Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread

09-21-2019 , 03:31 PM
Yeah I know but the gray hairs are happening
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-21-2019 , 04:16 PM
Sure, democrats suck, politicians suck, and frequently they all collude together. But change does happen. Once upon a time black people were slaves and women couldn't vote. 15 years ago gay people couldn't get married, weed was illegal everywhere, and people with Crohn's disease couldn't get health insurance.

Sometimes it's as simple as getting an extra Supreme Court seat or losing the public option due to having 59 Senate votes instead of 60. Other times it feels like two steps forward, three steps back.

The absurd thing about our political system is that population voting changes from 52% to 49% to 54% can have monumental differences in governing outcomes. We can use this fact to our benefit though.

The lesson about Trump for you should be that just because the media often props up objectively horrible people, doesn't mean that someone the media hates is necessarily any good.

Disillusionment and apathy are things the ruling class thrives on and encourages as much as possible.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-21-2019 , 04:24 PM
I'll add that by the 2008 Obama/McCain election any hope of much agreement between me and the majority of posters was gone.
That Obama was not going to be anything close to Hope & Change was super obvious to me. He was supported and pushed by the corporate media and The Revolution Will Not Be Televised . Hope and Change was impossible because it was televised. And Obama had people like Brzezinski as a foriegn policy advisor and he was team Citibank. Now ideas like that are getting to become commonplace and I don't even know who believed in hope & change then honestly. But people did and they still do. It just changes forms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex
The lesson about Trump for you should be that just because the media often props up objectively horrible people, doesn't mean that someone the media hates is necessarily any good
For sure. Please don't misinterpret anything I said to think that I don't have that understanding. About Trump, Tulsi Gabbard, or anyone else.

Last edited by Luckbox Inc; 09-21-2019 at 04:30 PM.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-21-2019 , 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by .Alex.
Disillusionment and apathy are things the ruling class thrives on and encourages as much as possible.
Apathy maybe. It's true that there more non-voters than there are Republicans or Democrats.
But disillusionment is a different thing. Ignorance isn't bliss. That's just a lie that is told to people.
As far as the good things that have happened--it's hard to know what to say to that. It isn't the idea that if the ruling class had their way that we'd all still be peasant farmers while they sit in their castles. Progress happens. Like I said earlier, millions of people have been lifted out of poverty. People have more opportunity now than ever before. But that doesn't make the world any less of a crazy place just the same.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-23-2019 , 01:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
It is hard to compare different eras, but one thing I want to say about these kinds of improvements is that some people act as if technological improvement is solely the result of capitalism. I'm not saying capitalism isn't part of it, but it clearly isn't all of it. Technology improved before capitalism. The Soviets (though that was really State-Capitalism) had amazing technological progress going from the end of Serfdom through a war that killed almost 25% of the population to the first country to put a man in space in less than 100 years. And a really high percentage of the technological improvements in the US came about at least partially if not mostly through government programs, Universities, War Department, Space programs etc.

But....20 years ago? I had a cell phone 20 years ago. That was 1999. It wasn't even a brick phone like I had (for work) in 1993. So you don't get to count that. Phones are smarter now, but I would submit that on the whole they make people less happy. They are both something that brings people's work with them everywhere they go and now brings obsessions with social media.

I guess Netflix is a slight improvement, even though they are pretty crappy about new movies, going to rent a DVD or tape wasn't that big a deal and in 1999 places like The Reel had a huge selection of movies to rent. And like watching movies and TV isn't really that great a standard of living thing anyway imo.

I've never gotten a flu shot, so meh, but yeah there have been some great medical advances for sure even over the last 20 years. Heart surgeries and the like just keep getting less and less invasive and people are out of the hospital in a few days for some bypass surgeries and the like.

Otoh, health insurance costs have significantly outpaced inflation and generally people have less and less security.

You actually could buy a home microwave 45 years ago. The first home model was introduced in 1955. About a million were sold by 1975, which is almost 45 years ago. I think my family got one in about 1980.

https://www.wired.com/2010/10/1025home-microwave-ovens/
Re your capitalism point, I guess my counterpoint would be all the massive improvements coming from capitalist societies.

But my main point is that life is pretty damn good for the lower two economic deciles in the United States and the developed world. Due to massive improvements to out standard of living. I wasn't really trying to get into the capitalism versus socialism or communism or whatever debate. I'm just saying that the media and the left (even the right, to the extent they have conceded the point) focus on the difference between the top income and the bottom income, when what should be discussed/measured is the standard of living, compared to historical standards of living.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-23-2019 , 04:20 PM
Isn't disillusionment just the crime of not fitting into a box?
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-23-2019 , 04:28 PM
It's all to do with expectations vs reality

Very little to do with absolute standard of living
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-23-2019 , 04:31 PM
One can have realistic expectations within their control about the unrealistic expectations beyond their control, though.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-24-2019 , 05:51 AM
So, what American intellectuals are worth paying attention to these days?

Twitter seems infected by pundits enamored with trying to sell their lectures, books or TV shows and it is increasingly hard to find the serious voices.

Political slants is not an issue, but nice to forego if possible. I can read both Chomsky and Scalia without fuming.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-25-2019 , 09:17 AM
I am in the waiting room at my doctor and they have a magazine called "The Philadelphia Trumpet" which is put out by the Philadelphia church of God, this thing is insane. In an article about how Germany is going to start ww3, "the book of Isaiah calls America and Britain by their ancient name, Israel, and Germany by its ancient name, Assyria."
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-25-2019 , 09:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox
Re your capitalism point, I guess my counterpoint would be all the massive improvements coming from capitalist societies.

But my main point is that life is pretty damn good for the lower two economic deciles in the United States and the developed world. Due to massive improvements to out standard of living. I wasn't really trying to get into the capitalism versus socialism or communism or whatever debate. I'm just saying that the media and the left (even the right, to the extent they have conceded the point) focus on the difference between the top income and the bottom income, when what should be discussed/measured is the standard of living, compared to historical standards of living.
Maybe, from a practical standpoint most revolutions are caused by a discontented middle class, not the lower classes, so even for someone who doesn't care about inequality as a problem and sees it really as a PR issue to be managed it still helps to have inequality on the radar, otherwise the Kochs will still find themselves on the guillotine side of things.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-25-2019 , 10:47 AM
I ran out of episodes of the Derry Girls so I might have to start posting again.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-25-2019 , 03:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl
Maybe, from a practical standpoint most revolutions are caused by a discontented middle class, not the lower classes, so even for someone who doesn't care about inequality as a problem and sees it really as a PR issue to be managed it still helps to have inequality on the radar, otherwise the Kochs will still find themselves on the guillotine side of things.
Yes, this ^^^ is a good point. It should be on our radar. Maybe my main point is that the right should not be conceding this point. And to the left, I see what you're doing, obscuring the massive standard of living improvements over the past 50 years to focus on a difference when the absolute is what matters.

Basically, I'm saying the media and left are doing politics, not just reporting, and to some extent, they've won, because they've framed the debate successfully. That may be trivially obvious, but I thought it worth pointing out.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-25-2019 , 03:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by well named
I ran out of episodes of the Derry Girls so I might have to start posting again.
Thanks. I forgot about that. I'll go back and pick up the series.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-25-2019 , 03:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox
Yes, this ^^^ is a good point. It should be on our radar. Maybe my main point is that the right should not be conceding this point. And to the left, I see what you're doing, obscuring the massive standard of living improvements over the past 50 years to focus on a difference when the absolute is what matters.

Basically, I'm saying the media and left are doing politics, not just reporting, and to some extent, they've won, because they've framed the debate successfully. That may be trivially obvious, but I thought it worth pointing out.
I think it's politics all the way down. There's no neutral framing of the issue
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-25-2019 , 03:55 PM
Solidarity forever

Quote:
A General Motors plant in Mexico fired at least five workers who organized to aid the GM strike in the United States, according to the Mexican newspaper Periódico Correo and an organizer for workers at Mexican plant.

Mexican GM workers organized to resist pressure to increase assembly line production, which would offset GM’s losses in the 48,000-worker strike in the United States, according to Periódico Correo. The GM plant is located in Silao, a city in central Mexico, and manufactures Chevrolet and GMC pick-up trucks. Motherboard has independently confirmed that workers in the Silao plant are organizing in solidarity with their colleagues in the US; an organizer named Israel Cervantes Córdova working with people in the Mexican plant also confirmed that five people were recently fired for taking action.
Quote:
In an audio recording sent to striking GM workers in the United States and reviewed by Motherboard, one GM worker in Silao named Carlos Marquez said, “We are organizing to collaborate for the success of your efforts by not permitting overtime work at General Motors Mexico—because this hurts your movement and benefits your bosses who are the same as ours. Your struggle and problems are those of every GM worker in every part of the world.”

“We are willing to reinforce your struggle by not allowing [GM] to pressure us for greater productivity,” another GM worker in Silao said in an audio message sent to UAW strikers. “If our bosses are the same, then your complaints are ours.”
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/m...us-auto-strike
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-28-2019 , 09:26 PM
Clarence Thomas is not a sell out

https://nyti.ms/2oaLJq4

Quote:
At a moment when Democrats are arguing over a multiracial social democracy of the future versus a tepid neoliberalism of the past, we should remember that Justice Thomas has long mobilized racial pessimism against black voices on the social democratic left. Declaring in 1987 that a “broad coalition of voters” in the United States would never tolerate European-style universal programs that especially help black people, he posed a simple rhetorical question: When has socialism ever benefited “a ‘truly disadvantaged’ minority” like African-Americans?

Thirty-two years later, we’re still living with his answer — on both sides of the partisan divide.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-28-2019 , 11:20 PM
Not the intended response but reading g that article increases my respect for Thomas.

Here’s my conservative principal. Government can’t.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-29-2019 , 03:26 AM
Clarence Thomas is married to a Republican lobbyist who pushes anti-Dem conspiracy theories on social media.

I'm sure there's no conflict of interest there.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-30-2019 , 12:49 PM
So he should resign because of his wife?
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-30-2019 , 03:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox
Not the intended response but reading g that article increases my respect for Thomas.

Here’s my conservative principal. Government can’t.
Well, I guess if you exclude all the places where government does, then you might have a point.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-30-2019 , 07:59 PM
Well, they screw up most things. The one thing they do well is use of force - military and police. Let em stick to that.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-30-2019 , 08:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl
Clarence Thomas is not a sell out

https://nyti.ms/2oaLJq4
Quote:
Originally Posted by .Alex.
Clarence Thomas is married to a Republican lobbyist who pushes anti-Dem conspiracy theories on social media.

I'm sure there's no conflict of interest there.
Guy compares eminent domain to ethnic cleansing in Kelo but turns into a blackpilled nihilist in voting rights cases, arguing that there's no hope politically for minorities so why try. He's a grade A troll.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-30-2019 , 08:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox
Well, they screw up most things. The one thing they do well is use of force - military and police. Let em stick to that.
The list of military and policing failures are too numerous to get into. That stuff is by far the thing government does the worst at.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
09-30-2019 , 08:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox
Well, they screw up most things. The one thing they do well is use of force - military and police. Let em stick to that.
I don't know. They seem pretty good at mailing checks out to people every month. Should probably do more of that.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote

      
m