Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • If there's not at least one goonsay in the memecloud, I can't be held responsible for the actions that I or other concerned citizens of Talkrational might take.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - teeming brown mass

1
trying to analyze that shit is some reddit-ass shit, too.
2
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/zmg538/extremely-racist-video-shows-syracuse-frat-swearing-to-hate-black-and-jewish-people-vgtrn

Quote
"I solemnly swear to always have hatred in my heart for n*ggers, sp*cs and most importantly the fuckin' k*kes." That was the "oath" members of Syracuse University engineering fraternity, Theta Tau, seemed encouraged to recite in an online video obtained by the college's student newspaper Wednesday, igniting widespread protests across campus, Syracuse.com reports.
Well, that's some reddit-ass shit
3
So the fact that HR McMaster's father seems to have been murdered is......honestly a little terrifying:

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/mcmaster-father-death-philadelphia-suspicious
4
Haley can't win post-Trump. She's too right-wing to hold the center-left and too non-white to draw votes fro the GOP base. Republicans need Trump and, more importantly, Trump's foreign backers because realistically the only way to win is to cheat.
5
Kris Kobach is now formally held in contempt of court.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/kobach-contempt-order
7
rlogan?
8
Hmm. I read a lot more of than I had time to. But I don't think it's as easy to dismiss as you seem to be implying. The problem of priors plagues all economic and political analysis, but as much as I read seemed interesting not least because of his datasets. I will need to give it a closer look which I don't have time for today but I think your objection is generally a simplistic conflicting assumptions dismissal. Mass migration in an age without frontiers is a pretty new issue for humans to deal with and part of what is unequally distributed among peoples is environmental resources. For natural monopoly resources like oil or water, that has tended towards strongman government but with distributed resources like good farmland or lumber, that has tended towards community organizing. What happens when the latter type are overwhelmed by refugees from the former has historically been unhappiness all around. As much as you like to imagine people mean Jew when they say globalist, that is not the case when the person literally means globalist. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. I don't see the jew hating that you do in this particular piece and the topic is actually really important for policy because in order to provide the best humanitarian aid to refugees,  we really need to figure out how to mitigate their impact on local societies so that those societies will still have resources to help those refugees. Of course,  the right solution is to kill all billionaires and nationalize their assets. But there are operational challenges to that plan.

I think the problem is that you like the conclusions (we need to redistribute wealth) and are not really looking at how Piketty is getting to those conclusions.

A few things that really don't follow.

1. Piketty argues that racial awareness and catering to racial minorities by the Democrats creates a barrier to minority Americans developing a class consciousness and that this is why minority communities repeatedly vote for a globalist agenda on subjects like immigration that undercut efforts for effective wealth redistribution. This is obviously false and misleading: the issue is actually the opposite. Minorities traditionally have voted in favor of wealth redistribution policies; white racialists are the ones who vote actively against wealth redistribution policies, and those policies are ineffective not because of migration but because conservativism promises both retention of conservative wealth distribution AND racial power dynamics.

2. Piketty argues that the main skin that "highly educated globalists" have in the game is money for the education system, and that this is why they lobby for wealth redistribution policies. In actuality, most people who work in education/research institutions do not make a ton of money personally and instead are advocating for education spending because affordable education prepares more people for job and class mobility at a time where deskwork is increasingly becoming the new labor (especially jobs that used to be elite but no longer are, such as coding and IT).

3. In addition to implicitly arguing that increased education is "elitist" Pitketty argues that immigration is an underhanded means of undercutting attempts to redistribute wealth by the educated "globalist" elite in order to...whatever. In reality, immigration generally serves one of four purposes: family reunification, acquisition of skills with high demand and low national supply, humanitarian concerns, and temporary work in specific industries such as agriculture where lifestyle expectations of white Americans mean that there is no one who wants to do those jobs even though those industries are heavily subsidized. Here Pitketty directly accepts nativist rhetoric as economic fact, when the reality is much more nuanced and probably does not perform the way he models it.

The underlying argument that Pitketty makes, then, ends up being very right-wing: "Globalists" are mobilizing uneducated people of color to enrich themselves by funneling taxpayer dollars into the education system while swamping out white labor with immigration. If not for the globalist elite, black people wouldn't have racial awareness and could make common cause with poor whites who are really just experiencing economic anxiety because the immigrants keep taking their jobs for less pay.

I mean, come on, I know people are in love with Pitketty, but it's time to start seriously asking what it is he's actually saying.
9
I did. A lot of his analysis hinges on the argument that immigration issues and the will of the globalist elite make redistribution ineffective, rather than that Old Wealth is pushing racism in the public sphere in order to maintain social relevance and control. It's bullshit and he says a lot of stuff elsewhere from his eagerness to use (((globalist))) to explain the failure of class politics that also borders on racism, including blaming the poor US class consciousness on racial awareness in the US left.
10
all you gotta do is skim his abstract:

Quote
I also discuss the origins of this evolution (rise of globalization/migration cleavage, and/or educational expansion per se) as well as future prospects: "multiple-elite" stabilization; complete realignment of the party system along a "globalists" (high-education, high-income) vs "nativists" (low-education, low-income) cleavage; return to class-based redistributive conflict (either from an internationalist or nativist perspective)

He goes on later to complain about immigration making it difficult to effectively do redistribution of wealth and therefore is blaming immigration for economic anxiety etc.  But his insistence on using the word "Globalist" with associated scarequotes to talk about high-education parts of society should be an obvious red flag, too.
11
I for one appreciate Thomas Piketty's new obsession with (((Globalists)))

http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/Piketty2018.pdf
13
well. that's a crazy reveal. I wonder what twists th writers will have for us by the season finale
14
Politics and Current Events / Re: Removing Assad
No one has offered it because Russia is vetoing anything that comes through the UNSC and Turkey is vetoing anything that comes through NATO. The issue is not multilateralism so much as that key players in both organizations have a vested interest in keeping the massacre going.
16
Politics and Current Events / Re: Removing Assad
I feel like US interventions in the Balkans were actually pretty successful, all said and done.
17
Politics and Current Events / Re: Removing Assad
e.g. where are the fucking horses
18
Politics and Current Events / Re: Removing Assad
anyway, i like the idea of "precision strikes" because it's a great encapsulation of the general failure of thinking around this issue. like, hey, i won't lost sleep over military bases and chemical weapons plants that get blown up. i might lose sleep over hospitals and medicine factories that were were totally sure were military targets, ah well gotta break a few eggs.

usually i like being proven right, but...

At destroyed Syria lab, workers say they produce antidotes to snake venom not toxic weapons

eta: like i'd really rather be wrong here, i'd really rather this report be bullshit and this was actually a weapons plant.

That's not an antibody production facility you idiot.
19
Politics and Current Events / Re: Removing Assad
I've seen a few people throwing out the whole "how do we know its not a false flag" thing. Now some of them are definitely on the side of "make sure we know what happened before doing anything- and make sure what you do will improve things", as with this woman, but there are a few of them who have definitely bought into some of the conspiracy theories.

The "false flag" idea was floated by Russian troll networks weeks before the attack and is being amplified by them now. Very strong evidence this is not a false flag.
20
Politics and Current Events / Re: Removing Assad
Oh no now he'll just barrel bomb them, problem solved!
Can't barrel bomb if you don't have an air force. Again, straightforward.
21
Politics and Current Events / Re: Trumpocalypse
if Trump resigned, it would be easy as cake to indict him.
22
lol Josh Marshall is having a field day with the fact that Michael Cohen skipped court today to smoke cigars with literally Trump's connection to Agalarov at the Moscow Miss Universe pageant:

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/can-you-identify-this-person
23
Politics and Current Events / Re: Removing Assad
No one wants another Rwanda, but bombing campaigns aren't going to fix that

Yes, eliminating chemical weapons depots and production facilities has nothing at all to do with stopping those chemical weapons from being used on civilians.  Sure.
24
Politics and Current Events / Re: Removing Assad
mainly I support continuing obama's mix of syria policies, which (contrary to his rhetoric) trump has continued more or less unchanged, until he said last week that he'd break them off.  I think they were more or less working and pushing things toward a sustainable truce and a non terrible negotiated settlement.  if trump recommits to supplying and supporting sdf and various smaller factions we've worked with, takes positive steps to show he's serious, and takes punitive actions over chemical weapons, all without any big or reckless changes to the program, I think that would be a good thing.  it doesn't require much involvement of trump's dumb brain, mostly just him OKing a bunch of things that already being done by other people.

ok. i'm not as strongly opposed to sub-military intervention (i.e., intervention without using our own weapons and soldiers). i'm leery of it because it still carries the risk of greater entanglements and escalation (when has funding and supporting various foreign resistance elements ever gone wrong...) but it's not on the same level of hazard to me as launching missiles. in this case, yeah help the sdf/ypg as much as possible.

So you're not against the use of force to stop Assad from killing civilians. You're just against the US putting American soldiers' lives on the line to do so.

Which brings us back to the point made in the LARB article I linked.
25
Politics and Current Events / Re: Removing Assad
If you're saying there should be no consequences for gassing civilians,
please get some new material.

Hussein has gassed civilians in the 80s. Assad gassed civilians last week. There was no evidence in 2003 that Hussein was planning follow-ups to his campaigns in the 80s. Assad shows every sign of planning to continue this campaign.