Interesting article. It catches the key ideological points. But what's the point? As long as we have ideologues putting themselves in charge of things that they are not necessarily qualified to be in charge of, we will continue to have problems.
Let's remember, as I keep reminding people, money is imaginary. it does not exist. Economies should be measured by productivity, not money. Instead of how much money somebody has consider how much they have produced. You will get a much clearer picture that way.
I always downgrade any article that throws in climate change as if it's a major issue. There has always been climate change. Cavemen delt with climate change. Get over it.
Here's an article I wrote a while back that looks at some of this:
I would analyse it differently. What we are seeing is not some kind of ideological dialectic synthesis, but just a mutual and now symbiotic pursuit of power, in which the left has been co-opted by the donor class, and (to a lesser extent) vice versa. And that is just as true globally as it is in the US domestically.
Good article but for one point: rights aren't granted, ever. They are rights (not privileges) because they exist in a natural state simply as a function of being human, not because a governance structure awards them. Anything granted would be called privileges, which can be revoked, whereas rights - at least in America - are preserved by the Constitution.
That distinction seems to be something the left does not understand, but I agree you properly attributed the rights (particularly those protected by the 1A and 2A) erosion issue to populism's rise.
There are no Marxists, socialists, or communists in the Democratic Party. The Democrats are a capitalist party. No one who believes capitalism must be destroyed and replaced by something else supports such a party.
You are repeating Republican propaganda that's been around since the late 1940s, but the longevity of a lie does not make it true.
I can't help but check out Jacobin. I used to have a paid subscription, haven't paid it in five years, and they STILL send me their glossy magazine!
They're not Marxists. They believe in reform, not revolution. They are a bunch of PMC types who don't want to destroy capitalism because they still benefit from the system, but want to pretend they're edgy leftists.
When push comes to shove, they always tell us to hold our nose and vote for the Democrats because Republicans Bad. The Pubs have their own versions of sheepdogs; they're no better. They're the ones wailing about woke trannie terrorists right now.
Interesting article. It catches the key ideological points. But what's the point? As long as we have ideologues putting themselves in charge of things that they are not necessarily qualified to be in charge of, we will continue to have problems.
Let's remember, as I keep reminding people, money is imaginary. it does not exist. Economies should be measured by productivity, not money. Instead of how much money somebody has consider how much they have produced. You will get a much clearer picture that way.
I always downgrade any article that throws in climate change as if it's a major issue. There has always been climate change. Cavemen delt with climate change. Get over it.
Here's an article I wrote a while back that looks at some of this:
https://individualistsunite.substack.com/p/i-am-100-certain-that-i-might-be
Very interesting and thoughtful analysis.
I would analyse it differently. What we are seeing is not some kind of ideological dialectic synthesis, but just a mutual and now symbiotic pursuit of power, in which the left has been co-opted by the donor class, and (to a lesser extent) vice versa. And that is just as true globally as it is in the US domestically.
yes
Good article but for one point: rights aren't granted, ever. They are rights (not privileges) because they exist in a natural state simply as a function of being human, not because a governance structure awards them. Anything granted would be called privileges, which can be revoked, whereas rights - at least in America - are preserved by the Constitution.
That distinction seems to be something the left does not understand, but I agree you properly attributed the rights (particularly those protected by the 1A and 2A) erosion issue to populism's rise.
Agree.
There are no Marxists, socialists, or communists in the Democratic Party. The Democrats are a capitalist party. No one who believes capitalism must be destroyed and replaced by something else supports such a party.
You are repeating Republican propaganda that's been around since the late 1940s, but the longevity of a lie does not make it true.
Check out Jacobin.
I can't help but check out Jacobin. I used to have a paid subscription, haven't paid it in five years, and they STILL send me their glossy magazine!
They're not Marxists. They believe in reform, not revolution. They are a bunch of PMC types who don't want to destroy capitalism because they still benefit from the system, but want to pretend they're edgy leftists.
When push comes to shove, they always tell us to hold our nose and vote for the Democrats because Republicans Bad. The Pubs have their own versions of sheepdogs; they're no better. They're the ones wailing about woke trannie terrorists right now.