Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 27 Next »

exindy

Profile Information

Name: Tony
Gender: Male
Hometown: Indianapolis
Home country: USA
Current location: Indianapolis
Member since: Thu May 15, 2014, 08:59 AM
Number of posts: 12,304

Journal Archives

Wedge Issue Du Jour

I hope everyone enjoyed the games yesterday and didn't let the wedge issue affect their enjoyment.

Afterall the games must go on. Gladiators in the colosseum while the soldiers in England are starving and freezing. Life is good in a declining empire. --- Did you know there is raw sewage on the streets in Florida?

Once again agreeing with someone who can see past the jingoisms and fake nationalism. It is interesting to see die-hard Trump supporters ignoring his broken promises for MAGA while loudly cheering his support for the anthem at a sports venue.

And repeating my favorite observation.... Do you think Pavlov's dogs knew what was going on?

---------------------------------------------------------------

A wedge issue is a heavily politicized topic emphasized with the goal of splitting a sector of the population and rendering them politically impotent. While wedge politics can sometimes be used by political parties to try and sow division within a rival party, in America it’s far more common to see them used to neuter anti-establishment sentiment within both parties simultaneously. Since America is a corporatist oligarchy and both parties are more or less controlled by the same plutocrats, the goal is not to ensure victory of one party or another but to disrupt all anti-establishment sentiment.

Donald Trump does not give a shit about whether or not anyone stands, kneels, sits or urinates on the American flag, and neither do any of his plutocratic allies. What they care about is and always has been power, and by rallying the masses into a debate along establishment-dictated partisan lines, they help ensure that they keep that going. As a result of Trump’s deliberately inflammatory tweets, anti-establishment conservatives who’ve been critical of his healthcare failures and perpetuation of Obama’s corporatist and interventionist policies are standing on his side, angrily shaking their fists at their unpatriotic enemies....

My goal here is only to point out that manipulation is happening, not to discourage people from protesting the draconian abuses of America’s increasingly militarized police force. Please do protest these things loudly and aggressively — but don’t do it because of Trump. Making it about Trump means entering into the same establishment partisan bullshit that saw this epidemic go completely unaddressed throughout Obama’s two terms and aligning yourself with the neoliberal neoconservative oligarchic one-party system. You might be saying some of the same things as the Democratic establishment loyalists, but please be acutely aware at all times that these people are not your friends, and they will not help you....

Don’t be a partisan hack. None of the people controlling either of America’s two major parties have ever cared about you. They use wedge politics to keep you fighting one another about nonsense like how much respect should be accorded to a piece of cloth while expanding the police state, expanding the military budget of their neoconservative war campaigns, bolstering the oppressive neoliberal Walmart economy that is choking America to death, and expanding their Orwellian surveillance system. The more they can rally you along partisan lines against a fake enemy they’ve manufactured themselves, the longer they can keep you from turning and facing the real enemy.

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/takeaknee-vs-boycottnfl-is-vapid-establishment-wedge-politics-8156ccc11173

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And there was a comment in that thread about the democrats and how they are more than happy to engage in the same tactics...

On the one hand the Dem machine doesn’t want to appear to be anything but uber-patriotic and pro-police state, pro-killing and pro-bombing, pro-DEA and pro-prison industrial complex, because their money people make profits from all that hell + blood sport. But on the other hand they know the black community is really upset over American government sanctioned police brutality, American government sanctioned drug policy, and American government support of the prison industrial complex — supported by politicians from both parties. Without the support of the black community the Dem machine is finished. So what we see from them is a bunch of mealy mouthed cowardly support of “taking the knee” by trying to make it all about “free speech” instead of “police brutality.” The Dem machine is part of the problem of police brutality by not doing anything about it, and of the drug law policy which leads to prison expansion for slave labor profiteering — they should be ashamed.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Before Obama donated taxpayer money to the NFL

the players were not on the field for the anthem.

In 2009 the DoD started monetarily supporting the NFL. That's even more than the tax breaks and subsidies and eminent domains the NFL owners got.

I have no doubt Obama picked up some $upporters with that move.

BTW, WTF is the anthem played before football games? Even middle school games? Seriously?

It's almost become like a religious experience, hasn't it? Next thing we'll be giving the sign of peace between all the fans at halftime.

As you were, back to your poutrage.

Socialism in America -- and why we need it more than ever

Once more in an exchange on this forum we were once again faced with the fact that so many in thrall with the establishment were arguing that the only way to individual freedom in this country is by relinquishing those freedoms to the owner class. The American aristocracy.

That there are only two possibilities for governance in this country. All capitalism or all socialism. And those arguments were strictly along pure economic definitions. Absolutely no acceptance of the fact that unless there is economic justice, there can be no social justice and equality.

BTW, reading between the lines of the purpose for our constitution it's pretty obvious where the founder's position was on that issue. Eg, the tea party. The original one.

In any case, have at it:

https://www.discussionist.com/?com=view_post&forum=1015&pid=1478459

The only way you can justify your anti-social attitude

is by insisting on a very rigid definition, your definition of what socialism is. It also depends on picking out some parts and ignoring the others. In effect you are insisting on the letter of the definition and ignoring the spirit of the defnition.

As an example to refute your position, we might look at wiki, and just the introductory part:

--------------------- Socialism ------------------------------------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as the political theories, and movements associated with them. Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership, or to citizen ownership of equity. There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them. Social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.

Socialist economic systems can be divided into non-market and market forms. Non-market socialism involves the substitution of factor markets and money, with engineering and technical criteria, based on calculation performed in-kind, thereby producing an economic mechanism that functions according to different economic laws from those of capitalism. Non-market socialism aims to circumvent the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system. By contrast, market socialism retains the use of monetary prices, factor markets, and, in some cases, the profit motive, with respect to the operation of socially owned enterprises and the allocation of capital goods between them. Profits generated by these firms would be controlled directly by the workforce of each firm, or accrue to society at large in the form of a social dividend. The socialist calculation debate discusses the feasibility and methods of resource allocation for a socialist system.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Socialism is a range of economic and social systems" -- you are emphasizing the first word and ignoring the second. Not only an error in comprehension, a dishonest error.

"social ownership and democratic control of the means of production" -- Again, emphasizing the 1st part and ignoring the 2nd. "democratic control". That is regulated capitalism. The thing we aren't allowed to mention by many on this forum because it shows the error in their reasoning.

"Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership, or to citizen ownership of equity.". -- This is the absolute crux of the problem we have in this country today. The rejection by the 1% of anything related to the Commons. BTW, this is where you fail to see FDR's position. And this is why you have no similarity to an FDR liberal. An FDR liberal believes strongly in the Commons. FDR's attack on the banking and manufacturing sector proves it. He went after the bankers. And won.

"Non-market socialism aims to circumvent the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system" ---

Exactly. "circumvent the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system". You might refer to the big bank bailout a decade ago and the funneling of public money into private coffers.

(added) I forgot to emphasize this part: "There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them."

The only way you can justify your anti-social attitude

is by insisting on a very rigid definition, your definition of what socialism is. It also depends on picking out some parts and ignoring the others. In effect you are insisting on the letter of the definition and ignoring the spirit of the defnition.

As an example to refute your position, we might look at wiki, and just the introductory part:

--------------------- Socialism ------------------------------------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as the political theories, and movements associated with them. Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership, or to citizen ownership of equity. There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them. Social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.

Socialist economic systems can be divided into non-market and market forms. Non-market socialism involves the substitution of factor markets and money, with engineering and technical criteria, based on calculation performed in-kind, thereby producing an economic mechanism that functions according to different economic laws from those of capitalism. Non-market socialism aims to circumvent the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system. By contrast, market socialism retains the use of monetary prices, factor markets, and, in some cases, the profit motive, with respect to the operation of socially owned enterprises and the allocation of capital goods between them. Profits generated by these firms would be controlled directly by the workforce of each firm, or accrue to society at large in the form of a social dividend. The socialist calculation debate discusses the feasibility and methods of resource allocation for a socialist system.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Socialism is a range of economic and social systems" -- you are emphasizing the first word and ignoring the second. Not only an error in comprehension, a dishonest error.

"social ownership and democratic control of the means of production" -- Again, emphasizing the 1st part and ignoring the 2nd. "democratic control". That is regulated capitalism. The thing we aren't allowed to mention by many on this forum because it shows the error in their reasoning.

"Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership, or to citizen ownership of equity.". -- This is the absolute crux of the problem we have in this country today. The rejection by the 1% of anything related to the Commons. BTW, this is where you fail to see FDR's position. And this is why you have no similarity to an FDR liberal. An FDR liberal believes strongly in the Commons. FDR's attack on the banking and manufacturing sector proves it. He went after the bankers. And won.

"Non-market socialism aims to circumvent the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system" ---

Exactly. "circumvent the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system". You might refer to the big bank bailout a decade ago and the funneling of public money into private coffers.

Is Trump backpedaling on Paris Accords decision?

I saw something in passing but I haven't had a chance to research it.

The original was another Obama screw the common American and deliver taxpayer money to foreign countries thru private contractors.

I guess he is truly following in Reagan's footsteps instead of FDR.

Does anyone have any info on it?

Irma thing shows how worthless the snooze really is

Nothing but a confused mess of confusing information. No context, no time line, but lots of interviews with some guy on the street who can't see more than 2 blocks.

Watching a reporter on the street somewhere north of Miami showing scenes behind him while talking about the situation in Key West...

then having comments by Marco Rubio. Who I believe is probably hunkered down in his condo on K street. (or whatever)

Not to mention shoving in videos from god knows where.

Which just proves that the current goal of the news reporting is not reporting but making a living off the reporting...

/rant

Packing up the Commodore 64.

End of an era. Made me a nice tidy sum writing software, provided endless hours for the sons playing games.

Even built my own cartridges by coding chips. Did some internal wiring and added a non-maskable interrupt that let me kill a running system without losing memory. Did some reverse engineering.

Did most of my work in machine language so I could make use of the shadow memory and sprites.

United Tech, that wonderful company that is closing my Carrier factory and moving it to Mexico, bought the old Mostek stuff and since the investors couldn't figure out how electronics worked, sold it to a French company. I believe the Mostek eventually led to the DRAM tech. Another brilliant move by the beancounters.... ala Kodak.

I've got 2 of them. Looked into selling them. Hah! Worth about $25 on a good day.

Heading for toxaway next Saturday.

Equifax Is Trying To Make Money Off Its Massive Security Failure

Turns out my skepticism about Equifax motives in their response to the breach seems to have been accurate.

Ref: https://www.discussionist.com/1014373993

"This current Equifax thing is a corporation not letting an emergency go to waste."


------------------ snippet --------------------------------

“We will not bill You until the free trial period has expired and provided that You have not yet cancelled your trial membership,” say the terms, dated Sept. 6. “In the event that You wish to continue Your membership beyond the trial period, do nothing and Your membership will automatically continue without interruption and We will begin billing You via the payment source You provided when you signed up for the free trial.”

Robert Weissman, president of the consumer watchdog Public Citizen, said, “It appears that the company thinks one of the worst data breaches in history is a marketing opportunity. Instead of trying to rip people off with new hidden charges and trick consumers to give up their rights it might be a better idea to actually remedy the harm.”

...“At this point it’s very clear that Equifax is trying to use this massive data breach as an excuse to profit, which is just appalling behavior,” said Amanda Werner, the campaign manager at Americans for Financial Reform. “I can’t even put into words how awful this behavior is.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/equifax-breach-2017_us_59b2dae8e4b0b5e531062976?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Would a self-driving car recognize a water hazard?

What would it do?

Serious question. Watching the news from Houston and wondering.

Did you see corporate America step up to help?

Neither did I.

I noticed that gasoline prices will be going up to make up for their inconvenience.

All you libertarians?

Houston.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 27 Next »