RSS
There’s also a pollyannish view of the ability of the economy to recover. Businesses have to be run by entrepreneurs, who need to be able to take account of possibilities. One future possibility is that your functioning business can be shut down to save lives near their end, and that will now have to go into the calculus. Dead businesses are as hard to revive as dead people.
The pandemic presents a perfect power-grabbing opportunity for Woke Capital, and Woke Capital won’t pass the opportunity up.
When activity is brought to a standstill, the family-owned diner and the auto repair shop partnership have enough cash on hand to last a few weeks. Beyond that and the disruption to cash flow becomes more than these small businesses are able to handle. Finding themselves suddenly flung into dire economic straights, the owners sell to McDonald’s and to Goodyear for dimes on the dollar of what they would’ve commanded a few months ago.
The diner and the repair shop were run by normal people with normal sensibilities. The corporate HR departments of McDonald’s and Goodyear, in contrast, proudly support refugee resettlement in the apartment complex down the road and drag queen story hour at the local library.
Diversity with regard to wealth, social status, political thought, preventive and proactive good health behaviors, level of education–bad.
Diversity with regard to race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, bizarre mental health issues like gender dysphoria–good.
There has to be a key there somewhere. I just can’t seem to find it.
There is diversity and then there is diversity:
The thing iffen’s missing–or would be missing if the sentence were not primarily rhetorical–is Who? Whom? The moral universe we find ourselves in pretends Malia Obama is somehow oppressed while the neglected boy of an impoverished, methed-out mother in Appalachia is privileged. And they wonder why Joker was so popular among white male zoomers.
Relatedly, res:
Trading class politics for identity politics had the added benefit of making them much more appealing to the donor class.
Wokeness is a devastating weapon the ruling class wields against its subjugated masses. See Bernie Sanders’ hopeless presidential campaign.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Wokeness is a devastating weapon the ruling class wields against its subjugated masses. See Bernie Sanders’ hopeless presidential campaign.
The ONLY issues the proles should/must consider are economic issues. The only issues. Once the proles give in to wokeness – even if they may be sympathtic – they lose. Proles must go at wokeness with a savage fury. No quarter. Wokeness, like Cucks, are the enemy and it most be challenged and destroyed.
I don’t think much of the fetishization of ‘Ma & Pa’ small business owners. A lot of these people are rank amateurs or complete morons, who think they are owed a living and any failures on their part are the fault of the government.
It's still going to be a profound permanent change. It will be a shock to people when their local shopping centres become permanent ghost towns. It will be a shock to many people when they realise that running a small business is just not going to be a viable option any more. They will be joining the ranks of the unemployed, permanently. That's potentially going to lead to some social and political consequences.
Also once their competition is destroyed and they achieve complete monopoly status those mega-corporations will no longer have an incentive to be efficient, cheaper and provide better customer service.
Some large businesses might also never recover, even with bailouts. Airlines and tourist businesses for example. Will international air travel ever recover to pre-2020 levels of popularity? International air travel might be subject to restrictions for several years. Some resorts might never recover economically.
If you shut down an economy and then restart it it's not going to be the same economy.Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan, @Tusk
This crisis will cause a collapse of state and local governments as property prices and taxes are deflated. To take the example of NYC, which is about to suffer an economic doom: the MTA, which runs the subways and commuter lines, is funded by sales taxes, tolls, and fares, along with a head tax for employees in the city. Tolls and fares are down more than 50%; sales taxes crashed with the tourist economy. Yet the organization still needs to pay the salaries of the workers running the empty trains.
Meanwhile, I expect that a lot of workers will insist on remaining at home. This will greatly cut the demand for office space in the city, perhaps alleviating the demand for rail and subway service that will need to be cut because the funds are simply not there. This collapses the value of commercial property, meaning the city and state will be unable to count on billions in revenue. Time to sell your NY Muni bonds.
If you want a great examination of the economics of small businesses in the Manhattan ecosystem, there's none better than this:
https://nymag.com/news/features/2007/profit/
I expect almost all of those to die from this.
This is a hyperbole. I will counter it with another hyperbole: Hitler and Tojo are still dead, but BMW and Mitsubishi are still alive.
By contrast, where's the local Duesenberg dealer? I'd like a car that's a real Doozy.Replies: @Twinkie
That count as hyperbole? Seems true to me, both in the literal sense (the companies exist, the people don’t) and the metaphorical (capitalism survived the defeat of fascism).
Who? Whom?
The moral universe we find ourselves in is also one where public health officials like Dr. Cody, using the power invested in them, turn their duty to protect the public’s health on its head and use the power to protect the infected from social isolation, thereby allowing everyone an equal chance at infection.
There’s some truth to that. Small businesses also tend to be open borders enthusiasts because they’re so marginal they can’t function without a supply of workers willing to work for starvation wages. Small businesses are pretty much on the way out because the evil soulless mega-corporations are more efficient, cheaper and provide better customer service.
It’s still going to be a profound permanent change. It will be a shock to people when their local shopping centres become permanent ghost towns. It will be a shock to many people when they realise that running a small business is just not going to be a viable option any more. They will be joining the ranks of the unemployed, permanently. That’s potentially going to lead to some social and political consequences.
Also once their competition is destroyed and they achieve complete monopoly status those mega-corporations will no longer have an incentive to be efficient, cheaper and provide better customer service.
Some large businesses might also never recover, even with bailouts. Airlines and tourist businesses for example. Will international air travel ever recover to pre-2020 levels of popularity? International air travel might be subject to restrictions for several years. Some resorts might never recover economically.
If you shut down an economy and then restart it it’s not going to be the same economy.
And, sorry, no, the impetus for open borders and Woke Capital is coming from large businesses, not small companies.Replies: @dfordoom
Did BMW and Mitsubishi die in WW2?
By contrast, where’s the local Duesenberg dealer? I’d like a car that’s a real Doozy.
What about companies like Simon Property Group? They’re not Ma and Pa, but they face a wipeout from this, with companies like Cheesecake Factory explicitly stating they will not pay rent.
This crisis will cause a collapse of state and local governments as property prices and taxes are deflated. To take the example of NYC, which is about to suffer an economic doom: the MTA, which runs the subways and commuter lines, is funded by sales taxes, tolls, and fares, along with a head tax for employees in the city. Tolls and fares are down more than 50%; sales taxes crashed with the tourist economy. Yet the organization still needs to pay the salaries of the workers running the empty trains.
Meanwhile, I expect that a lot of workers will insist on remaining at home. This will greatly cut the demand for office space in the city, perhaps alleviating the demand for rail and subway service that will need to be cut because the funds are simply not there. This collapses the value of commercial property, meaning the city and state will be unable to count on billions in revenue. Time to sell your NY Muni bonds.
If you want a great examination of the economics of small businesses in the Manhattan ecosystem, there’s none better than this:
https://nymag.com/news/features/2007/profit/
I expect almost all of those to die from this.
The large corporations are better able to afford the D.C. lobbyists than the small mom and pop businesses. You’ll know the country is going in the right direction when the number of lobbyists in Washington starts to decrease rather than increase.
To be fair, this isn’t completely the fault of these large corporations. In order for them to receive special favors, someone needs to be passing them out. You need corrupt politicians too. I’d split the blame half and half. People often think if they give the government more power it will be used for good purposes. “Good purposes” is defined as what is good in the mind of the person advocating the increase in government power. You have to take into consideration, though, when you give the government the power to do more good you are also giving it the power to do more bad. Bad people will be attracted to becoming politicians and government bureaucrats and fill up the ranks of the government in a situation like this. This is what is currently happening in the United States.
Is The Z Man and Audacious Epigone the same person? This post sounds like ZMAN’s podcast.
AE is A. Karlin's sockpuppet.Replies: @Audacious Epigone
“Finding themselves suddenly flung into dire economic straights, the owners sell to McDonald’s and to Goodyear for dimes on the dollar of what they would’ve commanded a few months ago.”
Yes and no. I owned a struggling business several years ago, and wanted out. You are correct about the “dimes on the dollar” part. What also happens is:
1. The buyer will expect you to carry a note on the purchase, even if the selling price is chump change for them. All cash buyouts are the exception, not the rule.
2. You’ll take a haircut on your inventory, even if it is not perishable or subject to technical obsolescence.
3. McDonald’s and Goodyear are not interested in your small business. Generally speaking, large companies don’t even look at businesses that turn over less than $5,000,000 annually, absent some factor like proprietary technology or unique intellectual property.
4. 99% of the time the purchase is the business’ assets only. The liabilities are still the seller’s problem.
5. You’ll have to sign a non-compete agreement. You won’t be able to own another business that is similar to the one you just sold for at least 3 years, and maybe as long as 7 years.
And after all of that, there is still a good chance the buyer won’t know what they’re doing and will run the thing into the ground. In that scenario, assuming you’re carrying the paper, you become just another creditor who’s not going to get paid or you foreclose on the buyer, take back your business that is now a smoldering ruin and try to figure out how to put it back together.
Maybe where you live, pal, but not in rural America.
It's still going to be a profound permanent change. It will be a shock to people when their local shopping centres become permanent ghost towns. It will be a shock to many people when they realise that running a small business is just not going to be a viable option any more. They will be joining the ranks of the unemployed, permanently. That's potentially going to lead to some social and political consequences.
Also once their competition is destroyed and they achieve complete monopoly status those mega-corporations will no longer have an incentive to be efficient, cheaper and provide better customer service.
Some large businesses might also never recover, even with bailouts. Airlines and tourist businesses for example. Will international air travel ever recover to pre-2020 levels of popularity? International air travel might be subject to restrictions for several years. Some resorts might never recover economically.
If you shut down an economy and then restart it it's not going to be the same economy.Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan, @Tusk
Do you people actually believe this crap?
And, sorry, no, the impetus for open borders and Woke Capital is coming from large businesses, not small companies.
Agree. There are inefficient small businesses but they usually don’t last very long. They can’t get the government bailouts and regulatory changes that benefit them that larger businesses can get. Who benefits from government passing out special favors? Large corporations who can deliver large political donations and pay for lobbyists and organized groups who can deliver votes benefit. Also, the corrupt politicians who receive the money and votes in exchange for these special favors. Who doesn’t benefit? The poor and unorganized don’t. Many small businesses fall into this category. Also, honest politicians who don’t elected because they aren’t willing to deliver special favors and want to treat everyone fairly and equally.
The way I look at it is that very few small businesses own commercial property. They lease it, often at exorbitant rates from people who generally are wealthy but don’t add any value. Indeed, I think that there might be some sort of distributionist argument (that the community would benefit) from doing away with this system.
But often the locations are such that chain stores would not be interested in them.
“The diner and the repair shop were run by normal people with normal sensibilities.”
In some cases, yes. In other cases, no.
“The corporate HR departments of McDonald’s and Goodyear, in contrast, proudly support refugee resettlement in the apartment complex down the road and drag queen story hour at the local library.”
That is hyperbole and an overgeneralization, all wrapped up neatly in a bow.
Yep.
In a related vein, I recall this clip from The Sopranos (~2007) where two old-school mafiosos try to extort from a Starbucks-like chain establishment, only to be hilariously rebuffed, and whine about how there were no more such ‘Mom and Pop’ establishments.
Heh heh heh heh
Joe Diffie dead.
Maybe his casket will be John Deere Green.
First concert I ever attended.Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
By contrast, where's the local Duesenberg dealer? I'd like a car that's a real Doozy.Replies: @Twinkie
They died at the end of the war, but the deaths proved to be temporary, which was my point.
Does an amoeba die when it splits in two? I guess you think so.
After all, Standard Oil died and no trace of it remains. Just like Duesenberg, which survives as the phrase "a real doozy."Replies: @Twinkie
In some cases, yes. In other cases, no.
"The corporate HR departments of McDonald’s and Goodyear, in contrast, proudly support refugee resettlement in the apartment complex down the road and drag queen story hour at the local library."
That is hyperbole and an overgeneralization, all wrapped up neatly in a bow.Replies: @Sgt. Joe Friday, @216, @Audacious Epigone
I think most of the dumb platitudes corporations feel compelled to repeat are generated by their PR departments, not HR. Just the same, corporations feel as though they have to do this because if they don’t, some activist or politician will come along and say “nice little business ya got there. Be a shame if anything were to happen to it.” Corporate giving to left wing causes isn’t virtuous or charitable or reflective of a company’s “values,” it’s paying protection money so that bad things won’t happen.
It's still going to be a profound permanent change. It will be a shock to people when their local shopping centres become permanent ghost towns. It will be a shock to many people when they realise that running a small business is just not going to be a viable option any more. They will be joining the ranks of the unemployed, permanently. That's potentially going to lead to some social and political consequences.
Also once their competition is destroyed and they achieve complete monopoly status those mega-corporations will no longer have an incentive to be efficient, cheaper and provide better customer service.
Some large businesses might also never recover, even with bailouts. Airlines and tourist businesses for example. Will international air travel ever recover to pre-2020 levels of popularity? International air travel might be subject to restrictions for several years. Some resorts might never recover economically.
If you shut down an economy and then restart it it's not going to be the same economy.Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan, @Tusk
Source? Or is this just like when you said “Most whites are in favour of mass immigration” despite 2/3 of Whites being against it according to data posted by AE?
Wrt whites, revealed preferences are key. Regardless of what they tell a pollster, anti-immigration parties routinely underpoll anti-immigration sentiment. This can be explained by the presence of "Bill Maher voters", or liberals that have politically incorrect opinions but still line up in the liberal column.
Read this
https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-rights-human-capital-problem/Replies: @dfordoom, @indocon
Steven Pinker put it pithily in Enlightenment Now:
A lot of the farmers are “small business” and no one screams louder when they don’t get foreign labor. But most small businesses rarely have more than 10 employees, its a fraction that depend on a churn of cheap labor.
Wrt whites, revealed preferences are key. Regardless of what they tell a pollster, anti-immigration parties routinely underpoll anti-immigration sentiment. This can be explained by the presence of “Bill Maher voters”, or liberals that have politically incorrect opinions but still line up in the liberal column.
Read this
https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-rights-human-capital-problem/
The most likely explanation is that a lot of whites don't like immigrants but they care a lot more about money. They'll vote for short-term economic benefits rather than voting to stop immigration.Replies: @Tusk, @indocon
In some cases, yes. In other cases, no.
"The corporate HR departments of McDonald’s and Goodyear, in contrast, proudly support refugee resettlement in the apartment complex down the road and drag queen story hour at the local library."
That is hyperbole and an overgeneralization, all wrapped up neatly in a bow.Replies: @Sgt. Joe Friday, @216, @Audacious Epigone
Not a single R1 or a single F500 is demonstratably right-wing.
And, sorry, no, the impetus for open borders and Woke Capital is coming from large businesses, not small companies.Replies: @dfordoom
So what’s your explanation for companies like amazon increasingly dominating the retail sector?
Small businesses are less interested in Wokeness but they seem to be pretty keen on employing low-wage immigrants.
Macy’s just fired everybody. My friend was 7 months from retirement. He’s fucked.
Wrt whites, revealed preferences are key. Regardless of what they tell a pollster, anti-immigration parties routinely underpoll anti-immigration sentiment. This can be explained by the presence of "Bill Maher voters", or liberals that have politically incorrect opinions but still line up in the liberal column.
Read this
https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-rights-human-capital-problem/Replies: @dfordoom, @indocon
Precisely. If whites were genuinely strongly anti-immigration and genuinely saw immigration as a problem they’d vote for anti-immigration parties. But they don’t.
Possibly. I think it’s much more likely that whites who claim to be anti-immigration don’t really see it as an existential problem. They don’t care enough to do anything about it. They don’t even care enough about it to change their vote.
The most likely explanation is that a lot of whites don’t like immigrants but they care a lot more about money. They’ll vote for short-term economic benefits rather than voting to stop immigration.
Just one month ago AE showed that ~70% of Whites surveyed between 2012-2018 wanted immigration to be restricted. In fact the revealed preference, as evidenced by 2016 election, was that Whites wanted tougher restrictions on immigration.So in Australia you can vote for the legal immigration loving Libs or the illegal immigration loving Labs, which party in Australia can you vote for to reduce immigration? Don't imply that White people don't care about stopping immigration in the face of actual data showing they don't want it.
Simply provide some evidence for your statements that White people love immigration and that small business owners are enthusiatic about immigration. I'll happily change my views in light of evidence, but I'm not worried since you never provide any.Replies: @dfordoom
The most likely explanation is that a lot of whites don't like immigrants but they care a lot more about money. They'll vote for short-term economic benefits rather than voting to stop immigration.Replies: @Tusk, @indocon
Didn’t Whites elect Trump who, as a big part of his policy, wanted to stop immigration?
Just one month ago AE showed that ~70% of Whites surveyed between 2012-2018 wanted immigration to be restricted. In fact the revealed preference, as evidenced by 2016 election, was that Whites wanted tougher restrictions on immigration.
So in Australia you can vote for the legal immigration loving Libs or the illegal immigration loving Labs, which party in Australia can you vote for to reduce immigration? Don’t imply that White people don’t care about stopping immigration in the face of actual data showing they don’t want it.
Simply provide some evidence for your statements that White people love immigration and that small business owners are enthusiatic about immigration. I’ll happily change my views in light of evidence, but I’m not worried since you never provide any.
Mainstream Republicans voted for him because he was running as a Republican.
There's no evidence that immigration was a major issue for most voters.They could vote for One Nation, which is an anti-immigration party. But they don't. Which proves that they're not very concerned about immigration.The most reliable data is election results and that data clearly indicates that most whites in Australia don't care very much about immigration one way or another, because they refuse to vote for explicitly anti-immigration parties.I'm not arguing that white people love immigration. I'm arguing that they really don't care. They're more interested in their own short-term financial advantage. Election results clearly demonstrate that immigration is a minor political issue. Because we do have a well-publicised high-profile anti-immigration party and they won't vote for it.
Seems like overwhelming evidence to me.Replies: @Tusk
This is why we need to rely upon our guns. Power flows from their barrel, after all.
Just one month ago AE showed that ~70% of Whites surveyed between 2012-2018 wanted immigration to be restricted. In fact the revealed preference, as evidenced by 2016 election, was that Whites wanted tougher restrictions on immigration.So in Australia you can vote for the legal immigration loving Libs or the illegal immigration loving Labs, which party in Australia can you vote for to reduce immigration? Don't imply that White people don't care about stopping immigration in the face of actual data showing they don't want it.
Simply provide some evidence for your statements that White people love immigration and that small business owners are enthusiatic about immigration. I'll happily change my views in light of evidence, but I'm not worried since you never provide any.Replies: @dfordoom
Trump was elected because Rust Belt voters believed he’d bring the manufacturing sector back to life.
Mainstream Republicans voted for him because he was running as a Republican.
There’s no evidence that immigration was a major issue for most voters.
They could vote for One Nation, which is an anti-immigration party. But they don’t. Which proves that they’re not very concerned about immigration.
The most reliable data is election results and that data clearly indicates that most whites in Australia don’t care very much about immigration one way or another, because they refuse to vote for explicitly anti-immigration parties.
I’m not arguing that white people love immigration. I’m arguing that they really don’t care. They’re more interested in their own short-term financial advantage. Election results clearly demonstrate that immigration is a minor political issue. Because we do have a well-publicised high-profile anti-immigration party and they won’t vote for it.
Seems like overwhelming evidence to me.
So once again everything you say is just your opinion and backed up by nothing.Replies: @dfordoom
No.
AE is A. Karlin’s sockpuppet.
“Founded by Iwasaki Yatarō in 1870, the Mitsubishi Group historically descended from the Mitsubishi zaibatsu, a unified company which existed from 1870 to 1947. The company was disbanded during the occupation of Japan following World War II. The former constituents of the company continue to share the Mitsubishi brand and trademark. Although the group companies participate in limited business cooperation, most famously through monthly “Friday Conference” executive meetings, they are formally independent and are not under common control.”
Does an amoeba die when it splits in two? I guess you think so.
After all, Standard Oil died and no trace of it remains. Just like Duesenberg, which survives as the phrase “a real doozy.”
The most likely explanation is that a lot of whites don't like immigrants but they care a lot more about money. They'll vote for short-term economic benefits rather than voting to stop immigration.Replies: @Tusk, @indocon
I don’t think anybody knows how politics up this country will change in times of scarcity when all everybody has seen in their lifetime is times of excess. One of the commentators here pointed out recently that he saw the hodgepodge America melting pretty well at his neighborhood Costco Food Court, that was an interesting example because it perfectly captures the time of excess, almost all the crap we buy from a place like Costco is where in excess of what we really need, including that food court.
It took 40 years to assimilate the Italians who are pretty close genetically to Englishmen. That included the Great Depression, WW2, and the wops getting beaten up regularly for acting foreign.
Our elites seem to think the Bengalis are the new Italians, Arabs are the new Poles and Indians are the new Jews (well I guess that one's correct). It's just not going to work and it never will. We could have WW3 but we would still never become one people in the melting pot, the way it happened back in the 1924-1965 period.Replies: @Audacious Epigone
Wrt whites, revealed preferences are key. Regardless of what they tell a pollster, anti-immigration parties routinely underpoll anti-immigration sentiment. This can be explained by the presence of "Bill Maher voters", or liberals that have politically incorrect opinions but still line up in the liberal column.
Read this
https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-rights-human-capital-problem/Replies: @dfordoom, @indocon
Yes and no. Independent restaurant owners are one of the most Republican leaning business groups, they also are one of the biggest employers of illegal labor. On the other hand owners of independent auto repair shops still continue to employ your neighborhood blokes. In general industries that are biggest employers of illegal labor – agriculture, construction, food, lodging, entertainment, are some of the most Republican leaning ones.
Hmmm…looks like the Hungarian Empire arises – mwahahahahaha!
Peace.
I can't imagine a worse combination than degenerate hedonism, neo-liberalism, Zionism, multiculturalism, and open borders. Which is what we currently have thanks to our liberal democracy.Replies: @Yahya K., @Talha
https://twitter.com/balazscseko/status/1244612142831198209
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sg14jNbBb-8
Peace.Replies: @Yahya K., @LoutishAngloQuebecker
This reminds me of a funny quote by the head of the German army Kurt von Hammerstein,* on the day Hitler was appointed Chancellor in January 31, 1933:
*Kurt von Hammerstein was a General from the old Prussian military aristocracy, and fiercely opposed to Hitler. Hitler removed him from his post after he took power. The quote is from a book called “The Silences of Hammerstein”. Highly recommend it, btw. Its one of my favorites. Von Hammerstein was a very admirable man.
https://twitter.com/balazscseko/status/1244612142831198209
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sg14jNbBb-8
Peace.Replies: @Yahya K., @LoutishAngloQuebecker
He’s doing a better job than our “rulers”, so why not?
I can’t imagine a worse combination than degenerate hedonism, neo-liberalism, Zionism, multiculturalism, and open borders. Which is what we currently have thanks to our liberal democracy.
I wonder if he no longer has to worry about tax incentives to spur on fertility rates and can simply order Hungarian women to have more kids? Hmmm...the possibilities are endless really.
"Old people past the age of 80 (or 75 with dementia) are a drain on the economy! They are henceforth ordered to turn them selves in for mandatory Sloyent Green processing! I, Victor Orban, command it!"
The one thing that did surprise me, to be honest, is that there was no sunset clause for a review of the situation and whether or not the bill should remain in force or be suspended. That seems shortsighted, but perhaps it was deliberately meant to be this way and they are basically dissolving their government.
Peace.Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker, @dfordoom
As long as people are fed they won’t riot – especially not the middle class Asian immigrants – including Indians, Bangladeshis, Burmese, etc. you are likely to find at a Costco. But yeah, thing will get ugly very fast once everyone’s tribalism kicks in. It really is an artificial creation – such differing people groups just aren’t meant to live together.
It took 40 years to assimilate the Italians who are pretty close genetically to Englishmen. That included the Great Depression, WW2, and the wops getting beaten up regularly for acting foreign.
Our elites seem to think the Bengalis are the new Italians, Arabs are the new Poles and Indians are the new Jews (well I guess that one’s correct). It’s just not going to work and it never will. We could have WW3 but we would still never become one people in the melting pot, the way it happened back in the 1924-1965 period.
Disasters happen. Pandemics happen. The measures being implemented to couner this one are largely identical with the ones used in 1918, the primary difference being that they are being implemeted earlier and in a more widespread and coordinated fashion.
If the economy in general and/or certain types of small businesses in particular are not capable of surviving events like this, are they really that strong? Are they really worth preserving?
Is it really worth worrying about hothouse plants that only survive when times are good?
“The American Dream”, once upon a time, referred to a very specific concept: it was the idea of having your own house and land and being largely self-sufficient on it. That’s what Thomas Jefferson had in mind – a nation of small farmers. That’s what the Homestead Act was all about. That’s what “40 acres and a mule” was all about. That’s why people flooded across the Atlantic: to carve out their own piece of a largely-virgin continent and be INDEPENDENT.
There is no natural right to derive one’s existence from prosperity and safety, and attempting to depend on such circumstances is foolish. People who make their livings from restaurants and similar luxury goods (and make no mistake, having someone else prepare your food for you is absolutely a luxury) – if it works, while it works, good for them; but if they fail to make contingency plans for failure modes, that’s their own damn fault.
Be antifragile.
My worry is that the entire international credit system is a hothouse plant and winter is coming.
I can't imagine a worse combination than degenerate hedonism, neo-liberalism, Zionism, multiculturalism, and open borders. Which is what we currently have thanks to our liberal democracy.Replies: @Yahya K., @Talha
-> He’s doing a better job than our “rulers”, so why not?
Why not? Because what he is doing is the literal definition of *Fascism*. And history tells us that Fascism is a horrible idea. And i’m not one of these people who throws this word around lightly. (No, Trump is not a fascist).
Even if you think what he is doing now is good, just wait until he gets intoxicated by absolute power.
* Definition of fascism:
Hungary is really in no position to do such a thing - they would honestly have difficulty in holding a corner of Somalia. So this may be a long-overdue experiment to see if a fascist government is successful in the long term as long as it doesn't try to go imperial and/or piss off all their neighbors.
I'm certainly interested to see how it plays out...far away, in Hungary.
Peace.Replies: @Yahya K.
Oh, does this mean the People's Democracy of North Korea is actually Fascist rather than Communist? It's risible.
Is this describing Saudi Arabia? Pakistan? Malaysia? Egypt? Some of the Emirates? Maybe Iran?
How about Singapore?
Oh, and what about China? Xi is now effectively "leader for life", that makes him a sort of elected Emperor. Is anyone calling China a "Fascist state"?
Step back a couple of generations, was Francoist Spain "Fascist"? On the one hand a terrible civil war in the 1930's, on the other hand no real participation in WWII and zero territorial ambitions.
Or maybe Peronist Argentina? No real territorial ambitions there, either. Both were authoritarian in the Spanish model that hankered back to older norms of a strong man in charge of a paternalistic government. Were those "Fascists" or something else? The leftards call them Nazi's of course, but the left is retarded and has been for decades.
Of course the term "Fascist" and "Fascism" have no meaning now, they were coined by Benito Mussolini about 100 years ago. Mussolini came from an International Socialist background, he was named after a President of Mexico, and he only broke with the Socialists over WW I. The social mileau of Italy in 1920 was unique and really has no comparable example 100 years later. None.
It's funny to see leftards still swinging that stick as if it means anything. 70 years ago George Orwell noticed it had lost all actual meaning, it had just become an epithet, a verbal stick to wave in the air. To a committed Leftard, almost everything is Fascism and almost everyone he doesn't like is a Fascist, including the illegal immigrant clerk at the convenience store who shorted him on a Big Gulp drink. Because leftards are retarded ignoramuses.
It is a lolcow now, the word "Fascism".
Might as well call PM Orban a "Bonapartist" or a "Khan" or a "Hun" or some other long-dead historical label.
Is it a wise course? Eastern Europe has for the last 1,000 years or so tended to be more authoritarian than German free cities, Helvetican mountaineers, etc. Perhaps this is just a reversion to the prior working model, as can also be seen in Byelorus and Russia. Will it work for them? Who knows?
Only time will reveal if this was a good idea or not. I'm certainly not about to tell Hungarians what they ought to do, as I have zero skin in their game.
It will be worth watching the Visegrad group and neighbors in this crisis as well as places like Finland to see if those older ways work better or are well past their staledate
We can babble all we want in comboxes, we are like children chalking the sidewalk or dogs barking at a procession of automobiles. Orban is responsible for a nation, and he's assumed a whole lot of authority now for that nation . He will be judged in part on the results. Frankly I do not envy his position.Replies: @dfordoom
I can't imagine a worse combination than degenerate hedonism, neo-liberalism, Zionism, multiculturalism, and open borders. Which is what we currently have thanks to our liberal democracy.Replies: @Yahya K., @Talha
Hey man, I don’t ever plan to live in Hungary (or likely travel through there) and it was voted in by their own super-majority, which basically supports my view that literally anything can be done in a democracy if you have enough votes – even dissolving that very democracy (I mean, just like you can decide to buy a shotgun and point it into your mouth and decorate your ceiling with your brains…all of your own volition). No harm, no foul as far as I’m concerned; I don’t particularly care if they do that or declare the month of May to be “Transvestite Appreciation Day” or look to North Korea for inspiration.
I wonder if he no longer has to worry about tax incentives to spur on fertility rates and can simply order Hungarian women to have more kids? Hmmm…the possibilities are endless really.
“Old people past the age of 80 (or 75 with dementia) are a drain on the economy! They are henceforth ordered to turn them selves in for mandatory Sloyent Green processing! I, Victor Orban, command it!”
The one thing that did surprise me, to be honest, is that there was no sunset clause for a review of the situation and whether or not the bill should remain in force or be suspended. That seems shortsighted, but perhaps it was deliberately meant to be this way and they are basically dissolving their government.
Peace.
He's really playing into the hands of those who already want to target him as a dangerous fascist who needs to be removed. One hopes he is wise enough to make this a very short-term measure. Very short-term indeed.Replies: @Talha
The issue is that most fascist governments get all uppity and stupid and do the whole “We will expand beyond our borders in the name of awesomeness!!!” and then end up getting curb-stomped by a coalition of everyone they have pissed off.
Hungary is really in no position to do such a thing – they would honestly have difficulty in holding a corner of Somalia. So this may be a long-overdue experiment to see if a fascist government is successful in the long term as long as it doesn’t try to go imperial and/or piss off all their neighbors.
I’m certainly interested to see how it plays out…far away, in Hungary.
Peace.
Hungary is really in no position to do such a thing - they would honestly have difficulty in holding a corner of Somalia. So this may be a long-overdue experiment to see if a fascist government is successful in the long term as long as it doesn't try to go imperial and/or piss off all their neighbors.
I'm certainly interested to see how it plays out...far away, in Hungary.
Peace.Replies: @Yahya K.
-> The issue is that most fascist governments get all uppity and stupid and do the whole “We will expand beyond our borders in the name of awesomeness!!!”… Hungary is really in no position to do such a thing – they would honestly have difficulty in holding a corner of Somalia.
Talha, I agree with much of what you said above. But fascism doesn’t necessarily entail violence against outsiders only. It can be against insiders too. Jews in Germany, Uighurs in China, Roma in Hungary… (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hungary-extremists-idUSKCN1SR2DQ). Ideologies are also very infectious, they can and do spread around the world easily.
-> I’m certainly interested to see how it plays out…far away, in Hungary.
In “The Silences Of Hammerstein”, one of the themes was the ambivalent stance many in the German government took towards Hitler before his rise. Even if they opposed him, they thought he could be reined in. Some even thought Hitler would be beneficial to the German economy and the national spirit (which he sort of was). So they took a ‘wait-and-see’ approach, and passed up many opportunities to prevent his rise.
Lesson: Take a strong stance against fascism early on. Moral ambiguity is not good.
Read “The Silences Of Hammerstein”. It really is a great book.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmyJ1RVfnPETotally 100% agree with you, bro - I'm sold, with you all the way; I don't like fascism. But I'm also simply going to watch what happens in Hungary - because, whatever happens, they asked for it:
https://media.giphy.com/media/128UMaujdjX7Pi/giphy.gif
Wa salaam.
People should have foreseen the prosperity was artificial and would end in a recession and planned accordingly. If they didn’t, they shouldn’t be bailed out by the government. I don’t think anyone could foresee that the government would forcibly shut businesses down for an extended period of time. The Constitution has a takings clause that the government can’t take something from someone without making it up to them in some way. Would something like shutting down a business fall under this category?
Leaving aside the issue of whether the government should have done this, if the decision is made this has to be done to benefit society as a whole then shouldn’t society as a whole pay the costs rather than having all the costs fall on one group? It might be hard to tell the difference between something like a restaurant that would have failed in the next recession and a restaurant that would have survived the next recession but can’t survive a lengthy government shutdown but we should try to do so, while being cautious not to overdo it as appears to have happened after the last two crashes that just created the future conditions for this crash.
The trouble with your logic is that "society" didn't make the decision. It was made by morally retarded politicians at the behest of a depraved control freak elite who want to control everyone so, no, society shouldn't have to pay the costs. This shit was done TO society, not BY society.
Ordinary working people, one segment of society, are being ruined by the actions of politicians, but society as a whole isn't the offender. The idea that the current power grab is being done " to benefit society as a whole", or that it had to be done is pretty weak.
Ok enjoy your freedumbs. You can slave away earning your 30 sheckels.
I wonder if he no longer has to worry about tax incentives to spur on fertility rates and can simply order Hungarian women to have more kids? Hmmm...the possibilities are endless really.
"Old people past the age of 80 (or 75 with dementia) are a drain on the economy! They are henceforth ordered to turn them selves in for mandatory Sloyent Green processing! I, Victor Orban, command it!"
The one thing that did surprise me, to be honest, is that there was no sunset clause for a review of the situation and whether or not the bill should remain in force or be suspended. That seems shortsighted, but perhaps it was deliberately meant to be this way and they are basically dissolving their government.
Peace.Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker, @dfordoom
Fertility rate has improved under him. From 1.25 to 1.51 last year. But the real promising statistic is the number of marriages. From the Hungarian Central Statistical Office for 2019 data:
2020 is off to an even better start:
We’ll have to watch. Russia, Belarus, and Poland all saw a temporary increase in fertility rates but are now going down again. Hungary seems to be taking a smart, eugenic approach (women with 4 children pay no taxes), and is promoting a wholesome culture rather than just throwing money around. Let’s see what happens.
Peace.
If the economy in general and/or certain types of small businesses in particular are not capable of surviving events like this, are they really that strong? Are they really worth preserving?
Is it really worth worrying about hothouse plants that only survive when times are good?
"The American Dream", once upon a time, referred to a very specific concept: it was the idea of having your own house and land and being largely self-sufficient on it. That's what Thomas Jefferson had in mind - a nation of small farmers. That's what the Homestead Act was all about. That's what "40 acres and a mule" was all about. That's why people flooded across the Atlantic: to carve out their own piece of a largely-virgin continent and be INDEPENDENT.
There is no natural right to derive one's existence from prosperity and safety, and attempting to depend on such circumstances is foolish. People who make their livings from restaurants and similar luxury goods (and make no mistake, having someone else prepare your food for you is absolutely a luxury) - if it works, while it works, good for them; but if they fail to make contingency plans for failure modes, that's their own damn fault.
Be antifragile.Replies: @dfordoom, @Audacious Epigone
Which was a viable dream two hundred years ago. But you can’t run a modern society that way. You can’t run a nation of 320 million people that way. It’s a ludicrously outdated dream.
I wonder if he no longer has to worry about tax incentives to spur on fertility rates and can simply order Hungarian women to have more kids? Hmmm...the possibilities are endless really.
"Old people past the age of 80 (or 75 with dementia) are a drain on the economy! They are henceforth ordered to turn them selves in for mandatory Sloyent Green processing! I, Victor Orban, command it!"
The one thing that did surprise me, to be honest, is that there was no sunset clause for a review of the situation and whether or not the bill should remain in force or be suspended. That seems shortsighted, but perhaps it was deliberately meant to be this way and they are basically dissolving their government.
Peace.Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker, @dfordoom
One has to wonder if it’s smart to turn himself into a dictator. Which is what this amounts to – it’s the original Roman concept of dealing with a short-term crisis – appoint a dictator with virtually unlimited powers to deal with the crisis. It worked in the early days. Dictators would dutifully step down after six months or so. It worked until it stopped working, and then Rome got a century of civil wars and the Republic collapsed.
He’s really playing into the hands of those who already want to target him as a dangerous fascist who needs to be removed. One hopes he is wise enough to make this a very short-term measure. Very short-term indeed.
https://foreignpolicy.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/mussolini_e_petacci_a_piazzale_loreto_1945.jpgNo clue...Peace.Replies: @songbird
I get it, but they voted for that stuff transparently and openly – not my business. If they voted to overwhelmingly eat their own grandparents, I could well say; “maybe that’s not such a good idea guys”. But ultimately are they going to listen to a muzzie? No – so more than likely my advice is along the lines of:
Totally 100% agree with you, bro – I’m sold, with you all the way; I don’t like fascism. But I’m also simply going to watch what happens in Hungary – because, whatever happens, they asked for it:
Wa salaam.
He's really playing into the hands of those who already want to target him as a dangerous fascist who needs to be removed. One hopes he is wise enough to make this a very short-term measure. Very short-term indeed.Replies: @Talha
Your comment is exactly why I find this all so interesting. It’s an experiment from so many angles. I have no clue which way it may turn out. It could literally be that he does so well and the people are so grateful that they (have an collective Orbasm and) elect to make him the founder of the Orban Dynasty, supreme ruler of Hungary.
Or…it could eventually end up like this:
No clue…
Peace.
I don't often watch the show, but I thought I'd watch the segment.
Anyway, I thought it was pretty funny because they kept trying to make his party seem evil, but when they interviewed some member of his party, despite their editing, he seemed pretty articulate and came across as supporting fairly rational policies.
Amusingly enough, one of the things they really hated about Orban was that he wasn't subsidizing gay couples.Replies: @Talha, @dfordoom, @Sgt. Joe Friday
Very interesting…thanks for the stats. I certainly hope they are able to turn that TFR ship around, so good for them. Just another reason why this is all so fascinating to watch.
Peace.
There won’t be a rush to liquidate for at least 3 months. For now, all businesses have debtor’s leverage.
Simon Group announced the rent is still due. But are they going to kick out Cheesecake Factory? And replace them with exactly who?
Bankruptcy is a slow process, and no one is going to rush to foreclose on anyone in the chain. Landlords will waiters long as possible. Banks will wait. Regulators will slow walk it.
The early BK’s/Liquidations will be strategic defaults.
And exactly how are gig economy workers all that worse off?
PS…change your vehicle usage on your auto insurance to 0 commuting milage.
My first encounter with them was when someone gave me a gift card many years ago, and after one year from purchase, they started taking fees from it every month.
An acquaintance worked for them in some mall that they had just bought, and he said that the people there used to get an hour paid-lunch break before they bought it, but after, it was down to like 15 minutes, and I think unpaid.
https://foreignpolicy.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/mussolini_e_petacci_a_piazzale_loreto_1945.jpgNo clue...Peace.Replies: @songbird
60 Minutes ran a segment on Orban – I think it was a week before this past Sunday. You can probably guess the ethnic identity of the people behind it.
I don’t often watch the show, but I thought I’d watch the segment.
Anyway, I thought it was pretty funny because they kept trying to make his party seem evil, but when they interviewed some member of his party, despite their editing, he seemed pretty articulate and came across as supporting fairly rational policies.
Amusingly enough, one of the things they really hated about Orban was that he wasn’t subsidizing gay couples.
I don't often watch the show, but I thought I'd watch the segment.
Anyway, I thought it was pretty funny because they kept trying to make his party seem evil, but when they interviewed some member of his party, despite their editing, he seemed pretty articulate and came across as supporting fairly rational policies.
Amusingly enough, one of the things they really hated about Orban was that he wasn't subsidizing gay couples.Replies: @Talha, @dfordoom, @Sgt. Joe Friday
I agree, he seems to be what one would imagine as a “Hungary first” politician/leader. Now obviously if you don’t like that sort of thing…
Now, as some people have pointed out, it simply remains to be seen if he stays in the “fairly rational” category or slowly starts going down the path of the Caligula category. Again, I have no clue or prediction I am willing to bet on.
What?! WHAT?! I cannot believe this! Don’t they know how much gay couples contribute to a country’s fertility rate?!
Peace.
Simon Group announced the rent is still due. But are they going to kick out Cheesecake Factory? And replace them with exactly who?
Bankruptcy is a slow process, and no one is going to rush to foreclose on anyone in the chain. Landlords will waiters long as possible. Banks will wait. Regulators will slow walk it.
The early BK's/Liquidations will be strategic defaults.
And exactly how are gig economy workers all that worse off?
PS...change your vehicle usage on your auto insurance to 0 commuting milage.Replies: @songbird
I really hate Simon Group.
My first encounter with them was when someone gave me a gift card many years ago, and after one year from purchase, they started taking fees from it every month.
An acquaintance worked for them in some mall that they had just bought, and he said that the people there used to get an hour paid-lunch break before they bought it, but after, it was down to like 15 minutes, and I think unpaid.
It is a wonder that they didn’t bring up trannies.
Peace.
You only have so much time – it’s called 60 minutes. Maybe they’ll do a follow up.
Peace.
The major governments of the Western World and their oligarch classes have consistently waged war on small and medium sized business for quite some time already. Governments hate them because it is hard to collect taxes (include the withheld workers’ income taxes) from so many and harder still to impose unfunded mandates upon them. Oligarchs simply hate the competition. This Woke Crisis is indeed a windfall for them.
I don't often watch the show, but I thought I'd watch the segment.
Anyway, I thought it was pretty funny because they kept trying to make his party seem evil, but when they interviewed some member of his party, despite their editing, he seemed pretty articulate and came across as supporting fairly rational policies.
Amusingly enough, one of the things they really hated about Orban was that he wasn't subsidizing gay couples.Replies: @Talha, @dfordoom, @Sgt. Joe Friday
Proof positive that he’s an evil Nazi fascist hater!
If someone truly deserves disapprobation, then referencing their own name and actions should suffice. To reference someone else's name or actions is to engage in a pop culture version of history. It is inevitably superficial and devoid of moral content.
If one cloned Hitler, like in The Boys from Brazil, the clone wouldn't even be Hitler - and I say that as a hereditarian. There are two many different factors at play. Make the real Hitler come to power ten years after he did in our history, and things likely would have unfolded very differently. There really isn't any rational point in invoking his name nearly 90 years later, after he rose to power, as if he could arise now, and 1001 things would not change the situation, including ballistic nuclear weapons.
It's actually worse than invoking the threat of a Mongol invasion because Mongolians are still good riders, still venerate Genghis and have a 131-foot (40 m) tall statue of him on a horse. I don't know if anyone noticed, but Germany is super-cucked and self-hating, and many of its men are effeminate. Not at all like Mongolians.Replies: @nebulafox, @dfordoom
Does an amoeba die when it splits in two? I guess you think so.
After all, Standard Oil died and no trace of it remains. Just like Duesenberg, which survives as the phrase "a real doozy."Replies: @Twinkie
Sounds like death to me.
It's an interesting question what death is. When I die, I expect all the tissues of my body with my unique DNA to also die. I don't expect any organ donation, and I'd be surprised to see, say, my hand go on living as a separate entity from the rest of me. If I do donate organs am I not dead until the organs themselves die? I guess under my definition with Mitsubishi, yes.
Thanks for the thought-provoking comment.Replies: @Twinkie
There are some number of authoritarian, ultranationalist governments characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of both the society and the economy.
Oh, does this mean the People’s Democracy of North Korea is actually Fascist rather than Communist? It’s risible.
Is this describing Saudi Arabia? Pakistan? Malaysia? Egypt? Some of the Emirates? Maybe Iran?
How about Singapore?
Oh, and what about China? Xi is now effectively “leader for life”, that makes him a sort of elected Emperor. Is anyone calling China a “Fascist state”?
Step back a couple of generations, was Francoist Spain “Fascist”? On the one hand a terrible civil war in the 1930’s, on the other hand no real participation in WWII and zero territorial ambitions.
Or maybe Peronist Argentina? No real territorial ambitions there, either. Both were authoritarian in the Spanish model that hankered back to older norms of a strong man in charge of a paternalistic government. Were those “Fascists” or something else? The leftards call them Nazi’s of course, but the left is retarded and has been for decades.
Of course the term “Fascist” and “Fascism” have no meaning now, they were coined by Benito Mussolini about 100 years ago. Mussolini came from an International Socialist background, he was named after a President of Mexico, and he only broke with the Socialists over WW I. The social mileau of Italy in 1920 was unique and really has no comparable example 100 years later. None.
It’s funny to see leftards still swinging that stick as if it means anything. 70 years ago George Orwell noticed it had lost all actual meaning, it had just become an epithet, a verbal stick to wave in the air. To a committed Leftard, almost everything is Fascism and almost everyone he doesn’t like is a Fascist, including the illegal immigrant clerk at the convenience store who shorted him on a Big Gulp drink. Because leftards are retarded ignoramuses.
It is a lolcow now, the word “Fascism”.
Might as well call PM Orban a “Bonapartist” or a “Khan” or a “Hun” or some other long-dead historical label.
Is it a wise course? Eastern Europe has for the last 1,000 years or so tended to be more authoritarian than German free cities, Helvetican mountaineers, etc. Perhaps this is just a reversion to the prior working model, as can also be seen in Byelorus and Russia. Will it work for them? Who knows?
Only time will reveal if this was a good idea or not. I’m certainly not about to tell Hungarians what they ought to do, as I have zero skin in their game.
It will be worth watching the Visegrad group and neighbors in this crisis as well as places like Finland to see if those older ways work better or are well past their staledate
We can babble all we want in comboxes, we are like children chalking the sidewalk or dogs barking at a procession of automobiles. Orban is responsible for a nation, and he’s assumed a whole lot of authority now for that nation . He will be judged in part on the results. Frankly I do not envy his position.
Most of the words we use to describe political positions no longer have any real meaning except as insults or virtue-signalling. They have become moral labels rather than political descriptors.
To people who consider themselves liberals the word liberal means "people who agree with me" while "people who disagree with me" are fascists, Nazis or conservatives or far right.
To people who consider themselves conservatives the word conservative means "people who agree with me" while "people who disagree with me" are communists.Replies: @anon
I don't often watch the show, but I thought I'd watch the segment.
Anyway, I thought it was pretty funny because they kept trying to make his party seem evil, but when they interviewed some member of his party, despite their editing, he seemed pretty articulate and came across as supporting fairly rational policies.
Amusingly enough, one of the things they really hated about Orban was that he wasn't subsidizing gay couples.Replies: @Talha, @dfordoom, @Sgt. Joe Friday
Yeah, I saw the hit piece 60 Minutes ran. In a sane world, that segment would have never made it to the air, because Hungary is a small, relatively insignificant country that is far away, and is best known to people over a certain age for the Gabor sisters, and not much else. What the Hungarians do is their business, not ours or anyone else’s. That’s why borders are such a great idea: they allow various groups of people to organize their countries in ways that make sense to them, not someone else.
I know you are jesting, but if I could propose a few short, serious reforms of grammar, it would be to ban both the word “Nazi” and the word “fascist” for everything other than direct historical references. “Nazi” for “Nazi Germany”, and “fascist” for “Italy under Mussolini.” I would also ban calling people Hitler.
If someone truly deserves disapprobation, then referencing their own name and actions should suffice. To reference someone else’s name or actions is to engage in a pop culture version of history. It is inevitably superficial and devoid of moral content.
If one cloned Hitler, like in The Boys from Brazil, the clone wouldn’t even be Hitler – and I say that as a hereditarian. There are two many different factors at play. Make the real Hitler come to power ten years after he did in our history, and things likely would have unfolded very differently. There really isn’t any rational point in invoking his name nearly 90 years later, after he rose to power, as if he could arise now, and 1001 things would not change the situation, including ballistic nuclear weapons.
It’s actually worse than invoking the threat of a Mongol invasion because Mongolians are still good riders, still venerate Genghis and have a 131-foot (40 m) tall statue of him on a horse. I don’t know if anyone noticed, but Germany is super-cucked and self-hating, and many of its men are effeminate. Not at all like Mongolians.
We need new political terminologies. Trump is not a conservative. He's a Trumpist. Bernie Sanders is not a communist. He's a Sanderista. Macron is a Macronista. Putin is not Hitler nor is he Stalin. He's a Putinista. The Chinese Communist Party is not communist, it is a Dengist party.Replies: @songbird
America hit hard by the corona virus.
Much, much worse is uptick in support for Trump.
Completely concur. It was almost like satire.
One way I think of it is this: Hungary’s population is about 10 million. In what other region of the world would the media run a hit piece on a country of 10 million and invoke shades of the Nazis?
Truth be told I have trouble thinking of similar sized countries, outside of Portugal. With some hard thinking: UAE, Belarus, and Jordan. Imagine if they ran a similar piece on one of them! Or, heaven forbid – a country with pre-existing extreme ethnic conflict, like Israel! It’s absolutely insane; they’d NEVER do it.
Mainstream Republicans voted for him because he was running as a Republican.
There's no evidence that immigration was a major issue for most voters.They could vote for One Nation, which is an anti-immigration party. But they don't. Which proves that they're not very concerned about immigration.The most reliable data is election results and that data clearly indicates that most whites in Australia don't care very much about immigration one way or another, because they refuse to vote for explicitly anti-immigration parties.I'm not arguing that white people love immigration. I'm arguing that they really don't care. They're more interested in their own short-term financial advantage. Election results clearly demonstrate that immigration is a minor political issue. Because we do have a well-publicised high-profile anti-immigration party and they won't vote for it.
Seems like overwhelming evidence to me.Replies: @Tusk
Imagine actually saying this. Despite the Liberal party being intensely anti-immigration in the form of boat people, and them receving a lot of support for their policies, nobody cares? I’m not sure what world you live in but it’s certainly not the real one.
So once again everything you say is just your opinion and backed up by nothing.
Being uncharitable, the same could of course be said about the working classes in general. I don’t think it’s productive to go after either in such a way. Keep your eye on the real power.
I wish! He’s a true polymath when an incredibly lucid mind, but I’m honored by the comparison.
In some cases, yes. In other cases, no.
"The corporate HR departments of McDonald’s and Goodyear, in contrast, proudly support refugee resettlement in the apartment complex down the road and drag queen story hour at the local library."
That is hyperbole and an overgeneralization, all wrapped up neatly in a bow.Replies: @Sgt. Joe Friday, @216, @Audacious Epigone
Polling consistently shows majorities of Americans opposing current levels of refugee resettlement and I suspect the drag queen story time doesn’t have a lot of popular support. Surely you can find a few Fortune 500 companies who oppose these things, then? Thanks in advance.
Maybe his casket will be John Deere Green.Replies: @Audacious Epigone
And not even on a hot summer night.
First concert I ever attended.
Were you a pickup man?
God Bless the USA.Replies: @Audacious Epigone, @Twinkie
No severance?
AE is A. Karlin's sockpuppet.Replies: @Audacious Epigone
He, like Twinkie, is good with a blade. I have a strong self-preservation instinct.
History tells us the past, not the now. What failed 50 years ago might not fail now because things are different. History tells us Joe Biden is a failure at running for president but here he is having another go at it, times changes, conditions change, and what is good changes. There’s a good chance in a post-scarcity world with 100% renewable energy sources and automated labour a lot of political theories that were once worthless could be useful, and theories that were useful are now useless.
But also as G.K Chesterson says “Just because something has failed doesn’t mean it is a failure.” If you fail to ride a bike the first time you don’t go on believing that bike riding itself is a failure, you simply failed in your attempt at it. If you’re building a house and it collapses, it’s not the idea of houses that is wrong, but your enaction of the theory.
Fascism has many types and isn’t just what this dumb definition claims it to be. H. R. Morgan’s Codex Fascismo is a good starting point. National-Socialism isn’t fascism. Peronism isn’t fascism. Francoism isn’t fascism. These are often labelled fascism but they’re not. Thinking on left-right spectrum is incredibly flawed.
We already live in authoritarian nanny states where flying the ISIS flag is permitted by wearing the Union Jack to the pub is banned.
Noooooooooooo how dare you support your ethnic nation group ahhhh you have to become cosmpolitan liberals who advocate for foreigners or you’re RACIST.
Implying nationalism is bad is like implying caring for your family is bad. Perhaps if you’re a globalist cosmpolitan sympathiser that has no roots you should abandon your family and support random others because that is what you’re essentially advicating, and what not supporting nationalism is like.
Is this like when you get banned from social media, have your bank account closed, lose your job because of your political views? We are living in a very liberal democratic world and yet these defining “far-right fascist” elements are present today. But I suppose having police come and arrest you for misgendering someone online is tolerance.
We should destroy all order and relationships because that’s GOOD! Anyone against economic or social order, in my eyes, is like a child who wants ice-cream for breakfast and lashes out when Dad won’t let them. Man is defined by their limits not their excesses.
This is as silly as comparing a wall along the US-Mexican border with the Berlin wall. Superficially similar, but serving very different purposes. There is nothing expansionary or imperialistic about Orban’s ambitions. He threatens no one other than, potentially, Hungarians, but they keep electing him so that’s their business.
It took 40 years to assimilate the Italians who are pretty close genetically to Englishmen. That included the Great Depression, WW2, and the wops getting beaten up regularly for acting foreign.
Our elites seem to think the Bengalis are the new Italians, Arabs are the new Poles and Indians are the new Jews (well I guess that one's correct). It's just not going to work and it never will. We could have WW3 but we would still never become one people in the melting pot, the way it happened back in the 1924-1965 period.Replies: @Audacious Epigone
They can get along well enough as long as the buffet line is full. People stand in line with their own kind, exchange pleasantries with one another, occasionally get into squabbles but nothing that can be worked out.
When the buffet line starts to run empty, though, is when things go from mildly standoffish to weary to aggressive to violent, fast.
If the economy in general and/or certain types of small businesses in particular are not capable of surviving events like this, are they really that strong? Are they really worth preserving?
Is it really worth worrying about hothouse plants that only survive when times are good?
"The American Dream", once upon a time, referred to a very specific concept: it was the idea of having your own house and land and being largely self-sufficient on it. That's what Thomas Jefferson had in mind - a nation of small farmers. That's what the Homestead Act was all about. That's what "40 acres and a mule" was all about. That's why people flooded across the Atlantic: to carve out their own piece of a largely-virgin continent and be INDEPENDENT.
There is no natural right to derive one's existence from prosperity and safety, and attempting to depend on such circumstances is foolish. People who make their livings from restaurants and similar luxury goods (and make no mistake, having someone else prepare your food for you is absolutely a luxury) - if it works, while it works, good for them; but if they fail to make contingency plans for failure modes, that's their own damn fault.
Be antifragile.Replies: @dfordoom, @Audacious Epigone
Is it really worth worrying about hothouse plants that only survive when times are good?
My worry is that the entire international credit system is a hothouse plant and winter is coming.
What’s happening in Western Europe is a far more sinister violation of human rights than anything that Orban is doing.
Anyway, I always advocate that people should use their local cultural examples, when trying to make a moral-historical point, or cast aspersions on other regions. So, for example, if a person was of the Muslim persuasion, they shouldn’t talk about the Nazis, but about the New Turks, or what happened in Pakistan, after the split. Or some other example, like the Sudan. Or what happened to the local Jews in Arabia.
Honestly, I think that just improves the level of the conversation. Otherwise, it is like someone wanting to score double points off you, and for what purpose? Not for your benefit, surely! At least, it’s hard to believe that it is meant for your benefit. But, if they were willing to injure their own side, then at least one couldn’t accuse them of personal bias, whatever other flaws that style of argument might have.
Another good example was from Steve I think who wrote on the fact that Indians in America voted for left policies, whereas Indians in India voted for Modi. Of course what's good for Indians at home at the expensive of minority populations wouldn't be good if Whites were to treat them the same way. But groups shouldn't be dismissive of leaders who are bad for them when they have nothing in common with that leader. Illegal immigrants have no right to dislike or criticise Trump when they're not even American. It has nothing to do with them.
Hmmmm…where’s that Insufferable Prick tag when I need it?
Definitely a more cognizant way to argue. I think a good example would of course be Hitler. Lots of people use him as an example of how bad it would be to live under an authoritarian government, but that’s only their perception of it based on who they are. Of course to Jews living under Hitler was horrible but at the same time Jews vote for people like Netanyahu who may be like a Hitler to the Palestinians. But to many Germans it was a good thing so it’s hardly fair to presume your subjective opinion on what a foreign people think of their leaders.
Another good example was from Steve I think who wrote on the fact that Indians in America voted for left policies, whereas Indians in India voted for Modi. Of course what’s good for Indians at home at the expensive of minority populations wouldn’t be good if Whites were to treat them the same way. But groups shouldn’t be dismissive of leaders who are bad for them when they have nothing in common with that leader. Illegal immigrants have no right to dislike or criticise Trump when they’re not even American. It has nothing to do with them.
“Leaving aside the issue of whether the government should have done this, if the decision is made this has to be done to benefit society as a whole then shouldn’t society as a whole pay the costs rather than having all the costs fall on one group?”
The trouble with your logic is that “society” didn’t make the decision. It was made by morally retarded politicians at the behest of a depraved control freak elite who want to control everyone so, no, society shouldn’t have to pay the costs. This shit was done TO society, not BY society.
Ordinary working people, one segment of society, are being ruined by the actions of politicians, but society as a whole isn’t the offender. The idea that the current power grab is being done ” to benefit society as a whole”, or that it had to be done is pretty weak.
But I’m more likable, no? 😉
Whoops, meant to write “Young Turks”, not “New Turks.”
If someone truly deserves disapprobation, then referencing their own name and actions should suffice. To reference someone else's name or actions is to engage in a pop culture version of history. It is inevitably superficial and devoid of moral content.
If one cloned Hitler, like in The Boys from Brazil, the clone wouldn't even be Hitler - and I say that as a hereditarian. There are two many different factors at play. Make the real Hitler come to power ten years after he did in our history, and things likely would have unfolded very differently. There really isn't any rational point in invoking his name nearly 90 years later, after he rose to power, as if he could arise now, and 1001 things would not change the situation, including ballistic nuclear weapons.
It's actually worse than invoking the threat of a Mongol invasion because Mongolians are still good riders, still venerate Genghis and have a 131-foot (40 m) tall statue of him on a horse. I don't know if anyone noticed, but Germany is super-cucked and self-hating, and many of its men are effeminate. Not at all like Mongolians.Replies: @nebulafox, @dfordoom
>If one cloned Hitler, like in The Boys from Brazil, the clone wouldn’t even be Hitler – and I say that as a hereditarian.
The reason Hitler’s personality is interesting to study is he basically seemed to embody the time period that gave birth to him, but with heightened sensitivity and sharpness. So, speaking broadly, the notion of a “new Hitler” makes no sense at all. Nazism isn’t just dead, it just doesn’t translate to the 21st Century. Even in neo-Nazi circles: Hitler planned genocide on a massive scale for tens of millions of Slavs while holding Muslim and East Asian cultures in a certain degree of respect. It simply doesn’t translate.
No. A historical singularity in the 21st Century is going to embody *his* time period instead. Look at the times, look at the context, then look for the individual where history is condensing himself into.
The parts of the company, like the segments of the amoeba, lived on to this day. Though my father STILL won’t ride in a Mitsubishi car because they made the Zero.
It’s an interesting question what death is. When I die, I expect all the tissues of my body with my unique DNA to also die. I don’t expect any organ donation, and I’d be surprised to see, say, my hand go on living as a separate entity from the rest of me. If I do donate organs am I not dead until the organs themselves die? I guess under my definition with Mitsubishi, yes.
Thanks for the thought-provoking comment.
My favorite watch company, Stowa of Germany, was destroyed when its factory in Pforzheim was bombed in 1945. It was revived and its current iteration has been going strong under new ownership and factory for about 10-20 years.
Contrary to Romney, corporations are not people - they are not even any kind of a life form.
Oh, does this mean the People's Democracy of North Korea is actually Fascist rather than Communist? It's risible.
Is this describing Saudi Arabia? Pakistan? Malaysia? Egypt? Some of the Emirates? Maybe Iran?
How about Singapore?
Oh, and what about China? Xi is now effectively "leader for life", that makes him a sort of elected Emperor. Is anyone calling China a "Fascist state"?
Step back a couple of generations, was Francoist Spain "Fascist"? On the one hand a terrible civil war in the 1930's, on the other hand no real participation in WWII and zero territorial ambitions.
Or maybe Peronist Argentina? No real territorial ambitions there, either. Both were authoritarian in the Spanish model that hankered back to older norms of a strong man in charge of a paternalistic government. Were those "Fascists" or something else? The leftards call them Nazi's of course, but the left is retarded and has been for decades.
Of course the term "Fascist" and "Fascism" have no meaning now, they were coined by Benito Mussolini about 100 years ago. Mussolini came from an International Socialist background, he was named after a President of Mexico, and he only broke with the Socialists over WW I. The social mileau of Italy in 1920 was unique and really has no comparable example 100 years later. None.
It's funny to see leftards still swinging that stick as if it means anything. 70 years ago George Orwell noticed it had lost all actual meaning, it had just become an epithet, a verbal stick to wave in the air. To a committed Leftard, almost everything is Fascism and almost everyone he doesn't like is a Fascist, including the illegal immigrant clerk at the convenience store who shorted him on a Big Gulp drink. Because leftards are retarded ignoramuses.
It is a lolcow now, the word "Fascism".
Might as well call PM Orban a "Bonapartist" or a "Khan" or a "Hun" or some other long-dead historical label.
Is it a wise course? Eastern Europe has for the last 1,000 years or so tended to be more authoritarian than German free cities, Helvetican mountaineers, etc. Perhaps this is just a reversion to the prior working model, as can also be seen in Byelorus and Russia. Will it work for them? Who knows?
Only time will reveal if this was a good idea or not. I'm certainly not about to tell Hungarians what they ought to do, as I have zero skin in their game.
It will be worth watching the Visegrad group and neighbors in this crisis as well as places like Finland to see if those older ways work better or are well past their staledate
We can babble all we want in comboxes, we are like children chalking the sidewalk or dogs barking at a procession of automobiles. Orban is responsible for a nation, and he's assumed a whole lot of authority now for that nation . He will be judged in part on the results. Frankly I do not envy his position.Replies: @dfordoom
True, and to many committed Rightards everyone he doesn’t like is a communist.
Most of the words we use to describe political positions no longer have any real meaning except as insults or virtue-signalling. They have become moral labels rather than political descriptors.
To people who consider themselves liberals the word liberal means “people who agree with me” while “people who disagree with me” are fascists, Nazis or conservatives or far right.
To people who consider themselves conservatives the word conservative means “people who agree with me” while “people who disagree with me” are communists.
Point to some examples in real life, cobber. Either in Oz or Murka. Both if you wanna.
From the Current Year, please, not some old 1970's stuff. Meanwhile in the US it's easy to find Bernie Bros mooing "Fash-ist" mixed with their fantasies of being in firing squads, as well as Antifa morons ready to "Bash the Fash" in the streets of Portland and Seattle and DC. Neither group has any clue who Mussolini was. Plus, US Antifa doing their cosplay look like a cross between Mussolini's Blackshirts and the Ku Klux Klan. Two orgs that had "progressive" support at times, too. lol.But they are ready to beat on "Nazis" and "The Fash", oh, yeah. lol.Modern political terms are like 80 years out of date and mean nothing except "our team good, your team sux". Let's blame it on the Boomers!
If someone truly deserves disapprobation, then referencing their own name and actions should suffice. To reference someone else's name or actions is to engage in a pop culture version of history. It is inevitably superficial and devoid of moral content.
If one cloned Hitler, like in The Boys from Brazil, the clone wouldn't even be Hitler - and I say that as a hereditarian. There are two many different factors at play. Make the real Hitler come to power ten years after he did in our history, and things likely would have unfolded very differently. There really isn't any rational point in invoking his name nearly 90 years later, after he rose to power, as if he could arise now, and 1001 things would not change the situation, including ballistic nuclear weapons.
It's actually worse than invoking the threat of a Mongol invasion because Mongolians are still good riders, still venerate Genghis and have a 131-foot (40 m) tall statue of him on a horse. I don't know if anyone noticed, but Germany is super-cucked and self-hating, and many of its men are effeminate. Not at all like Mongolians.Replies: @nebulafox, @dfordoom
I totally agree. I’d also ban the word “communist” since communism as such is a political movement that also no longer exists. I’d ban the word “conservative” since there are no conservatives these days. Modern “conservatives” are just liberals who hate paying their taxes. But the word “liberal” also has little meaning outside the context of 19th century classical liberalism. 19th century classical liberals would not consider most modern self-described liberals as liberals.
We need new political terminologies. Trump is not a conservative. He’s a Trumpist. Bernie Sanders is not a communist. He’s a Sanderista. Macron is a Macronista. Putin is not Hitler nor is he Stalin. He’s a Putinista. The Chinese Communist Party is not communist, it is a Dengist party.
For instance, that communism isn't really defined accurately by the traditional definition. That we need to adjust our definitions for the long-term trends; the greater span of history, not the short term interval. Capitalism and communism aren't so much economic systems as they are power systems, and just like the communist party is still in charge in China, the root power systems that exist in the US, are basically unchanged, even as our politics have rapidly shifted.
One of the markers of this might be immigration. Communist countries seem to have better preserved their ethnic base so far. Countries that once were communist aren't as deeply transformed as those that never were. They are less pozzed.
I guess it will take decades to know whether this is a real effect or whether the two systems will truly converge.
Some people seem to think that the difference is that communists quickly monopolize power, and this allows them to drop the coalition of the fringes like a rock. Whereas, in capitalist or Anglo systems, they are always moving towards totalitarianism but never fully arrive there, and so keep the coalition of the fringes intact.Replies: @Talha, @dfordoom
So once again everything you say is just your opinion and backed up by nothing.Replies: @dfordoom
Since being in office the Liberals have been very pro-immigration. So why don’t people vote One Nation instead? One Nation is an actual anti-immigration party. Given that the Liberals and Labor are both pro-immigration if white Australians were really concerned about immigration Pauline Hanson would be Prime Minister.
The whole point is moot though since you're implying, with no evidence, that voting patterns are 1:1 proxies for immigration support by race when they're not. Voting is intensely multi-faceted since you vote on several issues at once, and this is why an explicit poll or study providing results on a single issue is more accurate than extrapolating support for something based on voting. The fact is data sources show low levels of White support for mass migration and that is more valid than your opinion on it based on voting levels. As I said before anyway, Trump was elected based on a platform of immigration restrictionism. You said it was manufacturing, to which is of course interrelated to immigration restrictionism. So is wages, housing prices, taxes, and so on. Picking and choosing how you want to explain stuff based on what you think is poor form, so I'll rather rely on the surveys and other such results that show Whites dislike immigration. Simply provide some evidence in this manner for your assertions.Replies: @dfordoom
The Australian political system doesn’t work like that. Due to the preferencing pretty much only ALP or LNP can be elected. So Australian’s who vote for smaller parties get their vote annuled when it simply gets preferenced to one of the big parties. Look at Canada where Trudeau gets elected with ~35% of the vote, 65% of people didn’t want him but he gets elected. So 65% of voters could vote for what they want and it wouldn’t matter.
The whole point is moot though since you’re implying, with no evidence, that voting patterns are 1:1 proxies for immigration support by race when they’re not. Voting is intensely multi-faceted since you vote on several issues at once, and this is why an explicit poll or study providing results on a single issue is more accurate than extrapolating support for something based on voting. The fact is data sources show low levels of White support for mass migration and that is more valid than your opinion on it based on voting levels. As I said before anyway, Trump was elected based on a platform of immigration restrictionism. You said it was manufacturing, to which is of course interrelated to immigration restrictionism. So is wages, housing prices, taxes, and so on. Picking and choosing how you want to explain stuff based on what you think is poor form, so I’ll rather rely on the surveys and other such results that show Whites dislike immigration. Simply provide some evidence in this manner for your assertions.
I am not arguing that white Australians like immigration. I am merely arguing that the overwhelming majority of white Australian voters see it as a secondary issue. They could stop immigration if they wanted to. They choose not to.
There seems to be a similar pattern throughout the West. White voters see immigration as a secondary issue, not an existential threat. They may not like immigration but they don't dislike it enough to take steps to end it.
The whole point is moot though since you're implying, with no evidence, that voting patterns are 1:1 proxies for immigration support by race when they're not. Voting is intensely multi-faceted since you vote on several issues at once, and this is why an explicit poll or study providing results on a single issue is more accurate than extrapolating support for something based on voting. The fact is data sources show low levels of White support for mass migration and that is more valid than your opinion on it based on voting levels. As I said before anyway, Trump was elected based on a platform of immigration restrictionism. You said it was manufacturing, to which is of course interrelated to immigration restrictionism. So is wages, housing prices, taxes, and so on. Picking and choosing how you want to explain stuff based on what you think is poor form, so I'll rather rely on the surveys and other such results that show Whites dislike immigration. Simply provide some evidence in this manner for your assertions.Replies: @dfordoom
If lots of white Australian saw immigration as an existential threat then One Nation should be able easily to gain total control of the Senate. If even 20% of voters voted One Nation they’d have a dozen senators (possibly more) and would permanently hold the balance of power.
No, it’s evidence that for most white Australians (the overwhelming majority in fact) immigration is a minor issue.
I am not arguing that white Australians like immigration. I am merely arguing that the overwhelming majority of white Australian voters see it as a secondary issue. They could stop immigration if they wanted to. They choose not to.
There seems to be a similar pattern throughout the West. White voters see immigration as a secondary issue, not an existential threat. They may not like immigration but they don’t dislike it enough to take steps to end it.
Most of the words we use to describe political positions no longer have any real meaning except as insults or virtue-signalling. They have become moral labels rather than political descriptors.
To people who consider themselves liberals the word liberal means "people who agree with me" while "people who disagree with me" are fascists, Nazis or conservatives or far right.
To people who consider themselves conservatives the word conservative means "people who agree with me" while "people who disagree with me" are communists.Replies: @anon
True, and to many committed Rightards everyone he doesn’t like is a communist.
Lol.
Point to some examples in real life, cobber. Either in Oz or Murka. Both if you wanna.
From the Current Year, please, not some old 1970’s stuff.
Meanwhile in the US it’s easy to find Bernie Bros mooing “Fash-ist” mixed with their fantasies of being in firing squads, as well as Antifa morons ready to “Bash the Fash” in the streets of Portland and Seattle and DC. Neither group has any clue who Mussolini was. Plus, US Antifa doing their cosplay look like a cross between Mussolini’s Blackshirts and the Ku Klux Klan. Two orgs that had “progressive” support at times, too.
lol.
But they are ready to beat on “Nazis” and “The Fash”, oh, yeah.
lol.
Modern political terms are like 80 years out of date and mean nothing except “our team good, your team sux”. Let’s blame it on the Boomers!
Nope. 2 months of health coverage. That’s it.
I think most people of most social classes suck, to be honest. Through family, I’ve had a lot of interaction with small-town small business folk; they did far too much whingeing relative to their financial situation, often making more than professionals for far less effort.
Ah..the reveal. Jealousy and resentment that a man who works by his brawn can earn a decent living, while the narrow-backed, pencil necked office drone that is yourself wallows in pointlessness.Replies: @Nodwink
We need new political terminologies. Trump is not a conservative. He's a Trumpist. Bernie Sanders is not a communist. He's a Sanderista. Macron is a Macronista. Putin is not Hitler nor is he Stalin. He's a Putinista. The Chinese Communist Party is not communist, it is a Dengist party.Replies: @songbird
I’ve toyed with the idea that there might be some unifying theme that carries forward from the Cold War face-off. Not anything that would have been understood at the start – but perhaps within a few decades, if it truly does exist.
For instance, that communism isn’t really defined accurately by the traditional definition. That we need to adjust our definitions for the long-term trends; the greater span of history, not the short term interval. Capitalism and communism aren’t so much economic systems as they are power systems, and just like the communist party is still in charge in China, the root power systems that exist in the US, are basically unchanged, even as our politics have rapidly shifted.
One of the markers of this might be immigration. Communist countries seem to have better preserved their ethnic base so far. Countries that once were communist aren’t as deeply transformed as those that never were. They are less pozzed.
I guess it will take decades to know whether this is a real effect or whether the two systems will truly converge.
Some people seem to think that the difference is that communists quickly monopolize power, and this allows them to drop the coalition of the fringes like a rock. Whereas, in capitalist or Anglo systems, they are always moving towards totalitarianism but never fully arrive there, and so keep the coalition of the fringes intact.
Capitalism and representative democracy never did represent freedom. The only freedoms we have in the West are the freedom to indulge ourselves in sexual degeneracy, to pretend that we're any one of 116 different imaginary genders and of course the freedom for bearded men in frocks to share locker rooms with our daughters. And the freedom of the rich to make themselves richer.
Freedom was a con-job. An illusion. In the West we have nothing but illusory and worthless freedoms.There's probably a lot of truth in that. The Soviets made some early experiments with sexual freedom but quickly realised it was a disaster. Since they did have a monopoly on power they were able to quickly change course. The Chinese communists learnt from the experience of the Soviets and did not make the same mistake.
That's another thing that we often overlook - communists in power are capable of learning from mistakes. Mao freely admitted that he had made mistakes. No western democratic leader ever admits to having made a mistake.Replies: @songbird
For instance, that communism isn't really defined accurately by the traditional definition. That we need to adjust our definitions for the long-term trends; the greater span of history, not the short term interval. Capitalism and communism aren't so much economic systems as they are power systems, and just like the communist party is still in charge in China, the root power systems that exist in the US, are basically unchanged, even as our politics have rapidly shifted.
One of the markers of this might be immigration. Communist countries seem to have better preserved their ethnic base so far. Countries that once were communist aren't as deeply transformed as those that never were. They are less pozzed.
I guess it will take decades to know whether this is a real effect or whether the two systems will truly converge.
Some people seem to think that the difference is that communists quickly monopolize power, and this allows them to drop the coalition of the fringes like a rock. Whereas, in capitalist or Anglo systems, they are always moving towards totalitarianism but never fully arrive there, and so keep the coalition of the fringes intact.Replies: @Talha, @dfordoom
It might be immigration, but the root cause of the pozz is hyper-individualism; something that the West lauded in defining itself in opposition to communism (which seems to be on the other side of the spectrum). So…could it be more of an ideological imprint on the society?
Peace.
The internet and social media have intensified that desire for conformity. We all want to be individuals, which means being exactly the same as everybody else.
The lesson is that people do not want freedom. They want to be told what to think and how to behave, and Twitter obliges by telling them exactly which opinions are acceptable and which movies they're allowed to like. And which behaviours are acceptable.
That said, I think individualism can be a problem, but I view it always as being due to underlying causes. I think of words like "rootlessness", or "materialism." People can deceive themselves into thinking that being a fan of a sports team or something like Star Wars is equal to having a culture. It is remarkable how defensive some can be of poor Hollywood products or comic books while simultaneously offering no defense to tradition.
BTW, it is kind of interesting how communism had a lot of rhetoric about internationalism and pretty wide global ties, and even a lot of foreign students, but didn't seem to develop into this no borders ideology. Though, I guess it did set up a lot of obstacles for people moving, including comparative disadvantage.If it is an imprint, then the really interesting question to me is, how old is the imprint? Does it date to before communism? Or what would have happened to the West if the Hays Code had simply been enforced with an iron fist? Communists banned a lot of that stuff, and probably more vigorously.Replies: @dfordoom
I think most people of most social classes suck, to be honest. Through family, I’ve had a lot of interaction with small-town small business folk; they did far too much whingeing relative to their financial situation, often making more than professionals for far less effort.
Ah..the reveal. Jealousy and resentment that a man who works by his brawn can earn a decent living, while the narrow-backed, pencil necked office drone that is yourself wallows in pointlessness.
For instance, that communism isn't really defined accurately by the traditional definition. That we need to adjust our definitions for the long-term trends; the greater span of history, not the short term interval. Capitalism and communism aren't so much economic systems as they are power systems, and just like the communist party is still in charge in China, the root power systems that exist in the US, are basically unchanged, even as our politics have rapidly shifted.
One of the markers of this might be immigration. Communist countries seem to have better preserved their ethnic base so far. Countries that once were communist aren't as deeply transformed as those that never were. They are less pozzed.
I guess it will take decades to know whether this is a real effect or whether the two systems will truly converge.
Some people seem to think that the difference is that communists quickly monopolize power, and this allows them to drop the coalition of the fringes like a rock. Whereas, in capitalist or Anglo systems, they are always moving towards totalitarianism but never fully arrive there, and so keep the coalition of the fringes intact.Replies: @Talha, @dfordoom
Unfortunately the eastern European countries are now rapidly becoming pozzed. Communism protected them from the Poz, and from foolish western ideas about freedom.
Capitalism and representative democracy never did represent freedom. The only freedoms we have in the West are the freedom to indulge ourselves in sexual degeneracy, to pretend that we’re any one of 116 different imaginary genders and of course the freedom for bearded men in frocks to share locker rooms with our daughters. And the freedom of the rich to make themselves richer.
Freedom was a con-job. An illusion. In the West we have nothing but illusory and worthless freedoms.
There’s probably a lot of truth in that. The Soviets made some early experiments with sexual freedom but quickly realised it was a disaster. Since they did have a monopoly on power they were able to quickly change course. The Chinese communists learnt from the experience of the Soviets and did not make the same mistake.
That’s another thing that we often overlook – communists in power are capable of learning from mistakes. Mao freely admitted that he had made mistakes. No western democratic leader ever admits to having made a mistake.
The irony is that westerners are in fact incredibly conformist. The freedom to be an individual ends up being merely the freedom to be exactly like all one’s facebook friends. Holding the same opinions, wearing the same fashions, listening to the same music, having the same tattoos, watching the same movies.
The internet and social media have intensified that desire for conformity. We all want to be individuals, which means being exactly the same as everybody else.
The lesson is that people do not want freedom. They want to be told what to think and how to behave, and Twitter obliges by telling them exactly which opinions are acceptable and which movies they’re allowed to like. And which behaviours are acceptable.
I’m confident I could get along well with both of you!
Damn it, sorry to hear.
When I think of “individualism”, I tend to think of “rugged individualism”, like a stereotypical hero in a cowboy movie – any number of characters that John Wayne played. Since, these protagonists typified many ideal masculine traits, and since, I believe that leftists generally hated these characters, I have a hard time accepting a negative connotation for the word.
That said, I think individualism can be a problem, but I view it always as being due to underlying causes. I think of words like “rootlessness”, or “materialism.” People can deceive themselves into thinking that being a fan of a sports team or something like Star Wars is equal to having a culture. It is remarkable how defensive some can be of poor Hollywood products or comic books while simultaneously offering no defense to tradition.
BTW, it is kind of interesting how communism had a lot of rhetoric about internationalism and pretty wide global ties, and even a lot of foreign students, but didn’t seem to develop into this no borders ideology. Though, I guess it did set up a lot of obstacles for people moving, including comparative disadvantage.
If it is an imprint, then the really interesting question to me is, how old is the imprint? Does it date to before communism? Or what would have happened to the West if the Hays Code had simply been enforced with an iron fist? Communists banned a lot of that stuff, and probably more vigorously.
The characters he played certainly encapsulated old-fashioned masculine virtues but those old-fashioned masculine virtues are the complete antithesis of individualism. Old-fashioned masculinity is all about a man being prepared to sacrifice himself - not just for his woman or his children, but for his community and even for society.Replies: @songbird
Capitalism and representative democracy never did represent freedom. The only freedoms we have in the West are the freedom to indulge ourselves in sexual degeneracy, to pretend that we're any one of 116 different imaginary genders and of course the freedom for bearded men in frocks to share locker rooms with our daughters. And the freedom of the rich to make themselves richer.
Freedom was a con-job. An illusion. In the West we have nothing but illusory and worthless freedoms.There's probably a lot of truth in that. The Soviets made some early experiments with sexual freedom but quickly realised it was a disaster. Since they did have a monopoly on power they were able to quickly change course. The Chinese communists learnt from the experience of the Soviets and did not make the same mistake.
That's another thing that we often overlook - communists in power are capable of learning from mistakes. Mao freely admitted that he had made mistakes. No western democratic leader ever admits to having made a mistake.Replies: @songbird
Probably true, but I do like how Orban banned sex-changes on official documents.
First concert I ever attended.Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
That’s the American dream eh. Joe Diffie concert. I wish so badly that I was raised in middle America… high school football, tailgates, country concerts, Christians, frat parties. Sure they come tour in Canada but it’s just not the same.
Were you a pickup man?
God Bless the USA.
Ah..the reveal. Jealousy and resentment that a man who works by his brawn can earn a decent living, while the narrow-backed, pencil necked office drone that is yourself wallows in pointlessness.Replies: @Nodwink
This is an internet classic. You couldn’t possibly know who I am or what I do, but still go ahead and make that claim anyway. Also ROFL at the idea of the guy hawking Beanie Babies at the mall using his “brawn” to earn a living.
That said, I think individualism can be a problem, but I view it always as being due to underlying causes. I think of words like "rootlessness", or "materialism." People can deceive themselves into thinking that being a fan of a sports team or something like Star Wars is equal to having a culture. It is remarkable how defensive some can be of poor Hollywood products or comic books while simultaneously offering no defense to tradition.
BTW, it is kind of interesting how communism had a lot of rhetoric about internationalism and pretty wide global ties, and even a lot of foreign students, but didn't seem to develop into this no borders ideology. Though, I guess it did set up a lot of obstacles for people moving, including comparative disadvantage.If it is an imprint, then the really interesting question to me is, how old is the imprint? Does it date to before communism? Or what would have happened to the West if the Hays Code had simply been enforced with an iron fist? Communists banned a lot of that stuff, and probably more vigorously.Replies: @dfordoom
Most of the characters John Wayne played were not individualists. They were men with a high sense of social responsibility and social duty.
The characters he played certainly encapsulated old-fashioned masculine virtues but those old-fashioned masculine virtues are the complete antithesis of individualism. Old-fashioned masculinity is all about a man being prepared to sacrifice himself – not just for his woman or his children, but for his community and even for society.
I don't think this is a stretch from the dictionary definition:
n. One that asserts individuality by independence of thought and action.
If you ask me, the US was a perfectly functional society for decades, while the word was idealized. I don't think that it implies that one is antisocial or cosmopolitan or an atomist, or that one spurns the ties of family, or tradition.Replies: @dfordoom
You should run for an office.
It's an interesting question what death is. When I die, I expect all the tissues of my body with my unique DNA to also die. I don't expect any organ donation, and I'd be surprised to see, say, my hand go on living as a separate entity from the rest of me. If I do donate organs am I not dead until the organs themselves die? I guess under my definition with Mitsubishi, yes.
Thanks for the thought-provoking comment.Replies: @Twinkie
You know that organic matter dies. Corporations are not organic life forms and might cease operation, can stay suspended indefinitely, or be revived anytime.
My favorite watch company, Stowa of Germany, was destroyed when its factory in Pforzheim was bombed in 1945. It was revived and its current iteration has been going strong under new ownership and factory for about 10-20 years.
Contrary to Romney, corporations are not people – they are not even any kind of a life form.
The characters he played certainly encapsulated old-fashioned masculine virtues but those old-fashioned masculine virtues are the complete antithesis of individualism. Old-fashioned masculinity is all about a man being prepared to sacrifice himself - not just for his woman or his children, but for his community and even for society.Replies: @songbird
To me, individualists are people who don’t virtue-signal or seek status. This means that generally aren’t moral-relativists, but have their own code.
I don’t think this is a stretch from the dictionary definition:
n. One that asserts individuality by independence of thought and action.
If you ask me, the US was a perfectly functional society for decades, while the word was idealized. I don’t think that it implies that one is antisocial or cosmopolitan or an atomist, or that one spurns the ties of family, or tradition.
But can we really use the term individualist to describe someone like the character played by John Wayne in Rio Bravo? He was a man who put his duty to society ahead of his own interests.
Independence of thought and action can be a good thing or a bad thing.
I don't think we're really in disagreement, we're simply talking about different definitions of individualism. I think of an individualist as someone who rejects any notion of having a social duty.
I do think that traditional masculinity was non-individualist.
You can see the way the understanding of individualism has changed by looking at the American western. In westerns up until the early 60s social duty was emphasised and men who put their own desires first (such as some of the characters played by Jimmy Stewart in 50s westerns) were seen as representing a social problem. By the late 60s the western had changed radically and selfish self-centred heroes were glamourised.Replies: @songbird
Were you a pickup man?
God Bless the USA.Replies: @Audacious Epigone, @Twinkie
My best friend was (is). Even then I was too parsimonious–pickups get poor mileage (yeah, I know, sorry). Motorcyle, though.
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UjItUPJTFh4/ThnNMm-KpRI/AAAAAAAAAGY/wJ_crb-wCIs/s1600/IMG_3131.JPG
Took the whole family on it. I got to sit at the front on the tank because I was older, my younger brother was sandwiched between mom and dad - fun times.
Helmets? Whatever. 🤨
Peace.Replies: @Audacious Epigone
I don't think this is a stretch from the dictionary definition:
n. One that asserts individuality by independence of thought and action.
If you ask me, the US was a perfectly functional society for decades, while the word was idealized. I don't think that it implies that one is antisocial or cosmopolitan or an atomist, or that one spurns the ties of family, or tradition.Replies: @dfordoom
Individualism has come more and more to mean selfishness and greed. Perhaps we need two different terms to describe two different kinds of individualism.
But can we really use the term individualist to describe someone like the character played by John Wayne in Rio Bravo? He was a man who put his duty to society ahead of his own interests.
Independence of thought and action can be a good thing or a bad thing.
I don’t think we’re really in disagreement, we’re simply talking about different definitions of individualism. I think of an individualist as someone who rejects any notion of having a social duty.
I do think that traditional masculinity was non-individualist.
You can see the way the understanding of individualism has changed by looking at the American western. In westerns up until the early 60s social duty was emphasised and men who put their own desires first (such as some of the characters played by Jimmy Stewart in 50s westerns) were seen as representing a social problem. By the late 60s the western had changed radically and selfish self-centred heroes were glamourised.
And in 2020 America, there is an added constraint - diversity. You've go to put a rainbow in there, and gays. No room for family or intergenerational interactions. It is only possible to create stories based around magical orphans.Replies: @dfordoom
There have long been cars which get motorcycle-class fuel economy. I had a 4-speed Jetta which reliably got 35 MPG, which was envied by a 2-wheeler acquaintance (who wasn’t interested in buying it, oddly enough). It carried a fuckton more than a motorcycle too. 4 adult-sized seats and a cavernous trunk.
They also handle poorly in snow – even with good traction, the weight distribution is out of whack. Back when I was farming in the Midwest, I always had sandbags in the back in winter.
Were you a pickup man?
God Bless the USA.Replies: @Audacious Epigone, @Twinkie
Where did you get this from, Friday Night Lights?
Oh yeah, I remember the family Yamaha in Karachi.
Took the whole family on it. I got to sit at the front on the tank because I was older, my younger brother was sandwiched between mom and dad – fun times.
Helmets? Whatever. 🤨
Peace.
But can we really use the term individualist to describe someone like the character played by John Wayne in Rio Bravo? He was a man who put his duty to society ahead of his own interests.
Independence of thought and action can be a good thing or a bad thing.
I don't think we're really in disagreement, we're simply talking about different definitions of individualism. I think of an individualist as someone who rejects any notion of having a social duty.
I do think that traditional masculinity was non-individualist.
You can see the way the understanding of individualism has changed by looking at the American western. In westerns up until the early 60s social duty was emphasised and men who put their own desires first (such as some of the characters played by Jimmy Stewart in 50s westerns) were seen as representing a social problem. By the late 60s the western had changed radically and selfish self-centred heroes were glamourised.Replies: @songbird
Westerns are a pretty interesting genre because in some ways, you can almost see a battle for America’s soul in them. There is a certain idealization of traditional values, but as it was such a popular genre, it’s easy to find a lot of subversion, as well, even in early films.
I think in any fiction – even in some history – there’s a tendency to reduce the number of characters, so that there is fewer to juggle. In many ways, it is perfectly understandable, as it is difficult to create characters and interactions between them, and difficult for the audience to follow too many of them. And then there are time constraints.
And in 2020 America, there is an added constraint – diversity. You’ve go to put a rainbow in there, and gays. No room for family or intergenerational interactions. It is only possible to create stories based around magical orphans.
And the liberalism was liberalism, not libertarianism. It was feelgood sentimental liberalism but with an uncritical worship of democracy. 1930s-1950s liberals were obsessed with Social Problems and they tended to see Social Problems as something the government should solve. They were social interventionist liberals. 1930s-1950s liberals were naïve but they weren't naïve enough to fall for libertarianism. They were disciples of Progressivism rather than classical liberalism and Progressivism was very very social interventionist. Progressivism of course was an offshoot of Puritan Christianity although that's something that has been pretty much memory-holed.
What you see in the 1960s is the rise of nihilism in Hollywood, along with drug-addled hippie nonsense. And you get the growing obsession with anti-social anti-heroes.
It's interesting that American liberals have always believed that liberalism should be enforced not just on all Americans but on the whole world as well. American liberals love Moral Crusades. Not surprising given the Puritan influence on American liberalism.
And in 2020 America, there is an added constraint - diversity. You've go to put a rainbow in there, and gays. No room for family or intergenerational interactions. It is only possible to create stories based around magical orphans.Replies: @dfordoom
Yes, very much so.
And even as early as the 1930s Hollywood was very very liberal. But it wasn’t monolithically liberal. There were still a few conservatives, and there were lots of communists. So you got a mixture of messages. Some traditional values and some subversion. Some individualism, but also a major emphasis on social responsibilities.
And the liberalism was liberalism, not libertarianism. It was feelgood sentimental liberalism but with an uncritical worship of democracy. 1930s-1950s liberals were obsessed with Social Problems and they tended to see Social Problems as something the government should solve. They were social interventionist liberals. 1930s-1950s liberals were naïve but they weren’t naïve enough to fall for libertarianism. They were disciples of Progressivism rather than classical liberalism and Progressivism was very very social interventionist. Progressivism of course was an offshoot of Puritan Christianity although that’s something that has been pretty much memory-holed.
What you see in the 1960s is the rise of nihilism in Hollywood, along with drug-addled hippie nonsense. And you get the growing obsession with anti-social anti-heroes.
It’s interesting that American liberals have always believed that liberalism should be enforced not just on all Americans but on the whole world as well. American liberals love Moral Crusades. Not surprising given the Puritan influence on American liberalism.
Right, but I thought having a motorcycle in high school might go some of the way in keeping his idea of a middle American upbringing intact!
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UjItUPJTFh4/ThnNMm-KpRI/AAAAAAAAAGY/wJ_crb-wCIs/s1600/IMG_3131.JPG
Took the whole family on it. I got to sit at the front on the tank because I was older, my younger brother was sandwiched between mom and dad - fun times.
Helmets? Whatever. 🤨
Peace.Replies: @Audacious Epigone
Haha, yeah, something like that.