Left-Wing Discussion Thread

[Calimera II]

Anybody here has good texts and sources for guevarism and focus theory?

It is in Spanish, though: http://www.lahaine.org/est_espanol.php/ ... onomia-pol

[Arkolon]

Hard to say, since economics outside of known distributive means through history is like performing physics in unknown dimensions: it's very theoretical, and hard to prove by practice. I'll play my cards safe and say 'post-scarcity', which can be argued is a consequence of ages of industrial capitalism anyway, and it seems to be, at least in theory, the most efficient way of distributing resources.

Post-scarcity as a consequence of the ages of industrial capitalism? Well now you're sounding like Marx. He predicted that very same thing.
Communism, or more specifically the "higher stage of communism", was Marx's description of the post-scarcity society he predicted would follow capitalism, or more accurately it would follow the "lower stage of communism" which would be a consequence of "late capitalism".

Arkolon, the undercover Menshevik.

[Fanosolia]

Everything Fox News says is a lie. Even true things, once said on Fox News, become lies.

>> <<

Or at the very least skewed as hell. I swear to god if they go on about the "liberal media" again (well in terms of like hollywood releases) I'm going to blow a gastic! You would think that a news station that usually claims is on the side of people who praises markets would know that if a certain type story or product isn't being produced they could always try to make it. I know there's more economics involved than that, but I little sympathy for the news anchors of Fox.

[Asterbania]

Anybody here has good texts and sources for guevarism and focus theory?

It is in Spanish, though: http://www.lahaine.org/est_espanol.php/ ... onomia-pol

No hay problema por eso! Gracias

[The Liberated Territories]

Everything Fox News says is a lie. Even true things, once said on Fox News, become lies.

>> <<

Or at the very least skewed as hell. I swear to god if they go on about the "liberal media" again (well in terms of like hollywood releases) I'm going to blow a gastic! You would think that a news station that usually claims is on the side of people who praises markets would know that if a certain type story or product isn't being produced they could always try to make it. I know there's more economics involved than that, but I little sympathy for the news anchors of Fox.

TBH MSNBC has been discovered to be just as biased as Fox, but isn't really called out as much. This at least would give cadence to the idea of the media being "liberal." Of course this could depend on your viewpoint. To me everything is socialist, or at least I am much more skeptical about the lobbying and other ways that newscasters are manipulated by various interest groups which in return fuels their biases.

I have to look more into it, but I am sure that the regulations by the US on the media are somewhat linked to the consolidation of the media, which in turn is linked to the national politics of the time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_network scroll down to "regulation"

[Fanosolia]

Or at the very least skewed as hell. I swear to god if they go on about the "liberal media" again (well in terms of like hollywood releases) I'm going to blow a gastic! You would think that a news station that usually claims is on the side of people who praises markets would know that if a certain type story or product isn't being produced they could always try to make it. I know there's more economics involved than that, but I little sympathy for the news anchors of Fox.

TBH MSNBC has been discovered to be just as biased as Fox, but isn't really called out as much. This at least would give cadence to the idea of the media being "liberal." Of course this could depend on your viewpoint. To me everything is socialist, or at least I am much more skeptical about the lobbying and other ways that newscasters are manipulated by various interest groups which in return fuels their biases.

I have to look more into it, but I am sure that the regulations by the US on the media are somewhat linked to the consolidation of the media, which in turn is linked to the national politics of the time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_network scroll down to "regulation"

Oh don't get me wrong, I don't deny there are other just as basis casters. For me to do that would make me very hypocritical, and blind the rest of the world. I mean didn't Republicans about a few months ago get debate questions that were insulting? Only reason I pick on Fox is because they are the most called out.

It's not that don't see themes of what can be considered "Liberal," "Progressive," or what is considered "Bleeding Heart" in the american stereotype sense in different media productions, but it's like, Bill, you want a movie/show that's actually a little more sympathetic to a business owner and exploring the struggles of one, then you can do that. You're the one with the million dollar idea for all we know. And for the record, it's not just conservatives I get on this about, this can equally said for someone who calls for better representation of someone in a medium. Many people have beef with Ayn Rand (she's the most blatant political person I can think of that wrote fiction, I'm sorry ), but I can at least respect her as she at least she wrote about the themes of her ideology she wanted to convey through her books. They're apparently not well written, but the point stands.

Maybe, but I'm not the one to confirm or deny that. Though from what I think I understand of the wikipedia page, can see why you would make the connection. At least, I think.

[Atlanticatia]

TBH MSNBC has been discovered to be just as biased as Fox, but isn't really called out as much. This at least would give cadence to the idea of the media being "liberal." Of course this could depend on your viewpoint. To me everything is socialist, or at least I am much more skeptical about the lobbying and other ways that newscasters are manipulated by various interest groups which in return fuels their biases.

MSNBC doesn't pretend to be unbiased, though. Two years ago, their slogan on MSNBC.com was "what progressives have been waiting for". They don't pretend to be 'fair and balanced' like Fox. People who watch MSNBC know that it's from a progressive viewpoint. However people who watch Fox think that they're the only ones getting a truly 'fair and balanced' report, because of a conspiracy theory about the 'librul mediaz'. I also think that the actual reporting on MSNBC is less to the left than FOX is to the right.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

TBH MSNBC has been discovered to be just as biased as Fox, but isn't really called out as much. This at least would give cadence to the idea of the media being "liberal." Of course this could depend on your viewpoint. To me everything is socialist, or at least I am much more skeptical about the lobbying and other ways that newscasters are manipulated by various interest groups which in return fuels their biases.

MSNBC doesn't pretend to be unbiased, though. Two years ago, their slogan on MSNBC.com was "what progressives have been waiting for". They don't pretend to be 'fair and balanced' like Fox. People who watch MSNBC know that it's from a progressive viewpoint. However people who watch Fox think that they're the only ones getting a truly 'fair and balanced' report, because of a conspiracy theory about the 'librul mediaz'. I also think that the actual reporting on MSNBC is less to the left than FOX is to the right.

Agreed. Largely because the American political spectrum itself is skewed to the right. Fox is, honestly, close to far-right and ultra-conservative... MSNBC is firmly center-left.

[The Liberated Territories]

TBH MSNBC has been discovered to be just as biased as Fox, but isn't really called out as much. This at least would give cadence to the idea of the media being "liberal." Of course this could depend on your viewpoint. To me everything is socialist, or at least I am much more skeptical about the lobbying and other ways that newscasters are manipulated by various interest groups which in return fuels their biases.

MSNBC doesn't pretend to be unbiased, though. Two years ago, their slogan on MSNBC.com was "what progressives have been waiting for". They don't pretend to be 'fair and balanced' like Fox. People who watch MSNBC know that it's from a progressive viewpoint. However people who watch Fox think that they're the only ones getting a truly 'fair and balanced' report, because of a conspiracy theory about the 'librul mediaz'. I also think that the actual reporting on MSNBC is less to the left than FOX is to the right.

That's a cruddy answer. I think Fox even admitted themselves that they lean right. Their slogan more or less is an artifact.

Plus, trying to out-wingnut Fox News is sort of pathetic.

[Geilinor]

MSNBC doesn't pretend to be unbiased, though. Two years ago, their slogan on MSNBC.com was "what progressives have been waiting for". They don't pretend to be 'fair and balanced' like Fox. People who watch MSNBC know that it's from a progressive viewpoint. However people who watch Fox think that they're the only ones getting a truly 'fair and balanced' report, because of a conspiracy theory about the 'librul mediaz'. I also think that the actual reporting on MSNBC is less to the left than FOX is to the right.

That's a cruddy answer. I think Fox even admitted themselves that they lean right. Their slogan more or less is an artifact.

Plus, trying to out-wingnut Fox News is sort of pathetic.

At least MSNBC doesn't publicly advertise itself as "fair and balanced" or have a theory about the "evil mainstream media".

[Calimera II]

It is in Spanish, though: http://www.lahaine.org/est_espanol.php/ ... onomia-pol

No hay problema por eso! Gracias

No problem. It is really interesting what he wrote.

[Zottistan]

You said that utilitarianism is tautological because it boils down to utility is utility. I said that it is not tautological because, definitionally, utility is left open for debate, in which case the definition is synthetic. You can always say more about what utility actually is. I.E. X is morally good iff it maximizes utility is non-tautological.

If the definition of utility is left open for debate, the statement "utility is good" carries no information.

Where do superior production outputs and standards of living come from. The standards of living rise in proportion to the socially necessary wage that is required to (re)produce the laborer in his/her normal condition and increased production outputs can come from a myriad of sources (technology, lengthening of the working day, etc.); however, all of these relate back to what creates value in the first place: human labor power, which is traded as a commodity to the capitalist. The formula for surplus value extraction is m-c-m' where m'=m+(delta)m. The laborer exists in a relation such as c-m-c. The laborer trades his labor power (which is a commodity) for a wage that he can use to buy commodities in the market. The capitalist pays the wage in return for the labor power commodity and uses the laborer to produce in order to sell and make a profit. The only way to make a profit is to not pay the worker for the full value of his labor. This is stealing plain and simple.

I never said that appropriation of labour value under a capitalist system wasn't a thing; I directly acknowledged it. I said it may be justified by the possibly superior production outputs and standards of living it generates.

[Chessmistress]

I like this kind of left-wing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_ ... 8Sweden%29

[Rodrania]

I like this kind of left-wing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_ ... 8Sweden%29

I prefer this one

Jokes aside, right now I'm following this party pretty closely to see if I might jump in or not.

[The Liberated Territories]

That's a cruddy answer. I think Fox even admitted themselves that they lean right. Their slogan more or less is an artifact.

Plus, trying to out-wingnut Fox News is sort of pathetic.

At least MSNBC doesn't publicly advertise itself as "fair and balanced" or have a theory about the "evil mainstream media".

I'm still not sure where you are getting the idea that they speculate about the evil mainstream media. Whenever I watch Fox, I get the news. As it should be. You are probably talking about their commentators, which are just that. It's not the news, and if you are listening talk show hosts to get the news than you are the part of the problem.

[Zottistan]

I like this kind of left-wing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_ ... 8Sweden%29

I prefer this one

Jokes aside, right now I'm following this party pretty closely to see if I might jump in or not.

I am in stitches.

[The Liberated Territories]

I like this kind of left-wing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_ ... 8Sweden%29

I prefer this one

Jokes aside, right now I'm following this party pretty closely to see if I might jump in or not.

Proof that Sweden is fucked up.

[Chessmistress]

I prefer this one

Jokes aside, right now I'm following this party pretty closely to see if I might jump in or not.

Proof that Sweden is fucked up.

Do you hate women?

[Rodrania]

Proof that Sweden is fucked up.

Do you hate women?

Disagreeing with a Feminist party automatically means someone hates women?

[Exelia]

Proof that Sweden is fucked up.

Do you hate women?

Do you hate men?

[The Liberated Territories]

Proof that Sweden is fucked up.

Do you hate women?

Only feminists who wish to use the government to forward their agenda.

Do you hate women?

Disagreeing with a Feminist party automatically means someone hates women?

Yes. Haven't you heard? Critique of feminism means you are apart of the Patriarchy(tm).

[Chessmistress]

Do you hate women?

Do you hate men?

Do you think that Feminists hate men?

[Neon Trotsky]

Only feminists who wish to use the government to forward their agenda.

Yes how dare women get involved in the political process.

[The Liberated Territories]

Only feminists who wish to use the government to forward their agenda.

Yes how dare women get involved in the political process.

This goes for anyone that wishes to use the gun of the government.

[Rodrania]

Do you hate men?

Do you think that Feminists hate men?

[rant]

I honestly believe some Feminists (Codeword being "SOME") seem to hate men and everyone who disagrees with their views, some even reaching the awful point of making themselves look like victims of the system, which they aren't.. And, judging by the way you reacted to someone being opposed to your views and believing Sweden is going to shit because of a party (Which I disagree with, but an opinion is still an opinion, and it doesn't automatically mean the person giving his opinion is a misogynist patriarchy supporter), you seem to be that kind of person. Go ahead and stone me for believing some of feminists are unfortunately full of shit, but I believe the Political Correctness bullshit is going too far lately.

And before I get called a Nazi or some bullshit as I always get called when I say something like this: No. Fuck no I'm not one. I just believe being politically correct is optional in a truly free society, and having to double-check whatever you are saying to make sure it's not offensive is bullshit. Also, I don't hate women. I actually believe women are the same as males in society and biologically they are way more important than us. Still, biology doesn't make anyone superior to anyone, just different.

[/rant]