LWDT 7: The Earth and Heavens Tremble.

[Great Minarchistan]

If you defend it then both me and OEP will take jabs

Brown-Red Alliance: Because fuck Neoliberalism

imagine being against neoliberalism

[Great Minarchistan]

guys we be better when gubmint make up stats and freeze prices xd

yes

this is why argentina cant get nice things

[Liriena]

yes

this is why argentina cant get nice things

Well, yeah, it is. Every time we've given liberalism (principled or otherwise) a shot since 1983 has ended in disaster. The Kirchnerist years, even with all of the corruption and bad policies, were still our best years since the end of the last dictatorship. I have the luxury of being able to vote on principle without having to worry that I'm killing myself in the process, but when push comes to shove, a majority of Argies can't afford that.

[Ostroeuropa]

Grrr realpolitik.

Bored of people not understanding the Melian dialogue.

The Melian dialogue is the sign that the decline of Athens is almost complete. At the beginning of the story it comes from, Athens is a hegemon that takes justice seriously (for its time), but as their power becomes threatened they begin to see justice as a weakness and a ploy by their enemies to trick them. In the beginning of the book Athens debates whether to do to another city what they eventually do to Melos, and one of the orators points out them even having this debate represents the moral decline of Athens and its insecurity over its position, the fact they even have to consider whether doing the right thing will weaken them suggests they have reached a point where being weakened might spell their doom and that they have no room to maneuver, though ultimately they vote not to do it and to instead do the right thing.

By the end of the book, there is no debate, they simply think it has to happen to Melos and vote for it. Far from Athens thinking that being brutal pragmatists will scare the other cities into line, it signals to them that Athens is weak and barely surviving, and that is why it cannot afford "Luxuries" like justice which it did at the peak of its power. It also motivates their citizens to fight Athens for justice's sake. The Melian dialogue is in story telling terms the end of Athens character arc from a "Just" empire to an evil one, and their doom shortly follows, the point of the book is to argue that Realpolitik is a sign of an insecure empire losing its hegemony and scrambling to keep it. It directly contrasts the earlier dialogue to show how far Athens had fallen into being the villain of the story, despite starting out as the hero.

If you think it's a debate between two opposing political ideologies, you're not understanding the story. The fact that the consequences of Athens doing this is that it unites the greek world against them is kind of a hint that the Athenians were wrong, guys. Instead of losing a war and a few vassals and becoming one of many powers in a multilateral rather than unilateral setting, their entire empire is destroyed and they never recover, becoming a minor player in a game played by other nations.

It's a badass line, the whole, "The strong do as they will, and the weak suffer what they must". Because it's the line that hammers home the fall of Athens into villainy. The drama of the line is there to signal a point of being beyond redemption and the completion of their character arc in a start of darkness story.
The actual political point of the exchange is the Melian response;

"Since you enjoin us to leave 'right' alone and talk only of interest, you should not destroy what is our common protection. The privilege of being allowed in danger to invoke what is fair and right and yes even to profit by such arguments where they hold true. You are as much interested in this as any, lest the fall of your empire be a prelude to the heaviest vengeance, and an example for the world to meditate on."

and

"Do you consider there is no security in the policy which you indicate? If you bar us from appealing to justice and demand we obey your interest, then we must also explain ours, and try to persuade you that the two may be aligned. How can you avoid making enemies of all the world who shall look at the case you have made here today and conclude that one day, you shall attack them? What is this other than to make greater the number of your enemies than your friends?"

Athens uses tortured logic to argue that to show strength they need to dominate people who hate them and wish them harm, so that others who hate them and wish them harm will think twice before rebelling or invading, when Melos replies they do not hate the Athenians nor wish them harm, Athens responds that they will once they dominate them. It's supposed to show how circular and irrational Athens is behaving, creating enemies everywhere in order to defeat them and keep them subjugated.

The Athenians say they are dispensing with pretense because they don't wish to insult the Melians, that they could make up reasons to justify what they are doing but know they would be a lie, and in exchange they want the Melians not to insult them back by appealing to what is right but to instead "lay bare both of our real sentiments", but then express confusion and shock at the Melians refusal to see the logic of the Athenian position, demonstrating that Athens simultaneously believes the Melians are lying and trying to trick them by appealing to justice, but also for some reason refusing to best possible deal they can expect from realpolitik, which Athens cannot comprehend, because they have already concluded that the Melians are also operating on pure realpolitik and attempts to talk about what is right are merely rhetoric to obscure their actual demands. The Melian refusal is not a victory of realpolitik. It is a demonstration that a state operating on realpolitik cannot comprehend states which do not and perceives everything as a threat to itself, and will constantly miscalculate until its eventual destruction. By choosing to die rather than submit, the Melians demonstrate realpolitik does not work because not everyone operates on realpolitik.

The Melians talk about fairness and the Athenians respond "But you are outnumbered, so independence isn't an option" in confusion because the Athenians construe the "Fairness" talk to be "It is in our interests to remain independent". Athens has become so degraded by realpolitik that they can no longer understand other city states or their people. Athens scoffs at the notion Melos will be avenged for similar reasons, suggesting that if any cities felt they had something to profit by the war against Athens they would have already joined, and certainly wont do so after Melos is destroyed and the war is even further in Athens' favor.

Athens' triumphant declaration that the strong do as they will and the weak suffer what they must comes only AFTER they claim that nature proves they are right and the gods will side with them and Athens has nothing to fear. (Again, the story ends with the destruction of Athens).

And so on. It's supposed to be a tale about the decline of an empire and its final stages.

[First American Empire]

Left and right critics of neoliberalism unite!

Where shall we draw the partition line on our shares of Poland?

I call dibs on Krakow.

[Cekoviu]

Schedule changed, so I finished Macri Curb. https://gfycat.com/enviousashamedamethystgemclam

[Nova Cyberia]

Left and right critics of neoliberalism unite!

Where shall we draw the partition line on our shares of Poland?

Poles are bros of the highest order. I think this time we partition Germany instead since honestly it lost its soul when Prussia died.

[Pacomia]

Eh, I think Poland is a borderline autocracy (or could slide into one concerningly quickly and easily) that’s currently not really a country I would want to be associated if I ran the U.S.. Doesn’t help that they’re cheating the system of the EU.

[Nova Cyberia]

Eh, I think Poland is a borderline autocracy (or could slide into one concerningly quickly and easily) that’s currently not really a country I would want to be associated if I ran the U.S.. Doesn’t help that they’re cheating the system of the EU.

The EU is a hive of neoliberals and deserves to be cheated.

As for the US, it's not really like we have much of a problem being associated with autocracies. After all, we created many of them in our time when we had to continuously remind our friends south of the border that their shitty socialist governments suck.

[Liriena]

Schedule changed, so I finished Macri Curb. https://gfycat.com/enviousashamedamethystgemclam

I love you

[Ostroeuropa]

While we're at it, it's fucking astounding that realpolitik types reference the Melian dialogue in isolation, given that one of the exchanges is Athens mocking Melos for "Knowing the minds of others and the future and trusting in that which is uncertain, rather than the certainty of what is right before their eyes." (I.E, the athenian fleet), which is about how Athens views each interaction as seperate from others and in isolation, a series of deals and power plays devoid of any context but the relative power of the participants, and cannot comprehend how their behavior here would impact the way others see them except in terms of athens getting more powerful and demonstrating what happens to those who defy them. What relevance to Macedon how the Athenians treat Melos? It is not their concern or interest.


It's kind of insane that the bit of the story everyone remembers is the Melian dialogue, when a part of that dialogue is "Haha, you're focused on what happens next, i'm focusing on the here and now and that's while i'm going to win.", and forgets what happens immediately after this scene.

Again.

The story ends with the destruction of athens.

You're... you're understanding the book wrong!

Athens loses its empire, pisses far too much gold and manpower up the wall, and the disaster even leads to general panic, rioting, and the fall of their democracy into oligarchy.

Fucking *Persia* even dogpiles them and sides with Sparta. Sparta.

Protip:

Do not openly declare your plans for world conquest and how you are only ever an ally of convenience who will knife former allies in the back and annex them when it is their turn and how you think everything is a series of power plays with no sense of right or wrong and how just murdering everyone in case they rebel is actually more stable if they don't agree you should be in charge, oh and by the way if a vassal ever looks like it might start becoming too powerful, murder all of them too, for security purposes. Are you getting all this, scribe? Yeah, make sure everyone gets a copy of our new foreign policy.

This is not, in fact, how most countries operate. We're not trying to trick you, we're not lying. This isn't a ploy to trick you into not pursuing the above policy while secretly we are. If it were, why would everyone go mental the moment you dispense with the "ruse" of morality and be like "What the FUCK mate?!" and focus on taking you down. (This has happened multiple times in history by now.).

It's kind of sad that 2400 years of plan "Let's murder everybody" failing still hasn't demonstrated it's a bad plan.

[Torrocca]

Schedule changed, so I finished Macri Curb. https://gfycat.com/enviousashamedamethystgemclam

Okay, now that's fucking awesome.

[Soviet Tankistan]

Eh, I think Poland is a borderline autocracy (or could slide into one concerningly quickly and easily) that’s currently not really a country I would want to be associated if I ran the U.S.. Doesn’t help that they’re cheating the system of the EU.

The EU is a hive of neoliberals and deserves to be cheated.

As for the US, it's not really like we have much of a problem being associated with autocracies. After all, we created many of them in our time when we had to continuously remind our friends south of the border that their shitty socialist governments suck.

Showing them by killing everyone, destroying their belongings, and leaving some dubiously qualified warlord to rule over a once democratic nation.

[Nova Cyberia]

The EU is a hive of neoliberals and deserves to be cheated.

As for the US, it's not really like we have much of a problem being associated with autocracies. After all, we created many of them in our time when we had to continuously remind our friends south of the border that their shitty socialist governments suck.

Showing them by killing everyone, destroying their belongings, and leaving some dubiously qualified warlord to rule over a once democratic nation.

Democracy has no inherent value when the people elect morons who destroy their economies and try to cozy up with the Soviets. We literally did nothing wrong.

[Nea Byzantia]

I posted this in RWDT the other day, but ya'll might like it as well:

This question of what happens next is thus central to the economy’s trajectory. Without the productivity gain, nothing happens. Workers able to produce more than before, for whatever reason, is the sine qua non of economic progress. But only if accompanied by rising output are the effects for workers undeniably positive.

Historically, that has been the dynamic. From 1947 to 1972, for instance, economy-wide productivity roughly doubled. But output surged as well and, at the end of the period, the same share of the population was working and men’s wages were up 86%. In the manufacturing sector, productivity rose by 3.4% annually, but real value added rose by 4.2% annually; employment during the period rose by more than three million.

Compare that period to the 21st century, when America has lost nearly five million manufacturing jobs. Was any of this because of extraordinary technological breakthroughs that caused productivity to surge, allowing firms to do much more with many fewer workers? No. In fact, the average rate of productivity growth in manufacturing this century has been 3.1%—lower than 1947–72 and no different than 1972–2000. But output growth has been only 1.3%, less than a third the rate of the earlier period. We’ve gone from the world where firms use a doubling of productivity to double output, to one where they use it to lay off half their workers. Had output growth this century equaled that of 1950–2000, manufacturing employment today would be near an all-time high.

So when policymakers blame automation for job losses, they are looking in the wrong place. Productivity gains have always been with us—in fact, they used to come faster. If anything, the American economy is suffering from insufficient automation—as reflected in declining productivity growth, stagnant wages, and remarkably little use of robots. American manufacturers use only 200 industrial robots per 10,000 workers, the standard measure of adoption. In both Germany and Japan, that level exceeds 300. In South Korea, it exceeds 700. With greater automation and higher productivity, American firms would likely be more competitive in the international economy.

So who or what is the culprit for job losses, and how do we prevent further damage/ repair things?

[Torrocca]

The EU is a hive of neoliberals and deserves to be cheated.

As for the US, it's not really like we have much of a problem being associated with autocracies. After all, we created many of them in our time when we had to continuously remind our friends south of the border that their shitty socialist governments suck.

Showing them by killing everyone, destroying their belongings, and leaving some dubiously qualified warlord to rule over a once democratic nation.

Daily reminder that it's the easiest thing in the world to measure how much Socialism fails by the number of dictators you directly install in any given Central/South American country to support the business interests of a fruit company. Clearly that's all Socialism's fault.

[Torrocca]

I posted this in RWDT the other day, but ya'll might like it as well:

So who or what is the culprit for job losses,

Capitalists, business owners, and investors all trying to reduce expenditures as much as possible so that they can make more money.

and how do we prevent further damage/ repair things?

End the Capitalist system and socialize all economic resources, such as the means of production.

[Cekoviu]

Schedule changed, so I finished Macri Curb. https://gfycat.com/enviousashamedamethystgemclam

I love you

Y tu.

Schedule changed, so I finished Macri Curb. https://gfycat.com/enviousashamedamethystgemclam

Okay, now that's fucking awesome.

Thanks.

[Ostroeuropa]

Policy time:

Ban TV adverts for a company that has over 10 million pounds value. It'll certainly liven up the adverts to have the slots open to whatever crap your local maniacs and small businessfolk are trying to sell. Big companies can fund their own campaigns by other means.

Also changes the "Bottom line" calculations for television and means their revenue is based on small businesses instead of large ones demanding they push a pro-corporate line.

Promotes more market competition and so on too.

[Pasong Tirad]

Just ban the whole advertising industry, really.

I'd lose a job but that's fine.

[Cekoviu]

Just ban the whole advertising industry, really.

I'd lose a job but that's fine.

It's great that you'd be fine if you lost your job. Many people, including advertisers, wouldn't.

[Ostroeuropa]

Just ban the whole advertising industry, really.

I'd lose a job but that's fine.

It's great that you'd be fine if you lost your job. Many people, including advertisers, wouldn't.

Given the shitshow that is advertising, i'm not sure that "I'd lose my job professionally gaslighting and making people mentally ill so I can lie to them and say a product will fix the problem i'm causing" is going to make me crack out the violins to play them a song.

Or if you like; That's a selling point, not a reason not to do it. Like; "But won't somebody please think of the sex traffickers and their income?" and what have you, but on a lesser scale.

[Kowani]

Just ban the whole advertising industry, really.

I'd lose a job but that's fine.

It's great that you'd be fine if you lost your job. Many people, including advertisers, wouldn't.

So, how do you feel about transitioning away from coal?

[Nakena]

Just ban the whole advertising industry, really.

I'd lose a job but that's fine.

So you'd sacrifice part of your income for ideology? Or is there a specific reason you'd like to see them banned?

[Cekoviu]

It's great that you'd be fine if you lost your job. Many people, including advertisers, wouldn't.

So, how do you feel about transitioning away from coal?

It should be done incrementally rather than all at once, as Pasong Tirad suggests.