Kansas Crimson

japhy wrote: ↑Tue Feb 07, 2023 1:38 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Feb 07, 2023 11:53 am Not sure that fits here tho.

Me either, but it was a you who moved the goalpost to windfall taxes.

Who was it who said, "agitprop is the indica of the woke"?

Anyway; if you want to change the system, you can do it best when owning part of the system. Why do you think the right is so afraid of woke capitalism?

Move the goalposts? Bro you’re the bro who tried to change the subject to weed.

I dunno who said that…was it one of DC’s socks?

And is the right so afraid of work capitalism cuz it’s work?

Cuz it sure ain’t cuz it’s it’s capitalism.

Never heard of work capitalism.

Learn something new every day.

go figure this thread wants to hate on China.

But it still checks out with the OP, since China’s economic system too is apparently capitalism.

china is a horrible citizen of this earth. the worst.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:07 pm Marx was wrong about history, economics, science, human behavior, and the mechanisms that animate all of them. If you're still confused about that, then that's a you problem.

Capitalism, in a vacuum, is a perfect system. Unfortunately, as zsn noted, we don't live in a vacuum, and the perfect conditions necessary to enable the perfect system, therefore, do not exist and never will.

Smith's contribution -- particularly in The Theory of Moral Sentiments -- was to describe the moral/ethical conditions, habits, and practices that best enable a commercial economy to thrive (in the absence of the vacuum/perfect world) and to produce economic activity that benefits both individuals and society at large.

Marx was a religious fanatic. Nothing more.

I was curious about this post, but I didn’t really bother at the time. Now that this thread got bumped, lemme ask:

If capitalism really is perfect, at least in a vacuum; and if any imperfections of capitalism were already offset by Smith contributing “the moral/ethical conditions, habits, and practices that best enable a commercial economy to thrive (in the absence of the vacuum/perfect world) and to produce economic activity that benefits both individuals and society at large,” then how did we nonetheless still encounter a problem as yuge as climate change anyway?

Put more simply, how are we sure Smith’s contributions were really contributions at all?

This take makes it sound like capitalism is either best equipped to curb climate change, and/or could have never caused climate change in the first place, cuz some dood wrote some book like 300 years ago…yet here we are.

I’d also be curious to hear why Mr. “Opiate Of The Masses” himself was actually just a religious fanatic, nothing more.

But I kinda doubt I get a response to any of this.

also…let’s just leave this here.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 1:51 pm
But I kinda doubt I get a response to any of this.

Cuz it's gibberish?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 1:51 pm
I’d also be curious to hear why Mr. “Opiate Of The Masses” himself was actually just a religious fanatic, nothing more.

Because Marxism is, more or less, a Christian heresy, a semi-secularized version of the millenarian fantasies that plagued Western Europe in particular since the 13th century?

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 10:53 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 1:51 pm
I’d also be curious to hear why Mr. “Opiate Of The Masses” himself was actually just a religious fanatic, nothing more.

Because Marxism is, more or less, a Christian heresy

I dunno bro, you make Marxism sound way cooler than it really is

Tho to be fair, it WOULD be fun to compare and contrast Marxism and Christianity.

I mean, one is the relentless and explicit condemnation of evil rich people, and the other is Marxism.

What's weird is that this seems to be the first time you've heard this contention.

yea.

Of all the directions I thought the climate change thread might end up, I honestly never thought anyone would go all "13th century fantasies" about it.

Clearly, you haven't been paying attention.

What have I missed?

you sure you aren’t just being condescending?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Feb 01, 2023 4:26 pm Let’s spice the pols bored up with some new content!

been meaning to start this thread for a while. It got brought up a while back in some other thread but figure it deserves it own

admittedly, don’t have my discussion points and credible sources (memes) all ready to go quite yet, but figure if this thread gets good and goes places, happy to provide that stuff.

Basically I think a system built around some concept of endless consumption is not also an ideal system to implement some concept of much-needed conservation.

And a system built primarily for individual accumulation and concentration of wealth may also often condone, maybe even incentivize, pollution and emissions and other destructive behaviors.

sooo where to begin!

Would anyone like to suggest/explain why maybe the best way to combat climate change might be to leave it to free market capitalism to take on?

There is no better a demonstration of the folly of anthropogenic conceit than the one regarding climate change. Humans regulating the earth’s temperature, a conceited notion I believe.

i haven't really spent much time concerning with the climate. But since i have been watching the last of us on hbo. it's making me wonder.

dolomite wrote: ↑Thu Feb 16, 2023 10:41 am

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Feb 01, 2023 4:26 pm Let’s spice the pols bored up with some new content!

been meaning to start this thread for a while. It got brought up a while back in some other thread but figure it deserves it own

admittedly, don’t have my discussion points and credible sources (memes) all ready to go quite yet, but figure if this thread gets good and goes places, happy to provide that stuff.

Basically I think a system built around some concept of endless consumption is not also an ideal system to implement some concept of much-needed conservation.

And a system built primarily for individual accumulation and concentration of wealth may also often condone, maybe even incentivize, pollution and emissions and other destructive behaviors.

sooo where to begin!

Would anyone like to suggest/explain why maybe the best way to combat climate change might be to leave it to free market capitalism to take on?

There is no better a demonstration of the folly of anthropogenic conceit than the one regarding climate change. Humans regulating the earth’s temperature, a conceited notion I believe.

Yea, it’s always good to form one’s world views based on HBO content.

I myself have been perceiving the world through “Real Sex” since back when cable would just scramble the channel if you didn’t subscribe to it.

An activist group is spreading misinformation to stop solar projects in rural America

https://www.npr.org/2023/02/18/11548670 ... al-america