"Nothing is Real"; 'live' CNN coverage, 1991 Gulf

[JackRiddler]

If someone who's been here quite a long time is at this stage characterizing neoliberal as remotely left-wing, they should probably stop posting and go spend a while doing independent remedial study.

[peartreed]

To outsiders, Trump has become the epitome of “The Ugly American” stereotype in that he consistently demonstrates ignorance, arrogance and egocentricity off the charts. Yet others who oppose him, who have been blessed with a strong intellect, can also evidence the same level of self-satisfied egocentricity and arrogance by obviously enjoying denigrating others with cruel insult simply for the sadistic pleasure of a public put-down, for scoring points, for the cruel glee of gloating.

It is such a waste of otherwise commendable intelligence to see such offsetting ignorance and a consistent absence of empathy, compassion and sympathy for others less gifted. The peer approval and encouragement in rewarding that type of behavior also begins to explain the popularity of Trump to some stupid Americans. I just hate to see such blind adulation shown here.

[JackRiddler]

Don't take it so personally. Just go read for a while until you get the basic concepts straight. For example: What is neoliberalism? What is its history? Who coined this term originally? Why is it back, so to speak? It's not that hard. RI is not the right place for primers - although you will find plenty of material in that vein too. It's the right place for debating once you've acquired that much.

[Elvis]

This is pretty good:
http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/ ... ad#p667001

Neoliberalism Is a Political Project

Neoliberalism is not your father's liberalism; it's your great-great grandfather's liberalism, revived with a PR and financial savvy the robber barons never had.

Neoliberalism is the 800 lb. gorilla in the living room, yet the word is not to be found in the MSM vocabulary. So modern mainstream liberals don't know what it means, and often bristle at criticisms of neoliberalism because they assume it means them—liberals.

By the way, I think calling for the end of neoliberalism is more effective than calling for the end of capitalism. Most people can't imagine anything that's not capitalism (except communism which is sooo 20th century fail), so "death to capitalism" a non-starter.

[Grizzly]

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... liberalism

Harvey is da bomb...

[JackRiddler]

If Henry Giroux recommends this as an intro, I'll believe it...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myH3gg5o0t0

I'd start it historically, either with the 1930s business plots, or with its advent in power from the 1970s. And define it as the decision to return to open class warfare.

[peartreed]

My preceding December 5 post only made passing reference to neoliberalism in an opening sentence to bridge the thread topic to the point of my opinion as expressed in the thrust of the rest of that post. That is, the need for more consideration and conscience in our collective conduct, institutionally in society and on this particular forum.

Nevertheless, I appreciate the input and intended help in defining neoliberalism despite its irrelevance to my post.

What still bothers me is the original point that the respondents ignored as the focus was instead diverted to a distracting flaw that everyone jumped on. I just want to reiterate that my observation about "bullying" group behavior was thus exemplified yet again. And the contentious issue of more considerate conduct here was simply ignored and dropped.

Group leaders and their supporters (sympathetic advocates or simple Yes-Men) tend to dominate discussions and debates by criticizing, containing and controlling their rivals and minority opinion voices by finding fault and dividing the audience into opposing factions, then further isolating the main dissidents by group pressure, highlighting differences, disagreements and diverting the focus to their flaws and human frailties. This encourages followers to board the bandwagon and join the attack.

As I understand it, neoliberalism can also be a form of free-for-all, unregulated exploitation.

Ironically, without conscience and consideration for others, so can a debate forum.

I suppose my expectation of more empathy in exchanges here is ultimately unrealistic, given the prevailing pundits.

I think I'll return to a family focus for the festive season to maintain my abiding faith in my fellow man.

[JackRiddler]

"As I understand it, neoliberalism can also be a form of free-for-all, unregulated exploitation."

Actually not. Pure libertarianism decays quickly into chaos followed by authoritarian solutions, not surprisingly. Neoliberalism seeks to cut out the middle step by commandeering the state actively (even while denigrating "big government" the whole time) to force and stabilize doctrinal market solutions. Commons need not just to be enclosed but actively stamped out. Public spending hasn't actually fallen during this time, it has been increased and toward maintaining the private sector. This is natural enough since neoliberalism came to the fore just as capitalism hit a protracted profits crisis, so what better way than to have the government spend to force the profits? Examples are as varied as social impact bonds, charter schools, for-profit fake universities subsidized by the government, rail privatization, future-profit claims insured by the state or by international tribunals of corporate lawyers, and of course that old favorite and 800-lb gorilla, perpetual war -- but the latter with state agencies making way for PMCs.

Anyway, have fun with family and holidays.

[liminalOyster]

My preceding December 5 post only made passing reference to neoliberalism in an opening sentence to bridge the thread topic to the point of my opinion as expressed in the thrust of the rest of that post. That is, the need for more consideration and conscience in our collective conduct, institutionally in society and on this particular forum.

Nevertheless, I appreciate the input and intended help in defining neoliberalism despite its irrelevance to my post.

What still bothers me is the original point that the respondents ignored as the focus was instead diverted to a distracting flaw that everyone jumped on. I just want to reiterate that my observation about "bullying" group behavior was thus exemplified yet again. And the contentious issue of more considerate conduct here was simply ignored and dropped.

Group leaders and their supporters (sympathetic advocates or simple Yes-Men) tend to dominate discussions and debates by criticizing, containing and controlling their rivals and minority opinion voices by finding fault and dividing the audience into opposing factions, then further isolating the main dissidents by group pressure, highlighting differences, disagreements and diverting the focus to their flaws and human frailties. This encourages followers to board the bandwagon and join the attack.

As I understand it, neoliberalism can also be a form of free-for-all, unregulated exploitation.

Ironically, without conscience and consideration for others, so can a debate forum.

I suppose my expectation of more empathy in exchanges here is ultimately unrealistic, given the prevailing pundits.

I think I'll return to a family focus for the festive season to maintain my abiding faith in my fellow man.

My response was meant to neutrally point out that associating Neoliberalism with "Left Wing" is 1) unusual and 2) fundamentally incorrect. And I'll stand by it. Happy holidays sincerely.

[American Dream]

Jerky is still banned for weeks to come, on the thinnest of charges. We shouldn't treat our fellow board members that way.

[Belligerent Savant]

.

The Feb 2022 version:



https://twitter.com/plymouthian/status/ ... WM9-iKjOcg

[DrEvil]

Even the Russians are in on the joke.

Just kidding. Putin can get fucked.

[MacCruiskeen]

Fwiw, none of the many Iive fixed-camera feeds from Kyiv show any signs of military activity, as yet. No tanks, no columns of smoke, no sounds of explosions, etc.

https://www.google.com/search?q=livestr ... 8&dpr=1.58

E.g., WaPo livestream from the top of a building on Maidan square:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qy39oo6PcTU

[Harvey]

Putin can get fucked.

If I roll my eyes,
It isn't because you can't,
Be that as it may, he tries,
To be something you long ago forgot.

[DrEvil]

Putin can get fucked.

If I roll my eyes,
It isn't because you can't,
Be that as it may, he tries,
To be something you long ago forgot.

No idea what you're saying here. Attempting to parse poetry makes my eyes glaze over. But Putin can get fucked. With a cactus, just like every other piece of shit who thinks starting a fucking war is a good idea.