01-09-2017, 11:38 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-10-2017, 12:11 AM by Eric the Green.)
(01-09-2017, 06:31 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(01-09-2017, 03:36 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:I get the impression that he's not a fan of all the individual freedoms and constitutional rights and protections that we represent and often find ourselves defending here.(01-09-2017, 02:18 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:(01-09-2017, 03:26 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:(01-09-2017, 01:27 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Your mistake is in assuming it's all about culture for everyone, just because it happens to be so for you. In fact, most of the conservatives here are libertarian leaning, and base our reasoning not on culture but on facts and proven economic theory. Assuming that it's a clash of cultures may be why you go wrong so much.
Neo-liberalism (aka Reaganomics, Austrian economics, libertarian economics, trickle-down, free market ideology, etc.) is not based on facts, but on an ideological belief system promoted by those whose interests are served by it.
Human history for the last 12,000 years has been powered by a series of innovations, climaxing in our modern world over the last 200-plus years, according to the 2015 PBS documentary called Humanity from Space:
Humanity has proved that it can innovate, and explode the data availiable to us.
This documentary is far from the full human story. Indeed, it neglects the vast field of "culture" and ideas/ideologies. But it makes a great point. We have the data and the innovative ability to create a civilization for the future.
But the catch is that we need to pay attention to the data, and support the innovations we need.
But neo-liberalism is the greatest obstacle to that future. It is the greatest threat to all of our lives.
Because neo-liberals systematically deceive the people with false conspiracy theories that deny the data, and oppose innovation, and seeks to shut down the best means of coordinated action to support innovation and transmit data-- our public institutions.
Neo-liberals promote denial of climate change, ignoring and distorting the data that all our technology provides us about our future.
Neo-liberals oppose the innovations that could save us and allow us to prosper in the future, by defending the corporations that produce the kinds of energy and products that endanger us, and putting politicians in office like Donald Trump, Paul Ryan and Rex Tillerson who want to expand rather than transfer away from the industries that threaten us.
Neo-liberals deny that we are a global society, and seek to keep us enslaved to nationalist scammers like Donald Trump, at a time when peoples of the world need to work together to resolve our issues. It denies the value of people working together for the greater good, which has made us what we are; touting instead a ridiculous individualism that creates nothing.
Neo-liberalism seeks to concentrate the wealth created by human innovation in the hands of a few people, seeking a neo-medieval society in which everything is controlled by a few owners.
Neo-liberalism has been disproven by any standard imaginable. It is the worst scam of our time. No intelligent person has any business supporting or promoting it.
Hey Eric I think you are a bit off in your concept of Neo Liberalism. According to the accepted political and academic definition, many Democratic politicians are also considered Neo Liberals. In general it's a Centrist arena albeit one that promotes a light touch of government in terms of managing the economy. It was a type of "fine tuning" of the classic New Deal mixed economy model. Think the DLC. On the GOP side, think "Establishment Republicans." It sought to tweak it without throwing it out completely.
I have my own critique of Neo Liberalism due to its naive outlook regarding the ways that certain geopolitical actors exploit the West's blind faith in Neo Liberalism's reputed ability to supposedly prevent Great War (e.g. by fostering economic friendly competition). Those geopolitical actors meanwhile prepare for Great War.
What Eric really objects to is classical liberalism, which does mean he and I are almost diametrically opposed. I think he's purposely obfuscating the differences between classical liberalism and neoliberalism because he actually approves of those parts of neoliberalism that aren't part of classical liberalism.
As usual you seem particularly amazing in your ability to get the wrong ideas about me. Of course I am for individual freedoms; that's why I oppose all of Trump's appointments and his repressive slogans.
But you neo-liberal conservatives seem to think that individual freedom boils down to gun rights. You seem to think that this "right" of anyone to have a quick and easy means to kill people, along with the "right" of business to exploit and cheat others, is what "individual freedom" is. But that's Orwellian doublespeak, but that fits the totalitarian people that you are, Classic Xer. Or, at least, authoritarian (I don't want to exaggerate )