needs toget rid of all programs like food stamps section eight Medicare Medicaid and social security and all welfare and we should never send any foreign aid to any nation other than for defense purposes possibly social security disability should get eliminated I think those who can work but won’t should not eat food i think corporate welfare is bad I think the irs is unconstitutional
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder
Are we supposed to pretend Alan Greenspan wasn't mainstream or just that he wasn't deeply influenced by Objectivism?
Greenspan wasn’t a mainstream economist, that was why Reagan liked him so much!
Greenspan is a punchline for mainstream economists. Bernanke and Yellen, as neo-classicists, are the Fed Chairs that they tend to admire. Even Jay Powell gets more recognition than Greenspan. Compare Yellen’s list of honours to Greenspan’s and you’ll get an idea for which of them is more highly thought of.
The problem is that while they're not 'mainstream' in the sense you're thinking, they're mainstream in that they're highly influential and trusted to the point that quite a number of people think that regurgitating their ideological preferences is the same as being informed about economics; and that should worry anyone who sees through their shtick because their influence is a significant factor in why so many struggle today.
/runon
Part of the problem is that the people who peddle these ideologies are able to present themselves as credible and authoritative and they pass their guano on to others who accept it as reasonable, and when that happens the end result seems to be a lot of people convinced that their bad idea is the only way forward. Ironically a lot of the criticisms end up being the same that's an ideological utopia that will only work on paper they often label other positions with.

That's right, capitalism is a system that largely works on paper but functionally needs substantial reforms to even be viable, as demonstrated by the entire period since Adam Smith first described it. It has never been implemented in any pure, large-scale form and generally speaking attempts at doing so are doomed to break down the closer they get.
All 'capitalist' economies in practice are mixed economies, just like most self-proclaimed socialist economies. Just like the economies that came before them, prior to those terms being defined.
So what is your proposed to alternative to capitalism
Personally I think the America economy has socialist and corporateism tendencies I think we should go back to the gilded age of the 1800s where have no social safety net and I think we should be as close to true gilded age capitalism as possible I think America should fund its government with tariffs too like it is used to
I think America needs toget rid of all programs like food stamps section eight Medicare Medicaid and social security and all welfare and we should never send any foreign aid to any nation other than for defense purposes possibly social security disability should get eliminated I think those who can work but won’t should not eat food i think corporate welfare is bad I think the irs is unconstitutional
If our current economic system is both predatory and unsustainable it needs either drastic reform or to be replaced entirely. If reform is impossible that makes more radical change the only viable option left. I support workers taking over their work places and running them democratically and I don't really care what happens to people who've made a livelihood off of playing with money and property without ever contributing anything to society.
Robber barons and oligarchs don't deserve our praise.
_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.
Are we supposed to pretend Alan Greenspan wasn't mainstream or just that he wasn't deeply influenced by Objectivism?
Greenspan wasn’t a mainstream economist, that was why Reagan liked him so much!
Greenspan is a punchline for mainstream economists. Bernanke and Yellen, as neo-classicists, are the Fed Chairs that they tend to admire. Even Jay Powell gets more recognition than Greenspan. Compare Yellen’s list of honours to Greenspan’s and you’ll get an idea for which of them is more highly thought of.
The problem is that while they're not 'mainstream' in the sense you're thinking, they're mainstream in that they're highly influential and trusted to the point that quite a number of people think that regurgitating their ideological preferences is the same as being informed about economics; and that should worry anyone who sees through their shtick because their influence is a significant factor in why so many struggle today.
/runon
Part of the problem is that the people who peddle these ideologies are able to present themselves as credible and authoritative and they pass their guano on to others who accept it as reasonable, and when that happens the end result seems to be a lot of people convinced that their bad idea is the only way forward. Ironically a lot of the criticisms end up being the same that's an ideological utopia that will only work on paper they often label other positions with.

That's right, capitalism is a system that largely works on paper but functionally needs substantial reforms to even be viable, as demonstrated by the entire period since Adam Smith first described it. It has never been implemented in any pure, large-scale form and generally speaking attempts at doing so are doomed to break down the closer they get.
All 'capitalist' economies in practice are mixed economies, just like most self-proclaimed socialist economies. Just like the economies that came before them, prior to those terms being defined.
So what is your proposed to alternative to capitalism
Personally I think the America economy has socialist and corporateism tendencies I think we should go back to the gilded age of the 1800s where have no social safety net and I think we should be as close to true gilded age capitalism as possible I think America should fund its government with tariffs too like it is used to
I think America needs toget rid of all programs like food stamps section eight Medicare Medicaid and social security and all welfare and we should never send any foreign aid to any nation other than for defense purposes possibly social security disability should get eliminated I think those who can work but won’t should not eat food i think corporate welfare is bad I think the irs is unconstitutional
If our current economic system is both predatory and unsustainable it needs either drastic reform or to be replaced entirely. If reform is impossible that makes more radical change the only viable option left. I support workers taking over their work places and running them democratically and I don't really care what happens to people who've made a livelihood off of playing with money and property without ever contributing anything to society.
Robber barons and oligarchs don't deserve our praise.
Well I don’t think communism ever works in governments
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder
I think it's fair to say Leninism doesn't work, or at the very least ends up with just as many flaws as any sort of more capitalist system.
That said, those flaws are strongly related to the society that created Lenin and Leninism and the long history of corruption of autocracy within that society. As proof of that just look at how badly Russia's economy has done since the collapse of the USSR, it's produced some billionaires but otherwise has contracted and seen greater divides between rich and poor - sounds like utter failure to me.
_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.
Well I don’t think communism ever works in governments
I think it's fair to say Leninism doesn't work, or at the very least ends up with just as many flaws as any sort of more capitalist system.
That said, those flaws are strongly related to the society that created Lenin and Leninism and the long history of corruption of autocracy within that society. As proof of that just look at how badly Russia's economy has done since the collapse of the USSR, it's produced some billionaires but otherwise has contracted and seen greater divides between rich and poor - sounds like utter failure to me.
Well every communist government in history was a murderous tyrannical dictatorship i don’t know if the young college Marxist today herein America are more democratic socialist like Bernie sanders or someone like Stalin or Castro
I think it's fair to say Leninism doesn't work, or at the very least ends up with just as many flaws as any sort of more capitalist system.
That said, those flaws are strongly related to the society that created Lenin and Leninism and the long history of corruption of autocracy within that society. As proof of that just look at how badly Russia's economy has done since the collapse of the USSR, it's produced some billionaires but otherwise has contracted and seen greater divides between rich and poor - sounds like utter failure to me.
I think Leninism has way more flaws than supply side economics I love reaganomics and i think it’s one of the greatest moments in American history I would rather liver under the current Russian economy than the soviet one
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder
They might be neither, there's a lot of room between those two interpretations.
Among things, in practice Sanders is a social democrat, which ultimately should probably be counted as capitalist even if it's the most heavily reformed sort of capitalism.
But also, all of the tyrannical socialist dictatorships derived from Leninism or from ideologies derived from Leninism. Leninism by it's very nature isn't able to be a responsive, democratic system so any state based on that ideology will end up inflexible and unable to respond to criticism.
Not all Marxists are Marxist-Leninists though and there's a pretty long history of socialists speaking/writing critically about that form of socialism. Emma Goldman being one of the first: https://gutenberg.org/files/60315/60315-h/60315-h.htm
Socialism really can't work without democratic management of the economy.
A lot of western socialists are democratic socialists or libertarian socialists. People who desire something along the Soviet model are often derided as tankies. Given how brutally supporters of other types of socialism were treated the USSR and other similar states I think you can understand why most of the left isn't very trusting of tankies.
Wow. The current Russian economy has just continued to decline, the decline started under the Soviets but it's just kept on falling ever since. The fall in standard of living throughout many former Soviet republics is one of the two main factors that drives nostalgia for that era, which says something considering all the other fair criticisms of the Soviet era.
I'd suggest the cultural norms of the region played a huge role in why the struggles there have endured no matter what economic system is in place.
I'd also suggest that regardless of ideological preferences, you'd prefer the period where getting adequate food and shelter was most possible, which is probably the 1960s.
_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder
Indeed.
_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder
Indeed.
It's not a lie, that is the source of most of the failings of capitalism (as it fails all around us).
_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parody
_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.
