Clinamenic

θερμοδυναμικός καπιταλιστής
What I understand of neoliberalism, which is still too abstract, is such that neoliberalism seems impossible without global coordination of states. If the US and the EU can pool their weight, and I'm unsure of the progress on this front, perhaps a proper neoliberal world order can be erected.

While I assume that I am only aware of a portion of the atrocities entailed by unbridled bottom-line motivations, neoliberalism in principle is something I;m on board with. The state as a steward of the economy, but personally I'd rather see a triple-bottom line approach.

edit: provided we can figure out how to provide returns on investments on society and on the environment, which are the two other bottoms lines alongside the financal.
 
Last edited:

Clinamenic

θερμοδυναμικός καπιταλιστής
As an aside, there is an excellent video essay series, from a critical leftist perspective albeit not one that occludes rational economic analysis, called This is Neoliberalism.

The Hayak citations seem quite gnostic, in my opinion.

 
Last edited:

version

Well-known member
Perhaps there is something to be said for positive approaches rather than negative approaches. Rewarding the compliant rather than punishing the dissident. Although arguably they amount to the same thing, but again arguably there is something to be said, in certain cases at least.
I know what you mean, but I'd hesitate to call what Orban's doing a positive approach as it's rooted in racism:

“If Europe is not going to be populated by Europeans in the future and we take this as given, then we are speaking about an exchange of populations, to replace the population of Europeans with others,” said Orbán. “There are political forces in Europe who want a replacement of population for ideological or other reasons.”
 

WashYourHands

Cat Malogen
And it's the secular vs. religious demographic problem in the States at a greater scale—when evangelicals are popping out babies, and secular liberals go childless, or have a single kid, the population outcomes over generations go sour.

The same line of bs is spouted here about who breeds too much and who breeds too little, all framed through the evolutionary lens of class

You want more American kids? Take the condom off, it’s that *simple

*Not really, procreation can move fucking into a whole other realm of brutalist timing/menstrual cycles and basic genital mechanics. When you’re ready you’ll be able to empathise. I do procreation consultancies live via Zoom btw so please be presentable and prepared, America won’t know what hit it
 

Clinamenic

θερμοδυναμικός καπιταλιστής
This whole area of procreation is impermissibly alien to me. I suspect this is one of the areas in which I am most removed from the herd, as my idea of raising a human is probably too arcane and systematic for most, although not without love, which ought to play the central role, I'd say.
 

luka

Well-known member
the people in their twenties here, gus, barty, entertainment all spent their youth getting really into rightwing blogs and stuff, shapiro and what not. big generational dividing line.
 

Clinamenic

θερμοδυναμικός καπιταλιστής
I also get the sense that @suspended and I are particularly responding to milieus of left academia, social justice, etc., trying to advance the logic local to such milieus, the logic of social justice that is largely lacking across normal culture, which I often forget.

Don't wanna speak for him, though. He could be experiencing this differently.

But I would say that marxism qua anti-capitalism is "utopian folly" by and large, although not without a few salvageable philosophic components.

Becoming a capitalist from a marxist angle has been interesting and, I'd like to think, has lended (edit: lent?) considerable insight into the nature of capitalism.
 
Last edited:

suspended

Well-known member
Very effective analogy. Like what vague understanding I have of corporate tax policy. The more nations that hike up certain taxes, the more other nations stand to gain from appealing to those corporate interests. And intergovernmental agreements seem like nightmares.
Beautiful example. Exactly.
 

suspended

Well-known member
Perhaps there is something to be said for positive approaches rather than negative approaches. Rewarding the compliant rather than punishing the dissident. Although arguably they amount to the same thing, but again arguably there is something to be said, in certain cases at least.
Enticement vs. coercion. A subtle difference, but a difference that makes the whole world over.
 

Clinamenic

θερμοδυναμικός καπιταλιστής
Enticement vs. coercion. A subtle difference, but a difference that makes the whole world over.
I do think there is a critical difference, just that particular example wasn't properly conducive. I was using "positive" and "negative" in a stricter conceptual sense, rather than as meaning good or bad.
 

suspended

Well-known member
the people in their twenties here, gus, barty, entertainment all spent their youth getting really into rightwing blogs and stuff, shapiro and what not. big generational dividing line.
Literally didn't, spent my formative time in radical leftist environs, then spent a couple years in libertarian circles, and now I don't hang anywhere with more internal political alignment than this board (i.e., very little).

I also get the sense that @suspended and I are particularly responding to milieus of left academia, social justice, etc., trying to advance the logic local to such milieus, the logic of social justice that is largely lacking across normal culture, which I often forget.
Yes.
 

suspended

Well-known member
WashYourHands, I don't even understand what you're saying. I make an argument, you say it's premised on a "logical fallacy" or is "BS" but never explain what is BS, or how, or what the correct way to view the situation is.

Do you not think that selection cycles and positive feedback loops are real? Do you not think they apply to population growth? Do you not think population matters to economic and military and geopolitical power? Do you not think that current trends will persevere over time? What exactly is BS about my argument, please, without all this irrelevant silliness about how I should "wait til I have children of my own"
 

WashYourHands

Cat Malogen
You’re on the naughty step with sir

There are 350million Americans. Is that not enough? Do the maths. If you invested in your high school education sector, invested in your healthcare and benefits systems, invested in actual drinkable water, indicated that as a nation you were less of a clusterfuck I’d listen to your mantra. Look what the US does with the people it actually has - you’re disposable workhorses

Why the fuck should I listen to breed more fallacies when you broad stroke into pure abstraction? Do we need to breed more? Laughs haughtily. No we don’t. We need to look at a deeper timeframe, that ideological bs based on “growth” on a finite rock needs a complete overhaul
 

Clinamenic

θερμοδυναμικός καπιταλιστής
At a certain point, it seems, economic growth will have to inflect from a development of quantity to a development of quality. Investing in human capital (edit: rather than just widening the workforce). Education and nutrition seem like key avenues, maybe the key avenues, but getting more concrete than that proves difficult given my current understanding.

That said, I am a subscriber to the infinite economic growth notion, just on the condition that we understand that every so often a paradigm shift is necessary. That is, infinite growth along a single, unchanging dimension is unsustainable in more than one sense of the word.
 

sufi

lala
It's very very primitive thinking to insist that capitalist conflict is the only way.
Increasingly power and justice are opposed, so something's got to give, your precious bad actors will hold smaller and smaller (though maybe richer and richer) constituencies, desperately ignoring the obvious and virtuous ways to sustain us all

is that abstract enough?
 

Clinamenic

θερμοδυναμικός καπιταλιστής
It's very very primitive thinking to insist that capitalist conflict is the only way.
Increasingly power and justice are opposed, so something's got to give, your precious bad actors will hold smaller and smaller (though maybe richer and richer) constituencies, desperately ignoring the obvious and virtuous ways to sustain us all

is that abstract enough?
If thats how things keep going, the yeah I'd agree that something's got to give. Thats really why I believe in the state qua public entrepreneur. Just about finding innovative ways to irrigate those vast reserves of capital to stimulate ground-level economic welfare. Still need to look into "opportunity zones" but in principle this is what that legislation seems to seek to do.
 
Top