Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Honestly, I’d rather the whole of humanity (myself included) die than for most of us to be slaves to a corporate upper class which does its best to grind the joy out of human existence in order to maximize profits. And if you think your technocratic ideals will lead to anything else, you’re the naive one.
@LeGarcon To the extent that you're using Bezos and Amazon as a stand in for Silicon Valley, yes, because the alternative is a considerably more rent-seeking elite where wealth is obtained chiefly through extractive measures.
AzurePaladin: I'm not proposing doing nothing; there are certain policies like UBI that could mitigate the negative effects of wealth inequality, and I'm in favor of such policies, but we have to be realistic about whether it's actually possible to reverse the trajectory of wealth inequality.
In which case you're one of the dangerous extremists who'd consider killing billions of people to be a worthy tradeoff for a more equal society.
Edited by CaptainCapsase on Mar 24th 2019 at 11:24:39 AM
Y'know if under the current system the only choice for the economic elite are "Silicon valley" or "figurative bandit lord" maybe those socialists have a point? Just throwing it out there.
And just like that I find Captn's position slightly more reasonable, what the hell is going on with this thread.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Mar 24th 2019 at 8:26:53 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangI mean in the past we’ve had a system where the threat of the mob has been used as a way to make the elites shelve the banditry behaviour of other elites and share the wealth so as to avoid the mob.
The mob doesn't have to slaughter the rich, it just has to be a big enough risk that the elites decide to disperse the mob via the easiest means available, sharing what they have.
![]()
As a Democratic-Socalist I offer regulated capitalism where the workers are able to properly enjoy the fruits over an increasingly powerful economy.
Edited by Silasw on Mar 24th 2019 at 3:35:55 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranYour argument has managed to make corporate slavery seem somewhat tolerable, congratulations.
I mean seriously, literally any argument would be better.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang![]()
![]()
If you're talking about the early 20th century, the threat of the mob wasn't hypothetical in Russia or China. Hundreds of millions of people died in the wars, famines, and revolutions of that period, and without a similar credible threat I don't see any real substantive reductions in inequality.
As for your suggestion, regulated capitalism is what we already have, and I'm not proposing drastic reductions in regulations.
Edited by CaptainCapsase on Mar 24th 2019 at 11:38:47 AM
Look, if history truly is a cycle of widening inequality and violence, I for one say we go with trying to defy fate. Just because others are cruel does not mean we must be. And just because others would rather sacrifice morals for power does not mean we should stoop to their level.
>Killing the planet
...Can we NOT? The world won't be better off with most of us dead. That rather defeats the purpose of trying to make a more equal society if most of us don't get to enjoy it. Which, for that matter, loops right back around to being a more violent version of Capsase's suggestion. Also, I cannot begin to calculate how morally reprehensible the result would be.
Edited by AzurePaladin on Mar 24th 2019 at 11:35:45 AM
The awful things he says and does are burned into our cultural consciousness like a CRT display left on the same picture too long. -Fighteer
X3 That’s a point, the elites had to see what their excessive greed would lead to before they’d correct course to avoid it happening in their own country. I’d hope that some still remember those lessons even now, if not I’d hope we don’t hit the point of another real example emerging, but we might well.
Edit to edit: The US does not have a truly regulated system, the little regulation you lot do have is unraveling before our eyes, there is so much room for improvement within the system as is.
Edited by Silasw on Mar 24th 2019 at 3:39:59 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranSo. . . it's happened. Mueller released his report. And it turned out to be the biggest disappointment since they opened Al Capone's vault. Trump isn't going to let go of this. He's going to use it as proof that Democrats are delusional and obsessed with things that aren't really there. And Democrats are going to have a harder time convincing voters that further investigation into Trump is worth it. What paths do you see for the Democrats?
![]()
IMO we won't hit the point of a real demonstration being required because by the end of the 21st century "the mob" will likely be totally obsolete as a credible threat due to various technological changes; that's how I suspect the 21st century will differ from previous ones rather than the more optimistic notion that we'll somehow buck the trend of inequality tracking with human development.
Edited by CaptainCapsase on Mar 24th 2019 at 11:41:43 AM
Uh no, what we have is the husk of regulated capitalism that over the last decade has been repeatedly weakened and is currently being attacked by the Trump administration.
Keeping the status quo is somewhat better than actively making it worse but not by too much.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
X3 Is it worth me trying to engage with you and explain how you’re being defeatist or should I not bother?
![]()
The threat of the mob can never go away, I get that you have this fantasy about us abolishing democracy and living under a benevolent AI overlord, but it’s not going to happen and any attempt to make it happen is going to see huge and likely violent pushback.
Edited by Silasw on Mar 24th 2019 at 3:46:14 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranCapsase, you are certainly making the same arguments I see from some of the more violence-minded Leftists I've seen floating around. That we can't change things in the system, and tearing it down is the only option.
Because as much as a lot of us (myself included) reject Ludlow's violent suggestion, if you gave people the choice of existing only to make things more comfortable for the rich and becoming part of a mob, I think a lot of people would choose the latter. And that's something I absolutely want to see avoided.
I don't believe that the world is so lost that we have to accept that equality can only come through violence. What else is Democracy for, if not a way to change things without violence?
The awful things he says and does are burned into our cultural consciousness like a CRT display left on the same picture too long. -Fighteer@Silasw: Actually I think "the mob" may already be quasi-obselete; not because of technologies allowing for greater social control (I suspect that's going to be the final nail in the coffin though), but because of the extent to which modern technology has allowed for virtually all people's basic needs to be fulfilled in developed countries. Society is 3 missed meals away from anarchy, but by the same token 3 meals a day and some cheap entertainment is pretty much all you need to avert violent revolt.
I'm not saying equality can only happen through violence, I'm saying that anything short of reverting to hunter gatherer lifestyles will only temporarily reduce inequality. I also think you're kind of strawmanning me; you seem to think I'm implying that greater inequality will necessarily degrade people's quality of life; it certainly might lead to stagnation for some (as has happened for subsets of the populations of developed countries), but the general trajectory is towards rising quality of life across the board, albeit unequally distributed.
Edited by CaptainCapsase on Mar 24th 2019 at 12:01:28 PM
That’s cute, you think that the parasites at the top will leave up to have three whole meals if they’re not reigned in?
You’re right that it’s super easy to provide the basic needs, yet we’re failing, in the UK we’ve got charities trying to save needy children getting attacked for showing how bad things are, Charles can tell you all about how the people where he lives wouldn’t be getting their three meals a day without outside help.
If this is kept up without the system being reigned in we’re at a real risk of seeing left-wing violence return, it might be a mob in DC, it could be a mass shooting at the New York stock exchange, it could be a series of arson attacks on Wall Street, that’s what I’m talking about with the mob, it’s a real threat and one that has to be avoided by those with power reigning in the parasites who want to take away the three meals.
Edited by Silasw on Mar 24th 2019 at 4:02:52 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran

...He's kinda 'eh' as a candidate though. Rather single issue on UBI, which is something I don't know how I feel about. Into the vague mess of the middle of my rankings he goes.
Personally, I view him like the Climate Change guy. He's not a serious candidate, rather he exists to push more esoteric policies into the party's Overton window.
So from that perspective, he's great and doing a good job. UBI is super interesting and I'm happy that he could make it more mainstream.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang