Right Wing Discussion Thread XV: A New Hoppe

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

Is the Right infighting? What did I miss?

Is the Right ever not infighting?...Lol

Here's a question for everybody: From the Right-Wing Point of View, which Communist Regime was best?

I'm not right-wing, so I can't really answer this, but I'm kind of surprised no one's answered "the USSR under Yeltsin".

[Western Vale Confederacy]

Is the Right infighting? What did I miss?

Is the Right ever not infighting?...Lol

Here's a question for everybody: From the Right-Wing Point of View, which Communist Regime was best?

Good ol’ Thomas Sankara!

[Washington Resistance Army]

Is the Right infighting? What did I miss?

Is the Right ever not infighting?...Lol

Here's a question for everybody: From the Right-Wing Point of View, which Communist Regime was best?

Best Korea!

[Conserative Morality]

CM, you are truly a man of higher culture.

>> when Grant championed F R E E T R A D E
>> tax reductions but increased revenue
>> C I V I L R I G H T S

Grant was a gud boi, no one can tell me otherwise

[Novus America]

I swapped the images out because the first one didn't convey the idea I was trying to discuss. Apologies in that regard.
The 50s set the groundwork for what could have been a far greater American society, and like every decade that preceded it, there were obvious flaws (most of which still exist). The idealized version of it is something to strive for.

The idealized 50s weren't the actual 50s though. Anyone who wasn't a straight, white, and at least middle class man was a second-class citizen. It wasn't all bad, but when the motherfr*cking Soviet Union of all countries gets to call you out for denying people their constitutionally-guaranteed civil rights, then there's a problem.

Well sure. No idealized romantic picture of an era properly represents the era.
Yes the civil rights situation was bad, and not where we would want it to be.

But they key thing to realize is all people in the 50s were not saying, “this is okay”.
People were fully aware of the problems, and many taking steps to fix them.

Eisenhower’s contributions to civil rights are grossly overlooked for example.

Take the Little Rock Nine.
One way to look at it is “it was super shitty that we have to send in the National Guard to protect students and force desegregation past the racists”.
The other way is to say “it is great we finally did something to protect students and force desegregation past the racists”.

Both are not wrong.

As far as women goes it is import to note that in the 50s about women’s participation in the labor force went from just below 30% in 1950 to 35% by 1960.

Women in the 50s did not always stay at home.

Now it is certainly higher today.
But simply looking at women’s labor rates is a bad metric for quality of life.

Are women working more now because they want to? Or are many because they have no choice, even though they would rather spend more time caring for children?

Or something in between?

While women should not be forced to be stay at home moms (though clearly they were not all forced to be in the 50s if about a third worked) we should also respect that raising children is an honorable, valuable job that should be an option.
Of course it does not have to be women doing so, but they are much more likely to do so.

Of course it is good that discrimination against women in the work place was prohibited in 1963, and bad that they could be legally discriminated against before.

The point is that the 50s were much more nuanced than both their defenders AND detractors make them out to be.

[Conserative Morality]

Are women working more now because they want to? Or are many because they have no choice, even though they would rather spend more time caring for children?

Do many men work now because they want to? Or because they have no choice, even though they would rather spend more time caring for children?

[Novus America]

Are women working more now because they want to? Or are many because they have no choice, even though they would rather spend more time caring for children?

Do many men work now because they want to? Or because they have no choice, even though they would rather spend more time caring for children?

Another interesting point, though I do allude to that. While women are far more likely (why is a huge can of worms, social, biology, both?) to be the stay at home parent if there is one, they do not necessarily have to be.

The reason I look at women particularly (besides the fact they are more likely to do the role) is that for men work force participation rate did not see as much change.
Asking why more men are working if more men are not actually working is of course not helpful.

[Conserative Morality]

Why do school administrator positions attract cretins like this?

Principal Carlotta Brown of James Madison High School announced the new dress code guidelines for parents and guests a day after the mother of a prospective student was denied entry to the school because of her attire.

Wearing a T-shirt dress and headscarf, Joselyn Lewis says she was turned away by school administrators when she attempted to enrol her daughter into the school.

When she asked to see the school's dress code rules for parents, administrators called the police.

[Conserative Morality]

Do many men work now because they want to? Or because they have no choice, even though they would rather spend more time caring for children?

Another interesting point, though I do allude to that. While women are far more likely (why is a huge can of worms, social, biology, both?) to be the stay at home parent if there is one, they do not necessarily have to be.

The reason I look at women particularly (besides the fact they are more likely to do the role) is that for men work force participation rate did not see as much change.
Asking why more men are working if more men are not actually working is of course not helpful.

Is the perpetuation of injustice less unjust for some reason?

[Novus America]

Another interesting point, though I do allude to that. While women are far more likely (why is a huge can of worms, social, biology, both?) to be the stay at home parent if there is one, they do not necessarily have to be.

The reason I look at women particularly (besides the fact they are more likely to do the role) is that for men work force participation rate did not see as much change.
Asking why more men are working if more men are not actually working is of course not helpful.

Is the perpetuation of injustice less unjust for some reason?

Of course not.
We could and should obviously run the data for men as well.
Just the data set is very different so the analysis would have to be done differently.

[Hakons]

Are women working more now because they want to? Or are many because they have no choice, even though they would rather spend more time caring for children?

Do many men work now because they want to? Or because they have no choice, even though they would rather spend more time caring for children?

There are differences between men and women, CM. It's not wrong that more women want to raise children at home than men. It is a statement of Nature that mothers are more inclined, and often better, at raising children. Freedom is having control of your own will, and not being forced into someone else's vision of equality.

[Bear Stearns]

Is the Right infighting? What did I miss?

Is the Right ever not infighting?...Lol

Here's a question for everybody: From the Right-Wing Point of View, which Communist Regime was best?

Honestly, China. They've to actually produce some semblance of prosperity.

[Bear Stearns]

Are women working more now because they want to? Or are many because they have no choice, even though they would rather spend more time caring for children?

Do many men work now because they want to? Or because they have no choice, even though they would rather spend more time caring for children?

When given the choice, I think men prefer to work more than women, given absentee father rates vs. absentee mother rates.

[Hakons]

Is the Right ever not infighting?...Lol

Here's a question for everybody: From the Right-Wing Point of View, which Communist Regime was best?

Honestly, China. They've to actually produce some semblance of prosperity.

They... literally killed 50 million people...

[Bear Stearns]

Honestly, China. They've to actually produce some semblance of prosperity.

They... literally killed 50 million people...

And the failed Leninist states didn't?

[Hakons]

They... literally killed 50 million people...

And the failed Leninist states didn't?

No, though that is probably more a statement of population size. It's difficult to think of a "favorite" Communist regime, because pretty much all of them I can think of were terrible and genocidal.

[Conserative Morality]

There are differences between men and women, CM. It's not wrong that more women want to raise children at home than men. It is a statement of Nature that mothers are more inclined, and often better, at raising children.

Press X to doubt. Have you ever seen a sixty-fucking year old man bawl like a child talking about how he missed his kids growing up because he was always working? That he could never get those years, those relationships, back?

The idea that mothers are the 'natural' parents is a 17th century European invention, and not a concept shared in previous European cultures, or non-European culture.

Freedom is having control of your own will, and not being forced into someone else's vision of equality.

And as we all know, women today are dragged out into the street and beaten for the crime of being stay-at-home moms.

1/3 of mothers in the modern US are stay at home moms - but those that are often endure feelings of social isolation from being burdened with childcare, degradation of emotional health, and a strong desire to return to work. People are not made for the strict divisions of labor that are bandied about regarding 'stay-at-home' vs. 'professional' parents. It's deeply damaging, and the idea that we should be pushing a reactionary myth to encourage it is beyond foolish.

[Benuty]

And the failed Leninist states didn't?

No, though that is probably more a statement of population size. It's difficult to think of a "favorite" Communist regime, because pretty much all of them I can think of were terrible and genocidal.

Even the ones that survived did so purely by abandoning party principles, and ideology because of realpolitik, and pragmatism. China essentially adopted the qualities of the very faction it ousted from power in order to survive.

[Conserative Morality]

When given the choice, I think men prefer to work more than women, given absentee father rates vs. absentee mother rates.

Lot easier to skip out on a child when you don't have to physically be there for the birth. Not only that, but significant culture pressure is in effect there - absentee mothers are looked upon considerably worse due to the 'natural parent' myth.

[North German Realm]

They... literally killed 50 million people...

And the failed Leninist states didn't?

The Kill-count of the rest of the Leninist states wouldn't be as large as Mao's in The Great Leap Forward and then the Cultural Revolution. Of course, if you think about it the actual reason is due to China's absurdly large population than anything either side could do but, you know.

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

Honestly, China. They've to actually produce some semblance of prosperity.

They... literally killed 50 million people...

A lot of the "deaths" from the Great Leap Forward were quite possibly the result of a revised census system finding out that some people who had previously been counted weren't alive anymore. Add that to the fact that 50 million dead isn't that atypical for pre-communist China (the Taiping Rebellion, which happened between 1850 and 1864, killed about 30 million - adjusting for population, that would mean that the Taiping Rebellion happening at the same time as the Great Leap Forward would have killed about 60 million people), and Mao probably wasn't as bad as he's made out to be.
Make no mistake, he was definitely one of the most lethal dictators in history and he deserves to be reviled in the same way that Hitler and Stalin are. I just think that, even though he was far from a good leader, he wasn't exactly Hitler-level evil. It's less that I want to justify his actions and more that I prefer it when people are blamed for things that A) they actually did and B) that were atypical, and we can't be certain of either when it comes to Mao.

[Benuty]

And the failed Leninist states didn't?

The Kill-count of the rest of the Leninist states wouldn't be as large as Mao's in The Great Leap Forward and then the Cultural Revolution. Of course, if you think about it the actual reason is due to China's absurdly large population than anything either side could do but, you know.

Well, it isn't just due to population size, but also a couple of factors. Despite the initial push, the great leap forward got Mao what he wanted i.e metal, but it was of such inferior quality that it was practically useless. By the time they tried to rectify the situation, people forgot the fact that farmers are supposed to farm. Had the initiative been complementary to farming it might not have resulted in a massive clusterfuck of a famine. The cultural revolution basically caused Mao to go "holy shit this is too much" especially when you cannot even govern a country effectively anymore because students are committing themselves to revolutionary orgies of violence.

[Benuty]

They... literally killed 50 million people...

A lot of the "deaths" from the Great Leap Forward were quite possibly the result of a revised census system finding out that some people who had previously been counted weren't alive anymore. Add that to the fact that 50 million dead isn't that atypical for pre-communist China (the Taiping Rebellion, which happened between 1850 and 1864, killed about 30 million - adjusting for population, that would mean that the Taiping Rebellion happening at the same time as the Great Leap Forward would have killed about 60 million people), and Mao probably wasn't as bad as he's made out to be.
Make no mistake, he was definitely one of the most lethal dictators in history and he deserves to be reviled in the same way that Hitler and Stalin are. I just think that, even though he was far from a good leader, he wasn't exactly Hitler-level evil. It's less that I want to justify his actions and more that I prefer it when people are blamed for things that A) they actually did and B) that were atypical, and we can't be certain of either when it comes to Mao.

Mao was great when it came to being the military strategist, but politically his role in the system should have been in the fashion of a figurehead. Had he not taken advice from dear uncle Joseph he might have gone about things differently during the first decade.

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

A lot of the "deaths" from the Great Leap Forward were quite possibly the result of a revised census system finding out that some people who had previously been counted weren't alive anymore. Add that to the fact that 50 million dead isn't that atypical for pre-communist China (the Taiping Rebellion, which happened between 1850 and 1864, killed about 30 million - adjusting for population, that would mean that the Taiping Rebellion happening at the same time as the Great Leap Forward would have killed about 60 million people), and Mao probably wasn't as bad as he's made out to be.
Make no mistake, he was definitely one of the most lethal dictators in history and he deserves to be reviled in the same way that Hitler and Stalin are. I just think that, even though he was far from a good leader, he wasn't exactly Hitler-level evil. It's less that I want to justify his actions and more that I prefer it when people are blamed for things that A) they actually did and B) that were atypical, and we can't be certain of either when it comes to Mao.

Mao was great when it came to being the military strategist, but politically his role in the system should have been in the fashion of a figurehead. Had he not taken advice from dear uncle Joseph he might have gone about things differently during the first decade.

I wonder how different history might be if people in the past realized that the skills involved in leading an army and the skills involved in leading a country have very little overlap.

[Novus America]

Is the Right ever not infighting?...Lol

Here's a question for everybody: From the Right-Wing Point of View, which Communist Regime was best?

Honestly, China. They've to actually produce some semblance of prosperity.

But the are Communist in name only, when actually practicing Communist theory they were a basket case.
They only became an economic power by dumping Communist economic theory.

Really they are closer to Fascism now.