© SOTT.net
Running Time: 01:00:15
Download: MP3 - 55.2 MB
SOTT
SIGNS
OF THE
TIMES
OF THE
TIMES
Welcome to Sott.net
The World for People who Think
SOTT Focus:
Running Time: 01:00:15
Download: MP3 - 55.2 MB
Reader Comments
@GCarlin
" Peterson shows how clueless he is about what socialism is. Funny that if it weren't for socialism in Canada helping Unions, he would've been fired from his professor job way back before he became famous ."
As for not being fired because his union protects him, true enough by degree, yet if there were no union the atmosphere would likely be so different that many of the other radicalized professors would have been drummed out long ago and now they are sheltered and can only complain about Peterson. I'm thinking he would have done just fine without a union on account that the atmosphere would be changed.
Although unions have their place, it is usually on account that some employers will take advantage - and there are many bad employers no argument. However, there are many workers who would prefer to be non-unionized and many employers who treat their workers well without unions. As said above, many unions are often a magnet for sheltering bad workers (or professors) with even worse attitudes, which makes for a toxic workplace dragging them all down. Some professors might even say that there is a preponderance of said toxic professors who can't be fired when clearly they immediately should be. I guess that is one aspect of socialism that works well, for them, yet it does not help society whatsoever with what comes out of their classrooms.
@GCarlin
" His daughter wouldn't have been able to afford all of the surgeries for her condition if it were privatized ."
As far as I can tell she was able to eventually overcome her conditions through diet on her own volition, and whatever socialized medical treatments were done came at the expense of her health.
@GCarlin
" Zizek is down to earth about working class conditions. Peterson is more about inspiration ."
I'm not so sure they are probably not that different. Where Peterson grew up he would well understand working class conditions and blue collars.
It also seems to me that Peterson is more 'famous' now because he is actually helping these same people rather than suppressing them, and you are right, he is inspiring many and that is not welcomed by others.
" Peterson shows how clueless he is about what socialism is. Funny that if it weren't for socialism in Canada helping Unions, he would've been fired from his professor job way back before he became famous ."
As for not being fired because his union protects him, true enough by degree, yet if there were no union the atmosphere would likely be so different that many of the other radicalized professors would have been drummed out long ago and now they are sheltered and can only complain about Peterson. I'm thinking he would have done just fine without a union on account that the atmosphere would be changed.
Although unions have their place, it is usually on account that some employers will take advantage - and there are many bad employers no argument. However, there are many workers who would prefer to be non-unionized and many employers who treat their workers well without unions. As said above, many unions are often a magnet for sheltering bad workers (or professors) with even worse attitudes, which makes for a toxic workplace dragging them all down. Some professors might even say that there is a preponderance of said toxic professors who can't be fired when clearly they immediately should be. I guess that is one aspect of socialism that works well, for them, yet it does not help society whatsoever with what comes out of their classrooms.
@GCarlin
" His daughter wouldn't have been able to afford all of the surgeries for her condition if it were privatized ."
As far as I can tell she was able to eventually overcome her conditions through diet on her own volition, and whatever socialized medical treatments were done came at the expense of her health.
@GCarlin
" Zizek is down to earth about working class conditions. Peterson is more about inspiration ."
I'm not so sure they are probably not that different. Where Peterson grew up he would well understand working class conditions and blue collars.
It also seems to me that Peterson is more 'famous' now because he is actually helping these same people rather than suppressing them, and you are right, he is inspiring many and that is not welcomed by others.
Gcarlin That's not what JBP means when he talks about "socialism".I understand. He should stop demonizing the word socialism as the Republicans and democrats do.
Instead, call it what it is, ussr communism was a form of fascism and usa capitalism is also a form of fascism. Fascism = STATE CORPORATISM
@GCarlinMy case is that if there were no worker protections, there would be no way he could stand up against the SJW nonsense. But then, people like him are in league with libertarian ideals of how unions are bad. He's an unknowing tool of the right/libertarians to justify the agenda of destroying a baseline worker's rights system, because "people are lazy" or "80% of the people do all the work". Sure, that's true in some cases but in some cases you could be that competent worker who says something that management/ownership sees as a threat and uses to lay you off (especially in the right wing "RIGHT TO WORK" states).
" Peterson shows how clueless he is about what socialism is. Funny that if it weren't for socialism in Canada helping Unions, he would've been fired from his professor job way back before he became famous ."
As for not being fired because his union protects him, true enough by degree, yet if there were no union the atmosphere would likely be so different that many of the other radicalized professors would have been drummed out long ago and now they are sheltered and can only complain about Peterson. I'm thinking he would have done just fine without a union on account that the atmosphere would be changed.
Although unions have their place, it is usually on account that some employers will take advantage - and there are many bad employers no argument. However, there are many workers who would prefer to be non-unionized and many employers who treat their workers well without unions. As said above, many unions are often a magnet for sheltering bad workers (or professors) with even worse attitudes, which makes for a toxic workplace dragging them all down. Some professors might even say that there is a preponderance of said toxic professors who can't be fired when clearly they immediately should be. I guess that is one aspect of socialism that works well, for them, yet it does not help society whatsoever with what comes out of their classrooms.
@GCarlinIf you didn't know what was happening to you, and you needed a doctor to find out- LIKE SHE DID, would you rather be in huge debt for that? Your hindsight is 20/20, but she had to get bones/joints fixed because otherwise she would've been crippled. It was MANY YEARS before she figured out what helped her. In the american privatized crap care system (or Romneycare/Obamacare- same thing), you become broke because of this because of the costs not carried by the supposedly "good" private insurance system. This did not happen for her BECAUSE OF SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. Don't ignore the fact that if you or your family member had a condition that took years to treat before finding out a cure, you would be better off WITHOUT socialized medicine. It's so easy for you to say in hindsight, perhaps because you have socialized medicine now, or never had to go through the system (like my family has and almost faced bankruptcy!)
" His daughter wouldn't have been able to afford all of the surgeries for her condition if it were privatized ."
As far as I can tell she was able to eventually overcome her conditions through diet on her own volition, and whatever socialized medical treatments were done came at the expense of her health.
@GCarlinHe's not about working class because he's defending the idea that executives and higher ups make money because they produce more. That's why the right wing loves him, he defends this "american dream" (or what other variants exist around the world). "WORK HARD AND ONE DAY YOU WILL BE RICH TOO". Pfft, of course this happens- much like those who work hard to become famous singers do- but you hear about the successes and not much about the 100x (or more) of failures. Peterson is a dreamer, inspiration comes from him. But he doesn't address the elephant in the room- the economy has been skewed to benefit the banks/corporations more and more since the late 70s/early 80s. It's clear as day, did you know that the top income tax rate during the good times of the 50s and 60s were 2x higher than they are today? At the same time, taxes were lower on the working class. For every dollar saved by a working class person, they spend at least 75% on average. For every dollar saved by the rich, less than 50% is spent. According to capitalism, money in the pockets of the working class is BETTER for the economy, than to give tax breaks for the rich.
" Zizek is down to earth about working class conditions. Peterson is more about inspiration ."
I'm not so sure they are probably not that different. Where Peterson grew up he would well understand working class conditions and blue collars.
It also seems to me that Peterson is more 'famous' now because he is actually helping these same people rather than suppressing them, and you are right, he is inspiring many and that is not welcomed by others.
But no, the conservatives will make you believe otherwise, that somehow it trickles down.
I'm a lone ranger, stuck in the middle of nowhere.
SOTT has it right about the global warming nonsense, but wrong about this JP socialism is evil crap.
The Jimmy Dore Show has it great about both right and left being fascist oligarchic systems, but they talk good about the bs green new deal.
B oth of you guys could be a whole lot better by questioning authority. JP is an authority as much as the green movement is.
Look at your own life and your own struggles in life and see what real justice is.
Don't excuse this messed up privatized healthcare/education system because JP thinks hierarchies are ok in capitalism and yet denounces socialism/marxism for that.
Don't excuse this SJW crap as marxist when it's exactly ignoring the key points of marxism- CLASS STRUGGLE not IDENTITY struggle.
MLK jr and Malcolm X weren't killed while they were into the identity phase of black vs white. They were killed when they realized it was a class struggle. Now you see why I'm a bit annoyed at yall for focusing on JP's identity politics fighting identity. He's never been about class, but about distraction from that. Same for the "civil rights" leaders and SJW's today who can say whatever they want and still get media coverage and not get shot.
My problem is that both sott and jimmy dore show are ignoring the piece of crap in their truth sandwiches. Just because it's a tasty sandwich, you should make sure you discard the crap embedded in it. Then maybe I can relate.
But Joe, you aren't making sense when you try to defend JP's different meaning of socialism. A word has an established meaning. Someone who twists the meaning, whether they be right winger or SJW is lying, whether to oneself or others. Even if JP is misleading himself about the meaning and means well, it doesn't rectify his damage of the word, much like the mass media damages the term 'conspiracy' as some nut job thing.
SOTT has it right about the global warming nonsense, but wrong about this JP socialism is evil crap.
The Jimmy Dore Show has it great about both right and left being fascist oligarchic systems, but they talk good about the bs green new deal.
B oth of you guys could be a whole lot better by questioning authority. JP is an authority as much as the green movement is.
Look at your own life and your own struggles in life and see what real justice is.
Don't excuse this messed up privatized healthcare/education system because JP thinks hierarchies are ok in capitalism and yet denounces socialism/marxism for that.
Don't excuse this SJW crap as marxist when it's exactly ignoring the key points of marxism- CLASS STRUGGLE not IDENTITY struggle.
MLK jr and Malcolm X weren't killed while they were into the identity phase of black vs white. They were killed when they realized it was a class struggle. Now you see why I'm a bit annoyed at yall for focusing on JP's identity politics fighting identity. He's never been about class, but about distraction from that. Same for the "civil rights" leaders and SJW's today who can say whatever they want and still get media coverage and not get shot.
My problem is that both sott and jimmy dore show are ignoring the piece of crap in their truth sandwiches. Just because it's a tasty sandwich, you should make sure you discard the crap embedded in it. Then maybe I can relate.
But Joe, you aren't making sense when you try to defend JP's different meaning of socialism. A word has an established meaning. Someone who twists the meaning, whether they be right winger or SJW is lying, whether to oneself or others. Even if JP is misleading himself about the meaning and means well, it doesn't rectify his damage of the word, much like the mass media damages the term 'conspiracy' as some nut job thing.
No one is fully behind the theory of “trickle down” just as no one supports the Supreme Court’s decision to give corporations all the unalienable rights of an individual or citizens united for that matter($=speech) nor do many support the ROE V WADE scam w/o endless propaganda. Be that as it may in typical lefty parlance you throw the baby out with the bath water. It’s all or nothing for you Marxist freaks. I have been on both sides of the ladder; both owning two million $ businesses, employing many people & homeless eating out of dumpsters. I can honestly say giving people free shit in perpetuity helps no one neither does fractional reserve banking but capitalism is a great vehicle and engine that is better than any other system on the planet. Why on earth do you think people from all over the world want to live here. It’s certainly not for our collectivist progressive “woke” values lol!
The problem isn't socialism vs capitalism. The problem is centralization of power. It doesn't matter what the system is, if it can be centralized, megalomaniacs will figure out how to take it over. The more ideologically compelling, the easier it is to do this, because the clever bastards can justify their actions and manipulate the masses with the lingo du jour.
Yep!
I think the title of the debate was loaded too. It's not capitalism ("pure") vs communism, but capitalism (unregulated) vs socialism.
The only difference in the first VS is that one system is run by the rich owner class and the other is run by the powerful political class.
Socialism is neither but rather a balance. But people like Peterson (and others on both parties) serve a purpose to demonize the term socialism, equating it with communism, welfare, and so on.
I'll use a good example of health care costs in the USA. It's ridiculous for a few reasons- and it spills over to education and other things that afterward I will describe works better in socialist european systems (and Peterson's Canada).
In capitalist private insurance healthcare like the USA:
-Insurance companies get a huge margin of profits. Because of multiple insurance systems, there is a lot of duplicate work. They also seek to deny claims in order to keep profits high.
-corps can change what they want for drugs no real regulations there nor a single buyer as there are in socialist systems
ironically, a lot of the research that leads to private "discoveries" is actually Gov't funded through universities/NIH.
-doctors want to be paid a lot to recoup there costs of education
-----those same costs of education are ridiculously high BECAUSE of capitalism/private ownership.
----------despite that, many professors are hired as adjunct professors and make very little money- so where does all of the tuition go?
Of course it's not into the actual education or labor, but the pockets of the "non-profit" chairmen/executives.
In socialist economies, medicine is better regulated because there is a single insurance pool, less duplicate work. Also, there is a better management of where costs should go.
-medicines are regulated in cost... the profits are limited to corporations and a lot of drugs are developed in public institutions
-doctors are paid well but not as much as in the USA, but their education costs are not sky high
----because education is not based on who can pay to play- those who have merit get the spots to study medicine. Healthy COMPETITION in a socialized education/health system. In the USA, a smaller percentage are offered scholarships and the rest pay in full to get the "privelage" of being a highly paid doctor.
-education is affordable or fully subsidized because it is publically run. professors get a more fair pay scale and retirement system without the market for underpaid adjuncts.
What IRONY that a socialist education/health care system encourages competition for SKILL over who can pay. I also have found in my history of dealing with a lot of doctors, for myself and family, some of the most open minded ones were trained in south america/europe. I think that is because they got into those schools because of skill, instead of having finances for it.
Call it what it is, capitalism, oligarchy, or even looming fascism, but whatever Peterson was trying to defend was not real. Zizek knows what's up and I sense that is because he probably went through the tribulations of privatized systems like I have and the many who are sick and tired of the excuses given to us by those who blindly believe in an unregulated economy that takes necessities and makes them for profit. Sure, some people may not want to use the healthcare system or higher education systems out of knowing that they too are flawed, but think about the people that NEED IT. Just because you don't need it NOW, doesn't mean you can tell someone else that they are wrong for using it. You might need it in the future too when you break something, or need to find a new job, etc. But before you defend the USA capitalism, remember that it's not real competition because of the same thing those libertariantards (just like libtards) defend- the status quo that gives them political power.
I think the title of the debate was loaded too. It's not capitalism ("pure") vs communism, but capitalism (unregulated) vs socialism.
The only difference in the first VS is that one system is run by the rich owner class and the other is run by the powerful political class.
Socialism is neither but rather a balance. But people like Peterson (and others on both parties) serve a purpose to demonize the term socialism, equating it with communism, welfare, and so on.
I'll use a good example of health care costs in the USA. It's ridiculous for a few reasons- and it spills over to education and other things that afterward I will describe works better in socialist european systems (and Peterson's Canada).
In capitalist private insurance healthcare like the USA:
-Insurance companies get a huge margin of profits. Because of multiple insurance systems, there is a lot of duplicate work. They also seek to deny claims in order to keep profits high.
-corps can change what they want for drugs no real regulations there nor a single buyer as there are in socialist systems
ironically, a lot of the research that leads to private "discoveries" is actually Gov't funded through universities/NIH.
-doctors want to be paid a lot to recoup there costs of education
-----those same costs of education are ridiculously high BECAUSE of capitalism/private ownership.
----------despite that, many professors are hired as adjunct professors and make very little money- so where does all of the tuition go?
Of course it's not into the actual education or labor, but the pockets of the "non-profit" chairmen/executives.
In socialist economies, medicine is better regulated because there is a single insurance pool, less duplicate work. Also, there is a better management of where costs should go.
-medicines are regulated in cost... the profits are limited to corporations and a lot of drugs are developed in public institutions
-doctors are paid well but not as much as in the USA, but their education costs are not sky high
----because education is not based on who can pay to play- those who have merit get the spots to study medicine. Healthy COMPETITION in a socialized education/health system. In the USA, a smaller percentage are offered scholarships and the rest pay in full to get the "privelage" of being a highly paid doctor.
-education is affordable or fully subsidized because it is publically run. professors get a more fair pay scale and retirement system without the market for underpaid adjuncts.
What IRONY that a socialist education/health care system encourages competition for SKILL over who can pay. I also have found in my history of dealing with a lot of doctors, for myself and family, some of the most open minded ones were trained in south america/europe. I think that is because they got into those schools because of skill, instead of having finances for it.
Call it what it is, capitalism, oligarchy, or even looming fascism, but whatever Peterson was trying to defend was not real. Zizek knows what's up and I sense that is because he probably went through the tribulations of privatized systems like I have and the many who are sick and tired of the excuses given to us by those who blindly believe in an unregulated economy that takes necessities and makes them for profit. Sure, some people may not want to use the healthcare system or higher education systems out of knowing that they too are flawed, but think about the people that NEED IT. Just because you don't need it NOW, doesn't mean you can tell someone else that they are wrong for using it. You might need it in the future too when you break something, or need to find a new job, etc. But before you defend the USA capitalism, remember that it's not real competition because of the same thing those libertariantards (just like libtards) defend- the status quo that gives them political power.
[Link]
I laugh when Peterson says why Venezuela is doing bad without reading SOTT and other sources that explain why: messed up sanctions to purposely destroy the governments. Before Chavez, there were huge tent/shanty towns around Caracas. Years of oil revenue really helped people... pfft. But no, blame the socialists who were rigged to fail by the OLIGARCH run world economy.
JP should stand up for real justice and start challenging OLIGARCHY, the same thing that ran the Soviet Union, The Euro, and the USA.
I laugh when Peterson says why Venezuela is doing bad without reading SOTT and other sources that explain why: messed up sanctions to purposely destroy the governments. Before Chavez, there were huge tent/shanty towns around Caracas. Years of oil revenue really helped people... pfft. But no, blame the socialists who were rigged to fail by the OLIGARCH run world economy.
JP should stand up for real justice and start challenging OLIGARCHY, the same thing that ran the Soviet Union, The Euro, and the USA.
Man you are HIGH on “socialism.” Have you ever been to Cuba? Or are you talking about socialism light..like not socialism at all but capitalism with a healthy welfare state like Northern Europe. The clowns here supporting “socialism” either don’t live in “Socialist” countries, speak about it in terms of hypotheticals or only point to rare examples of true socialism successes being careful to edit any Socialist dystopias out of their collectivist machinations. Marx sucks....
You're having a hard time keeping all of your griping straight. Socialism is a system where the government owns ALL property and means of production. Plus, it's an ideology. Capitalism isn't really an "-ism." It's not an ideology, but is a system where the means of production and property are privately owned. Socialism is a system where your individual worth is based on the group you belong to. Capitalism is where you are valued based on who you are and how you contribute.
Every one of your gripes about capitalism have nothing to do with pure capitalism. For instance, university tuition is high because government took over the loan market in that sector through regulation. Medical costs are high because people are hypochondriacs, providing massive demands on the system. Venezuela is failing because it ran out of people to steal from. Income taxes are not only unconstitutional, but a socialist style grab of one of the most sacred tenets of capitalism; my labor.
Get a grip, quit griping and go clean your room. If you can get that right, you might have enough in you to help your grandma. Leave the -isms to other countries. Millions of immigrants are dying to get into the USA for a reason.
Every one of your gripes about capitalism have nothing to do with pure capitalism. For instance, university tuition is high because government took over the loan market in that sector through regulation. Medical costs are high because people are hypochondriacs, providing massive demands on the system. Venezuela is failing because it ran out of people to steal from. Income taxes are not only unconstitutional, but a socialist style grab of one of the most sacred tenets of capitalism; my labor.
Get a grip, quit griping and go clean your room. If you can get that right, you might have enough in you to help your grandma. Leave the -isms to other countries. Millions of immigrants are dying to get into the USA for a reason.
You're having a hard time keeping all of your griping straight. Socialism is a system where the government owns ALL property and means of production. Plus, it's an ideology. Capitalism isn't really an "-ism." It's not an ideology, but is a system where the means of production and property are privately owned. Socialism is a system where your individual worth is based on the group you belong to. Capitalism is where you are valued based on who you are and how you contribute.I'm talking about what's on the table in the USA- what Bernie Sanders and other socialists in Europe do. What the yellow vests in France are fighting back for after banker Macron tried to shift France away from Social Democracy.
" social democrats are opposed to ultimately ending capitalism, and are instead supportive of progressive reforms to capitalism.[7] "
What I see JP and others do is mix the pot and try to use the -ism to make people think that everything to blame is from regulation. They even try to equate the crazy SJWs as marxist, which Zizek and others have explained is NOT marxism- as marxism goes on class- not race, gender, etc.
I mentioned that MLK and Malcolm X were not killed for civil rights, but killed when they started to promote the working class vs the "ownership class". By ownership class, it doesn't mean the shop owner, but the Oligarch politicians and corporate sponsors that run the government.
Every one of your gripes about capitalism have nothing to do with pure capitalism. For instance, university tuition is high because government took over the loan market in that sector through regulation. Medical costs are high because people are hypochondriacs, providing massive demands on the system. Venezuela is failing because it ran out of people to steal from. Income taxes are not only unconstitutional, but a socialist style grab of one of the most sacred tenets of capitalism; my labor.How are these hypochondriacs magically not a drain in government/public run medicine systems? We pay more PER PERSON, counting everyone than western european countries. You can't tell someone who broke their leg that they should shop around for the best deal. They are a captive buyer, subject to the whims of the supply. In a private run system, there is a profit motive which in itself is not wrong, but if you are hurt in an accident are you able to negotiate a better deal?
Get a grip, quit griping and go clean your room. If you can get that right, you might have enough in you to help your grandma. Leave the -isms to other countries. Millions of immigrants are dying to get into the USA for a reason.
I agree that income taxes are illegal (even the constitution deems them as an equal exchange- your hour of labor for X pay). But taxes on profits are legal, even according to our constitution! Why is it that since the 40s,50s,60s, both political parties in the USA have dropped corporate and capital gains taxes and shifted the burden of taxes to the middle class who have to work hours (exchange hours of their life) to pay their bills? This was one of the horrible things the latest Trump tax cuts brought. It doesn't help the companies that break even (and ones that cook the books to be even like Amazon, etc). Capitalism worked fine when the high tax rates on profits/capital gains were there in the 50s and 60s. Why? Because you only pay that tax when cashing out. Keeping your money in the business for reinvestment and growth is not taxable, along with the money you use to pay employees. With a lower tax rate, there is an incentive to reduce labor costs and cash out of the business- in many cases using stock buy backs which drive up the stock prices and allow executives to "cash out" their stock options.
Clean your room- ok, yes I've read that book and it does have very good common sense. But it doesn't address some issues:
Here's an analogy for people that assume that people are lazy to work:
You have 100 dogs (people) and 100 bones (jobs) buried in the field. You let the dogs out to find bones. Some find 2 or 3, some find none. The ones that found none are the lazy or "stupid" ones, right? JP would say that those dogs should learn how to find bones better. So they go out again and those dogs find more bones, but others find less or 0. After so many tries, some dogs that keep finding 0 give up. You can say that they should keep trying but in many psychological studies, those who realize that a test is rigged or limited who give up are actually seeing reality for what it is and those that keep trying at all costs are blind optimists. In our economy there is a worse situation: 100 dogs and 100 bones, but half of those bones are too small so you need 2 or 3 to get by. Not enough to satisfy the 100 dogs. But there are piles of bones hoarded by those that don't need to go out and look for bones anymore. They sit back and blame the dogs that find 0 bones as lazy. Sounds a bit like JP's lobster story. But we aren't lobsters and have empathy and enough to feed everyone, if we didn't see the need to have big bone piles.
The key point here is that people who are in poverty are not always there because of laziness. Sometimes the job market and economy doesn't offer enough bones for everyone. During the world wars, labor boomed because people were dying and in that case there were 50 dogs, looking in a field of 100 bones. Supply and demand works, but it's not an infinitely open system. It's a closed system and the results of a closed system depend on everything else in the system. If you want to have a few to be very rich, you end up with a lot being very poor. That's why marx wrote this, he saw what was going on during the industrial revolution... people working their asses off for scraps, while some never had to work at all and used the 'lobster' type excuse to ignore the point that money is a closed system...
Hmm, lotsa mental gymnastics here. 100 dogs, 100 bones? Might apply to dogs, but as a human, when I got laid off because the bankers got scared, I created my own "job." Freelance carpentry. Not union, but works really well.
Here's the problem with Marx. He DID NOT live in the real world. He had a rich benefactor who inherited his wealth. Oops, I thought that was un-Marxist.
Here's the problem with Bernie Sanders. He's a rich idiot . . . one of those political oligarchs that you rail against. In fact, he's such and idiot (evil genius?) he has convinced all of you that socialism and democracy are compatible. Democracy=rule by majority. Socialism=rule by a huge bureaucracy. Those are self annihilating terms. Duh! Besides, the USofA IS NOT A DEMOCRACY. You really need to read the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation. Money IS NOT a closed system, that's why economies grow . . . again, duh! No one said people without work are lazy . . . in all likelihood, it's a psychological disorder and the European countries are going broke because of single payer healthcare and that's why many are starting to move away from that model, including Denmark. Not to mention that under their systems, people die on waiting list to get medical testing. Marxism originally divided people into two classes and gauged their worthiness of life based on that. These days, the new socialists divide people into many classes, but the idea is the same; victims and oppressors. Same story, different characters.
You really should take some time to get a DEEEEEEEP reading of history. When you do, you will realize that while Capitalism has pulled millions out of poverty, socialism did too. However, socialism did it by returning the people back to their maker . . . millions of them (yes, communism is the point of socialism.)
Here's the problem with Marx. He DID NOT live in the real world. He had a rich benefactor who inherited his wealth. Oops, I thought that was un-Marxist.
Here's the problem with Bernie Sanders. He's a rich idiot . . . one of those political oligarchs that you rail against. In fact, he's such and idiot (evil genius?) he has convinced all of you that socialism and democracy are compatible. Democracy=rule by majority. Socialism=rule by a huge bureaucracy. Those are self annihilating terms. Duh! Besides, the USofA IS NOT A DEMOCRACY. You really need to read the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation. Money IS NOT a closed system, that's why economies grow . . . again, duh! No one said people without work are lazy . . . in all likelihood, it's a psychological disorder and the European countries are going broke because of single payer healthcare and that's why many are starting to move away from that model, including Denmark. Not to mention that under their systems, people die on waiting list to get medical testing. Marxism originally divided people into two classes and gauged their worthiness of life based on that. These days, the new socialists divide people into many classes, but the idea is the same; victims and oppressors. Same story, different characters.
You really should take some time to get a DEEEEEEEP reading of history. When you do, you will realize that while Capitalism has pulled millions out of poverty, socialism did too. However, socialism did it by returning the people back to their maker . . . millions of them (yes, communism is the point of socialism.)
tczubernat University tuition is high because it turned into a money-making scam run by banksters. Medical costs are high because big pharma turned medical care into a money-making scam. Government is nothing but a rubber stamp for the banking and pharmaceutical cartels, otherwise neither of these realities would exist.
Capitalism is an 'ism', and any 'ism' can be destroyed via centralization of power. Your 'pull yourselves up by your bootstraps' ethics be dammed - the game is rigged.
Capitalism is an 'ism', and any 'ism' can be destroyed via centralization of power. Your 'pull yourselves up by your bootstraps' ethics be dammed - the game is rigged.
tczubernat Surely you can't be serious...Let's dig a little DEEEEEEEEEPPPPPEEEEEERRRRRRR
Here's a little starter to clear the mind...[Link]
Here's a little starter to clear the mind...[Link]
Get a grip, quit griping and go clean your room. If you can get that right, you might have enough in you to help your grandma. Leave the -isms to other countries. Millions of immigrants are dying to get into the USA for a reason.Stop being an authoritarian follower and thinking that everything can be changed by changing your own place. When I talk socialism, when Zizek explained it was similar, the idea of regulation. False prophets such as Peterson have a good meaning- self help, but ignore the REALITY.
[Link]
G et your house in order is an easy argument from a middle class viewpoint, just as Peterson's. In fact, I said above, he was even more blessed to have a health care system that didn't bankrupt him when his daughter was going to the doctor over and over for her issue. I hear all of the excuses on how she healed herself after. OK but UNTIL she did, SHE WENT TO SURGERIES AND TREATMENTS THAT WOULD BANKRUPT ANY AMERICAN WHO EVEN HAS INSURANCE. so shut the hell up with those excuses. My family almost got bankrupt for a smaller condition! Stop being a shill!
[Link]
Watch this and tell me where the logic is incorrect... In fact, it gives me a better insight into those who follow "spiritual" or "religious" ideals as a form of authoritarian following. That includes the communist system of the USSR which was the same like our crap system, we have corporations running the politics and business, they had politicians running business and all. Neither had people's needs recognized... but the BELIEF systems.. just like RELIGION/SPIRITUALITY assumes- every huckster has an answer and it always requires dedication. No wonder why you guys are so strongly against social democracy... you're exactly like George Bush when he said, "you're with us or against us". FOX News says that, MSNBC/CNN says that.. and so on. While you idiots defend the establishment parties, you destroy the truth- a REGULATED system. Oh but no, you blame W. Europe fails on this social democracy... WHY? It was the CENTRALIZED BANKING EURO SYSTEM that destroyed greece and hurt other nations like France. But yet SOTT/yall support the yellow vests? This is ridiculous. I think I get it now, you rather believe in some spiritual ideal, or a rep of one (Peterson) than use your own common sense and insight into conspiracy to see that hey... maybe capitalism EMPOWERS PSYCHOPATHS as much as communism did. And the tools like JP are used to demonize by using idiotic terminology that isn't even connected to the terms used. Why? Because those BELIEFS override any critical thinking. No wonder why so many people believe in UFO's and other grainy shit here... Not much different than the crazies that believe the earth is flat, or god is watching over us. Yeah god watches over us, tell that to my mother who died from a crap medical system that the "best system" capitalism brings.
Also, in how JP loves to defend the existing systems like lobsters etc... to justify capitalism.
Well it just reinforces the militant communism, sjw bullshit. Heck, I would've went that way had it not been for my own sense of self seeing the bullshit in those extremes.
So the irony here is that bullshit about JP justifies evolution and hierarchies, that this spiritual nonsense is actually incompatible with. I remember reading an interesting paper on how if Christ were alive today he would be a socialist, in his stories- supporting the poor and all that. But shills like JP will ignore that and pick and choose. That's kind of why I stopped being spiritual. I couldn't lie to myself like that opportunist does.
Well it just reinforces the militant communism, sjw bullshit. Heck, I would've went that way had it not been for my own sense of self seeing the bullshit in those extremes.
So the irony here is that bullshit about JP justifies evolution and hierarchies, that this spiritual nonsense is actually incompatible with. I remember reading an interesting paper on how if Christ were alive today he would be a socialist, in his stories- supporting the poor and all that. But shills like JP will ignore that and pick and choose. That's kind of why I stopped being spiritual. I couldn't lie to myself like that opportunist does.
Hey thanks guys, great show - I really enjoyed it :D Haven't watched the debate yet, will get round to it eventually. At least know I'm not cringeworthy about it after some weird first reviews. Anyways, keep up the good work, have fun, play hard !
Interesting show, and comments.
I reckon that the Capitalist v Communist thing reflects the two fundamentally different human beings currently roaming the planet. I think that Jonathan Haidt makes this point in his book, the righteous mind? , although i haven't read it yet. For example, the people in favour of a capitalist approach, in general, are more liberty loving and more inclined to limit the size of government. The communist, socialist approach, favours more regulation, the big government nanny state, and the lowering of all people, of all talents, to a base level...(equality)... The communist, socialist approach certainly seems more authoritarian. Some sort of balance would be ideal, but socialism isn't it. I agree with tczubernat that "communism is the point of socialism". Of course, any 'ism', or system can, and will be exploited by psychopathic individuals.
As i understand this, the elite plan for a NWO is in essence, a global communist state for the masses, but private at the top. My view is that socialists are children, who need an authoritarian figure to tell them what to think, what to believe, etc. Then they expand on this, to include everyone!
I reckon that the Capitalist v Communist thing reflects the two fundamentally different human beings currently roaming the planet. I think that Jonathan Haidt makes this point in his book, the righteous mind? , although i haven't read it yet. For example, the people in favour of a capitalist approach, in general, are more liberty loving and more inclined to limit the size of government. The communist, socialist approach, favours more regulation, the big government nanny state, and the lowering of all people, of all talents, to a base level...(equality)... The communist, socialist approach certainly seems more authoritarian. Some sort of balance would be ideal, but socialism isn't it. I agree with tczubernat that "communism is the point of socialism". Of course, any 'ism', or system can, and will be exploited by psychopathic individuals.
As i understand this, the elite plan for a NWO is in essence, a global communist state for the masses, but private at the top. My view is that socialists are children, who need an authoritarian figure to tell them what to think, what to believe, etc. Then they expand on this, to include everyone!
graeme15b Good comments. But the socialism that has been attacked by both corporate republicans and corporate democrats is pretty much a balance between the two. You can see when there's obvious capitalist donor class corruption when both mainstream dem candidates and trump are against a medicare for all system. I can't even BUY INTO IT, I'm forced to buy crap private insurance.
So you got the point, but JP and other useful fake geniuses are out there to use labels like marxist, socialist etc- link it with SJW nonsense and destroy it. It's by design, just like how they destroyed the term conspiracy by equating it with the flat earthers etc.
So you got the point, but JP and other useful fake geniuses are out there to use labels like marxist, socialist etc- link it with SJW nonsense and destroy it. It's by design, just like how they destroyed the term conspiracy by equating it with the flat earthers etc.
Gcarlin Not so sure about that. JP is mainly talking about what is called cultural marxism, i.e, identity politics, feminism, veganism, and the SJWs, etc. Not necessarily the economics of these systems, but the impact this has on economics, like the sub prime mortgage crisis. Interestingly, identity politics destroys individual identity in favour of group identity, diversity destroys true diversity in favour of a mono culture. These 'movements', and i intend the excretion of waste products by this term, are all materialistic, i.e, gender, colour of skin, etc. They are also irrational, have no intelligent arguments, and just resort to name calling, etc.
JPs main gripe, as i understand is compelled speech, hate speech and so on, which is my point above. One cannot have free speech, and hate speech! Geeze, these SJWs are trying to teach us how to think!!! Think about it.
Anyway, this so-called progressive, post modernist ideology really masks globalism, and neoliberal economics, which is the NWO plan mentioned above.
JPs main gripe, as i understand is compelled speech, hate speech and so on, which is my point above. One cannot have free speech, and hate speech! Geeze, these SJWs are trying to teach us how to think!!! Think about it.
Anyway, this so-called progressive, post modernist ideology really masks globalism, and neoliberal economics, which is the NWO plan mentioned above.
His daughter wouldn't have been able to afford all of the surgeries for her condition if it were privatized.
Zizek is down to earth about working class conditions. Peterson is more about inspiration.