The Current Events, News, and Politics Thread
Fascists are National Socialists. They were/are socialists not just in name, but in economic policy and government social welfare policy. Modern-day socialists try their hardest to deny this, of course, because ****.
Communists are International Socialists, as are most people who would describe themselves as "socialist" today. Communists somehow had better PR management allies than the Fascists did, which is why they aren't vilified to the same extent despite killing many multiples more people.
Communists are International Socialists, as are most people who would describe themselves as "socialist" today. Communists somehow had better PR management allies than the Fascists did, which is why they aren't vilified to the same extent despite killing many multiples more people.
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,504
Total Cats: 4,079
for JoeP:
A writer at feminist blog Jezebel has inadvertently revealed another secret avenue journalists from across several prominent media platforms use to collude narratives.
The Jezebel story, headlined “Private Messages Reveal the Cis Journalist Groupthink Behind Trans Media Narratives,” intended to challenge a prominent writer for the Atlantic who specializes in transgender issues. But it ended up revealing that even impeccably well-credentialed liberal academics and journalists are totally fed up with the hysterical, anti-science, unsatisfiable, abusive trans lobby.
The closed listserv hosted on Google Groups and secretly leaked to Jezebel has existed for nearly a decade and has over 400 prominent figures in journalism, academia, and publishing as members, including award-winning reporters, New York Times writers, and contributors to the Washington Post.
According to Jezebel, which redacted names of the listserv members, the shadowy cabal’s “About” page says it is a “off-the-record discussion forum for left-of-center journalists, authors, academics and wonks.”
“These members include New York Times best-selling authors, Ivy League academics, magazine editors, and other public intellectuals—in short, a lot of important people who influence public discourse through their written work. They use the listserv’s forum to discuss current events, news from their respective fields, articles they’ve read, articles they’ve written,and other topics of public importance,” Jezebel reports.
Jesse Singal, the Atlantic writer and member of the listserv, caught the ire of Jezebel after publishing a story attempting a reasoned and academic approach to discussing transgender issues, particularly where children are concerned, and following several stories focusing on “desistance,” when people who at one time think they are transgender later realize they are not.
The Jezebel writer says he had “become deeply uncomfortable with the narratives [Singal] has centered” and calls Singal’s reporting unfair and opportunistic. “He has the support of a closed group of some of the most influential people in journalism, many of whom are currently lauding him for doing discredited and discrediting work,” Jezebel writes.
Yet in trying to expose transphobia in left-wing media, Jezebel inadvertently revealed that behind closed doors, some of the most prominent and well-respected figures in media and on the left have deep reservations about the trans-lobby’s narrative and seethe in private at the left’s culture of anti-intellectualism and mob-style outrage.
Jezebel, which is owned by Univision, notes there are no, or few, transgenders on the listserv, an issue that was brought up in discussions there, to which one “prominent futurist in progressive news media” responded, “I’m not interested in sharing this list or any other space with someone who is going to insist on nullifying and erasing my existence and experience as female.”
Boom.
Singal is no stranger to the leftist hate mob swarming him after publishing a story slightly critical of the trans narrative, another topic often discussed on the listserv. Jezebel called the listserv members’ responses to online trans-rage “dismissive.”
As Jezebel reports, conversations on the listserv included,
The Jezebel story, headlined “Private Messages Reveal the Cis Journalist Groupthink Behind Trans Media Narratives,” intended to challenge a prominent writer for the Atlantic who specializes in transgender issues. But it ended up revealing that even impeccably well-credentialed liberal academics and journalists are totally fed up with the hysterical, anti-science, unsatisfiable, abusive trans lobby.
The closed listserv hosted on Google Groups and secretly leaked to Jezebel has existed for nearly a decade and has over 400 prominent figures in journalism, academia, and publishing as members, including award-winning reporters, New York Times writers, and contributors to the Washington Post.
According to Jezebel, which redacted names of the listserv members, the shadowy cabal’s “About” page says it is a “off-the-record discussion forum for left-of-center journalists, authors, academics and wonks.”
“These members include New York Times best-selling authors, Ivy League academics, magazine editors, and other public intellectuals—in short, a lot of important people who influence public discourse through their written work. They use the listserv’s forum to discuss current events, news from their respective fields, articles they’ve read, articles they’ve written,and other topics of public importance,” Jezebel reports.
Jesse Singal, the Atlantic writer and member of the listserv, caught the ire of Jezebel after publishing a story attempting a reasoned and academic approach to discussing transgender issues, particularly where children are concerned, and following several stories focusing on “desistance,” when people who at one time think they are transgender later realize they are not.
The Jezebel writer says he had “become deeply uncomfortable with the narratives [Singal] has centered” and calls Singal’s reporting unfair and opportunistic. “He has the support of a closed group of some of the most influential people in journalism, many of whom are currently lauding him for doing discredited and discrediting work,” Jezebel writes.
Yet in trying to expose transphobia in left-wing media, Jezebel inadvertently revealed that behind closed doors, some of the most prominent and well-respected figures in media and on the left have deep reservations about the trans-lobby’s narrative and seethe in private at the left’s culture of anti-intellectualism and mob-style outrage.
Jezebel, which is owned by Univision, notes there are no, or few, transgenders on the listserv, an issue that was brought up in discussions there, to which one “prominent futurist in progressive news media” responded, “I’m not interested in sharing this list or any other space with someone who is going to insist on nullifying and erasing my existence and experience as female.”
Boom.
Singal is no stranger to the leftist hate mob swarming him after publishing a story slightly critical of the trans narrative, another topic often discussed on the listserv. Jezebel called the listserv members’ responses to online trans-rage “dismissive.”
As Jezebel reports, conversations on the listserv included,
“I see the Twitter reeducation process has begun, Jesse,” wrote the editor of a progressive news site. “I’m sorry you are dealing with the Twitter crowd once again,” wrote aWashington Post opinion writer. “Most people I know will not write about this subject any more because no matter how hard you try to represent the issues accurately and without bias against trans people, you will be accused of not doing so,” wrote a published author. Another member, an award-winning journalist and Washington Post editor, agreed: “Jesse is the most thoughtful person on this beat right now, pro-trans and pro-science at once. It’s very hard to write about this without being attacked by bludgeons.” One of the listserv’s most frequent posters, a Whiting Award-winning essayist and poet, wrote: “I value [J]esse’s reporting on this—and other—topics. He made me more empathetic and sympathetic to trans people… The attacks on him on twitter and in jezebel seem completely over the top to me.”
Jezebel goes on to expressed confusion why educated people might recoil at blindly accepting a certain narrative. Most of the people who posted found the criticism baffling. Some offered theories to explain it. “It’s like there’s a permanent distributed ledger of people who have sinned against left orthodoxy, and he’s on it, no further explanation needed,” wrote a prominent education policy analyst…An award-winning investigative journalist wondered whether Singal’s critics even understand how journalism works: “The idea that he’s ‘fixated’ is particularly bizarre. He’s a journalist with a beat!”
Jezebel goes on to expressed confusion why educated people might recoil at blindly accepting a certain narrative. Most of the people who posted found the criticism baffling. Some offered theories to explain it. “It’s like there’s a permanent distributed ledger of people who have sinned against left orthodoxy, and he’s on it, no further explanation needed,” wrote a prominent education policy analyst…An award-winning investigative journalist wondered whether Singal’s critics even understand how journalism works: “The idea that he’s ‘fixated’ is particularly bizarre. He’s a journalist with a beat!”
Moderator
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 20,670
Total Cats: 3,015
Socialism or communism is always implemented as a part of authoritarianism. Nationalism is a red herring. Could be just as easily tribalism, religious identification, caste identification, etc. None of these have anything to do with policy or structure. Government control of production is socialism and that's a policy. It can be implemented by an elected body, and a oligarchy, or even an autocrat like Hillary Clinton or someone else who believes they are above the law of the common people.
Socialism or communism is always implemented as a part of authoritarianism. Nationalism is a red herring. Could be just as easily tribalism, religious identification, caste identification, etc. None of these have anything to do with policy or structure. Government control of production is socialism and that's a policy. It can be implemented by an elected body, and a oligarchy, or even an autocrat like Hillary Clinton or someone else who believes they are above the law of the common people.
However, independent of this definition discussion: Claiming Bernie voters are ***** is pretty dumb. At the very least it shows you don't understand **** or Democrat ideology, and most likely both. Furthermore, it's completely insensitive as Bernie is Jewish.
Finally, I worry about the future of the US when people (Republican and Democrat alike) are making bold polarizing claims like these about a significant portion of their fellow countrymen. Instead of trying to find common ground to improve the country as a whole, you get hung up on differences.
Moderator
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 20,670
Total Cats: 3,015
I said government control of production is socialism. I did not say government ownership of production. Government ownership of production is communism.
Government staying out of meddling with production is generally called a free market. When business owners:
1. Produce as much or as little of a product as they desire and
2. Produce one product and not another as they desire and
3. Sell it for whatever price they desire.
^These components are considered necessary for a free market.
Barriers like confiscatory taxes and/or specific rewards attempting to alter production of certain products or practices are government controlling production. They are not freedom. They alter free enterprise and thwart the will of the individual owner and consumer.
I have absolutely no problem at all with people desiring to live in Scandinavian-type socialist systems. There are many countries that implement those practices from Japan to Scandinavia itself. The United States is not one of them. We were established with the ideals of individualism and freedom for all of its citizens. Leave us our country as it was designed for those of us who value freedom. Do not alter us into the image of some other country's system.
If you desire socialism (or whatever system you desire) then please go to where it is practiced but leave us with the freedom we desire, the system under which our country was established. This country is our only hope for freedom. We have nowhere else to go but you have a host of choices.
Government staying out of meddling with production is generally called a free market. When business owners:
1. Produce as much or as little of a product as they desire and
2. Produce one product and not another as they desire and
3. Sell it for whatever price they desire.
^These components are considered necessary for a free market.
Barriers like confiscatory taxes and/or specific rewards attempting to alter production of certain products or practices are government controlling production. They are not freedom. They alter free enterprise and thwart the will of the individual owner and consumer.
I have absolutely no problem at all with people desiring to live in Scandinavian-type socialist systems. There are many countries that implement those practices from Japan to Scandinavia itself. The United States is not one of them. We were established with the ideals of individualism and freedom for all of its citizens. Leave us our country as it was designed for those of us who value freedom. Do not alter us into the image of some other country's system.
If you desire socialism (or whatever system you desire) then please go to where it is practiced but leave us with the freedom we desire, the system under which our country was established. This country is our only hope for freedom. We have nowhere else to go but you have a host of choices.
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,504
Total Cats: 4,079
if you remove all the nationalism and fascism/totalitarianism out of the **** regime, you have the exact same platform as Bernie.
Bernie doesn't believe freedom means free to make you own choices, Bernie believes no one is truly free unless the state is making everyone's lives just as miserable as everyone else, so long as 1 person isn't better than another. If he had a magic wand, he would give everyone a gov't job, and make everything free, and outlaw fossil fuels, then smile as everyone starved to death.
coincidentally, the Adolf's National Socials Program shared a lot of the same things:
- All citizens must have equal rights and obligations. (everyone is a slave)
- The first obligation of every citizen must be to productively work mentally or physically. The activity of individuals is not to counteract the interests of the universality, but must have its result within the framework of the whole for the benefit of all. Consequently, we demand:
- Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. (ironic)
- In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore, we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.
- We demand the nationalisation of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).
- We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.
- We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.
- We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms, the utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State, county or municipality.
- We demand a land reform suitable to our needs, provision of a law for the free expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility, abolition of taxes on landand prevention of all speculation in land.
- We demand struggle without consideration against those whose activity is injurious to the general interest. Common national criminals, usurers, profiteers and so forth are to be punished with death, without consideration of confession or race.
- The state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program, to enable every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education and subsequently introduction into leading positions. The plans of instruction of all educational institutions are to conform with the experiences of practical life. The comprehension of the concept of the state must be striven for by the school [[i]Staatsbürgerkunde] as early as the beginning of understanding. We demand the education at the expense of the state of outstanding intellectually gifted children of poor parents without consideration of position or profession.
- The state is to care for the elevating national health by protecting the mother and child, by outlawing child-labor, by the encouragement of physical fitness, by means of the legal establishment of a gymnastic and sport obligation, by the utmost support of all organizations concerned with the physical instruction of the young.
- We demand abolition of the mercenary troops and formation of a national army. (armed citizens)
Last edited by Braineack; 06-30-2018 at 10:34 AM.
I said government control of production is socialism. I did not say government ownership of production. Government ownership of production is communism.
Government staying out of meddling with production is generally called a free market. When business owners:
1. Produce as much or as little of a product as they desire and
2. Produce one product and not another as they desire and
3. Sell it for whatever price they desire.
^These components are considered necessary for a free market.
Barriers like confiscatory taxes and/or specific rewards attempting to alter production of certain products or practices are government controlling production. They are not freedom. They alter free enterprise and thwart the will of the individual owner and consumer.
I have absolutely no problem at all with people desiring to live in Scandinavian-type socialist systems. There are many countries that implement those practices from Japan to Scandinavia itself. The United States is not one of them. We were established with the ideals of individualism and freedom for all of its citizens. Leave us our country as it was designed for those of us who value freedom. Do not alter us into the image of some other country's system.
If you desire socialism (or whatever system you desire) then please go to where it is practiced but leave us with the freedom we desire, the system under which our country was established. This country is our only hope for freedom. We have nowhere else to go but you have a host of choices.
Government staying out of meddling with production is generally called a free market. When business owners:
1. Produce as much or as little of a product as they desire and
2. Produce one product and not another as they desire and
3. Sell it for whatever price they desire.
^These components are considered necessary for a free market.
Barriers like confiscatory taxes and/or specific rewards attempting to alter production of certain products or practices are government controlling production. They are not freedom. They alter free enterprise and thwart the will of the individual owner and consumer.
I have absolutely no problem at all with people desiring to live in Scandinavian-type socialist systems. There are many countries that implement those practices from Japan to Scandinavia itself. The United States is not one of them. We were established with the ideals of individualism and freedom for all of its citizens. Leave us our country as it was designed for those of us who value freedom. Do not alter us into the image of some other country's system.
If you desire socialism (or whatever system you desire) then please go to where it is practiced but leave us with the freedom we desire, the system under which our country was established. This country is our only hope for freedom. We have nowhere else to go but you have a host of choices.
Regarding your previous statement:
1) If you say (e.g.) Denmark is a socialist state
2) Say all socialist states are authoritarian
3) Then Denmark is an authoritarian state
I would argue that with the broad definition of socialism that includes democratic socialism (e.g. Nordic model), there's plenty of examples of non-authoritarian socialist states. With the more limited (e.g. Marxist-Leninist) definition I would agree.
Furthermore, with your (in my opinion accurate) definition of free market, there are several challenges. To place free market above all other values is generally seen as ancap. Not even Republicans generally hold this position: They do think some level of government interference is required (e.g. banning drugs, banning abortion, banning alcohol in some counties, implementing trade tariffs etc.). The US does not have a 100% free market - just like every other functioning country. In general it's not a question of whether the government should interfere, but how much. This is why I think the focus should always be to find common ground, because in general people are usually pretty close on this scale, but often make it sound like they are on opposite ends.
Also, thanks for taking the time to properly write out your thoughts and not resorting to personal attacks. I do think I understand better where you are coming from.
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,504
Total Cats: 4,079
this is like the kettle calling the gas-chamber hot.
**** Party: Hey guys, were a socialists!
Skamba: Hitler, please define socialism, cause you're wrong, and that's offensive.
Also, because the ***** ran on a socialist policy does not make socialism inherently bad. Just as Hitler being a vegetarian does not make vegetarianism inherently bad. You must probably think that the Nordics are hell on earth.
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,054
Total Cats: 6,615
Uhm, Brainey's exact words there were "Claiming Bernie voters are ***** is pretty dumb."
What he said is the exact opposite of what you are accusing him of saying.
I'm having a hard time figuring out if you are being deliberately obtuse or if you're just developmentally disabled.
Uhm, Brainey's exact words there were "Claiming Bernie voters are ***** is pretty dumb."
What he said is the exact opposite of what you are accusing him of saying.
I'm having a hard time figuring out if you are being deliberately obtuse or if you're just developmentally disabled.
What he said is the exact opposite of what you are accusing him of saying.
I'm having a hard time figuring out if you are being deliberately obtuse or if you're just developmentally disabled.
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,054
Total Cats: 6,615
Ah, yes. Sorry, posting from my phone. This was the actual quote:
"if you remove all the nationalism and fascism/totalitarianism out of the **** regime, you have the exact same platform as Bernie."
Do you claim that this is untrue?
(I would support a Godwin claim, but I still can't find anywhere where Brain says that Bernie voters are *****.)
"if you remove all the nationalism and fascism/totalitarianism out of the **** regime, you have the exact same platform as Bernie."
Do you claim that this is untrue?
(I would support a Godwin claim, but I still can't find anywhere where Brain says that Bernie voters are *****.)
Ah, yes. Sorry, posting from my phone. This was the actual quote:
"if you remove all the nationalism and fascism/totalitarianism out of the **** regime, you have the exact same platform as Bernie."
Do you claim that this is untrue?
(I would support a Godwin claim, but I still can't find anywhere where Brain says that Bernie voters are *****.)
"if you remove all the nationalism and fascism/totalitarianism out of the **** regime, you have the exact same platform as Bernie."
Do you claim that this is untrue?
(I would support a Godwin claim, but I still can't find anywhere where Brain says that Bernie voters are *****.)
(He did not directly say that, but he did say that "Nazism is a form of fascism and showed that ideology's disdain for liberal democracy and the parliamentary system, but also incorporated fervent antisemitism, scientific racism, and eugenics into its creed. " describes Bernie voters here)
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,054
Total Cats: 6,615
Correct.
Obviously we cannot know the exact inner monologue of every person who voted for Sanders, but given the focus which his campaign platform placed upon national socialism, it seems reasonable to conclude that the voters did not place a high value on liberal democracy and the parliamentary system.
This "he said / she said" bickering is starting to become tiresome.
Obviously we cannot know the exact inner monologue of every person who voted for Sanders, but given the focus which his campaign platform placed upon national socialism, it seems reasonable to conclude that the voters did not place a high value on liberal democracy and the parliamentary system.
This "he said / she said" bickering is starting to become tiresome.
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,054
Total Cats: 6,615
"Although Norway has some of the highest salaries in the world, they do come with a vastly increased cost of living."
"MVA, or merverdiavgift, is a form of sales tax or VAT applied to goods and services purchased in Norway.
The standard rate of MVA is 25%, the same as the other Scandinavian countries. It is the highest rate in Europe apart form Hungary at 27%."
"MVA, or merverdiavgift, is a form of sales tax or VAT applied to goods and services purchased in Norway.
The standard rate of MVA is 25%, the same as the other Scandinavian countries. It is the highest rate in Europe apart form Hungary at 27%."
No thanks.