For more Info, Subscribe to the RSS!
EmanuelaOrlandi posted:lol
I would take that as a no. But let's try to cite our sources.
http://www.fiw.ac.at/fileadmin/Documents/Publikationen/Working_Paper/N_084-DregerHerzer.pdf
(i) exports have a positive shortrun
effect on non-export GDP and vice versa (short-run bidirectional
causality), (ii) the long-run effect of exports on non-export output, however, is
negative on average, but (iii) there are large differences in the long-run effect
of exports on non-export GDP across countries.
yes, but even then we don't know exactly what this 'deterioration' will look like, it seems to me it anticipates the old error of 'zero sum' relation, it may just mean that things will become more radically contingent and asymptotic, open to new outcomes and formations.
Some deep, deep, shit.
my intuition is that the birth of the western social-democratic welfare model had as much to do with the development of highly developed countries as the radical development of the periphery.
How? All countries tend to become more social-democratic as they arise out of preindustrial mud. The Russian Revolution certainly had an influence on it, but not a major or decisive one. The welfare state was getting started in the 1930s when colonialism was not particularly threatened yet and there wasn't much radical activity at all outside the USSR and the already developed world.
mustang19 posted:http://www.scribd.com/doc/114686578/Socialism-FAQI developed this for potheadchan, but I hope it's useful to some of ya'll. Rate and comment and critique and so forth.
guide does a poor job at laying out the fundamentals of socialism and is excessively negative + defensive. guide focuses excessively on certain points and fails to address many general issues. guide somehow conflates the motivation of socialist movements with those of capitalism and attempts to frame some sort of bizarre wealth-production pissing contest
1/5, would NOT recommend to my pals on /r/socialism or D&D. frankly, potheadchan deserves better
mustang19 posted:(i) exports have a positive shortrun
effect on non-export GDP and vice versa (short-run bidirectional
causality), (ii) the long-run effect of exports on non-export output, however, is
negative on average, but (iii) there are large differences in the long-run effect
of exports on non-export GDP across countries.
so what does some sort of vague maybe good maybe bad bullshit just like all the bullshit capitalist 'economists' talk about have to do with communism?? idgi
EmanuelaOrlandi posted:so what does some sort of vague maybe good maybe bad bullshit just like all the bullshit capitalist 'economists' talk about have to do with communism?? idgi
actually economics is really cool.
tpaine posted:everyone DOES support it. That's how socialism works. Form each according to his or her or whatever's (gender is dead, hallelujah) need to each according to his or her or whatever's ability. It's on like page two of the scholiast manual fringus,
Concurrently, evil people crave death, and if theyre not evil then Big woop it was in gods plan. Or they probably didnt die and you just made that up on the spot like a REAL FUCKER. In conclusion, socialism is a regime of contrasts, which everyone subconsciously supports
Plus, its like that jouissance thingy where you desire your enemy, if u think about it, the bourgeoisie has a displaced longing for proletariat victory. This i claim *flaps baby arms*
Crow posted:the bourgeoisie has a displaced longing for proletariat victory
do we really?
VoxNihili posted:mustang19 posted:http://www.scribd.com/doc/114686578/Socialism-FAQI developed this for potheadchan, but I hope it's useful to some of ya'll. Rate and comment and critique and so forth.
guide does a poor job at laying out the fundamentals of socialism and is excessively negative + defensive. guide focuses excessively on certain points and fails to address many general issues. guide somehow conflates the motivation of socialist movements with those of capitalism and attempts to frame some sort of bizarre wealth-production pissing contest
1/5, would NOT recommend to my pals on /r/socialism or D&D. frankly, potheadchan deserves better
Thanks for the info.
I might get around to rewriting it with all that in mind. Till then, don't show it to anyone.
guide does a poor job at laying out the fundamentals of socialism and is excessively negative + defensive.
This can be fixed.
guide focuses excessively on certain points and fails to address many general issues.
What are some general issues to look at? The managerial details of implementing socialism? I'm clueless on that. I could add things about revolutionary strategy, bourgeoisie democracy, and history. Any other suggestions for topics and subheadings would be appreciated.
guide somehow conflates the motivation of socialist movements with those of capitalism and attempts to frame some sort of bizarre wealth-production pissing contest
It would be nice to find examples of socialism being efficient. But I agree I did a poor job of explaining the other justifications.
if socialism is so great, why doesn't everyone support it?
I could add that too, in a less defensive tone.
Jeez this forum is pretty active for only having five posters.
mustang19 posted:I might get around to rewriting it with all that in mind. Till then, don't show it to anyone.
i already showed it to the FBI. they should be at your door soon. sorry you seem like a nice guy but im not gonna let some crazy running around trying to destroy freedom and the right to own your own small business.
getfiscal posted:OP, what do you think about economics? do you love it?
Yes, why? Your avatar?
mustang19 posted:my intuition is that the birth of the western social-democratic welfare model had as much to do with the development of highly developed countries as the radical development of the periphery.
How? All countries tend to become more social-democratic as they arise out of preindustrial mud. The Russian Revolution certainly had an influence on it, but not a major or decisive one. The welfare state was getting started in the 1930s when colonialism was not particularly threatened yet and there wasn't much radical activity at all outside the USSR and the already developed world.
i don't know, it seems like it was more than that, a focal point of rupture. it gave substance to all kinds of new possibilities and modes of development.
a good deal of civil rights work in the USA had strong affinity with either communist or third world revolutionary ideas, such as CPUSA organizing the defense of the Scottsboro Boys or even the radical Black Panther Party. radical justice movements had a huge hand in developing welfare and social democratic policies in the US, and alot of foreign policy pushing social democratic programmes abroad were at least partially with strategic considerations towards Cold War.
the development of social demoCRAZY has as much to do with the historical and local efforts of people as well as global regimes of ideological circulation, so thus you had the rapid developments of Arab nationalism, Nonalignment movements, even OPEC, etc frequently being pulled into the totalitizing narrative of the Cold War
Crow posted:*snip*
But if we're talking about whether third world struggles caused first world ones, or the reverse, then I think it's the latter. The Cold War occurred between two basically industrialized countries who then started ideological struggles in the developing world, not the other way around.
Sorry to the rest of you guys, I only have so many typing fingers and reading eyes.
getfiscal posted:mustang19, have you had any formal economic training?
No, but I've spent half my life on Google looking up economics studies.
mustang19 posted:getfiscal posted:mustang19, have you had any formal economic training?
No, but I've spent half my life on Google looking up economics studies.
Look. I'm going to level with you. You need to use "humor" and "trolling" around here. If you honestly post your thoughts or feelings, everyone will attack you till you die. Think of this place as a factory chicken house. Inside all of the chickens smell of turds. If they see another chicken is different, they attack. Theres 2 small dif. here. One all of the chickens secretly subscribe to slightly different fantasy nonsense offshoots of dead political movements, and think all the other ones are stupid. Two instead of feathers, the chickens are wearing the words "mc rib is back" and "fail aids" . Alright. Anyways, good luck posting on the best damn, most troll free, site on the net. reddit.com.
mustang19 posted:No, but I've spent half my life on Google looking up economics studies.
ive spent half my life googling economics. ive spent over eight and a half years googling economics...
mustang19 posted:Crow posted:*snip*
But if we're talking about whether third world struggles caused first world ones, or the reverse, then I think it's the latter. The Cold War occurred between two basically industrialized countries who then started ideological struggles in the developing world, not the other way around.
well if we follow this particular line of Cold War historiography, i don't think you could say these countries 'started' ideological struggle in the developing world. if anything, the 'Cold War' had much more to do with strategic, limited intervention into ongoing conflicts. some of the most explosive, such as the Vietnam war, was already in the context of quite developed, extended struggle. the designation of 'Cold War' has more to do with imposing a mythos or glorious narrative, highly-weaponized ideological constructs, on processes that already exist. the true nature of the 'Cold War' was much more strategically limited
Keven posted:mustang19 posted:getfiscal posted:mustang19, have you had any formal economic training?
No, but I've spent half my life on Google looking up economics studies.
Look. I'm going to level with you. You need to use "humor" and "trolling" around here. If you honestly post your thoughts or feelings, everyone will attack you till you die. Think of this place as a factory chicken house. Inside all of the chickens smell of turds. If they see another chicken is different, they attack. Theres 2 small dif. here. One all of the chickens secretly subscribe to slightly different fantasy nonsense offshoots of dead political movements, and think all the other ones are stupid. Two instead of feathers, the chickens are wearing the words "mc rib is back" and "fail aids" . Alright. Anyways, good luck posting on the best damn, most troll free, site on the net. reddit.com.
I got it. I didn't even come here for the discussion so much as to get advice on the FAQ. And I did happen to get some good feedback. If trolling or whatever is the purpose of this board, well, you can avert your eyes or let the thread die and/or ask for a banlock. Because I'm waaay to autistic to play this game. If anyone else wants semi-serious discussion of whatever the thread topic is that's good enough for me at 2:43 AM.
Crow posted:well if we follow this particular line of Cold War historiography, i don't think you could say these countries 'started' ideological struggle in the developing world. if anything, the 'Cold War' had much more to do with strategic, limited intervention into ongoing conflicts. some of the most explosive, such as the Vietnam war, was already in the context of quite developed, extended struggle. the designation of 'Cold War' has more to do with imposing a mythos or glorious narrative, highly-weaponized ideological constructs, on processes that already exist. the true nature of the 'Cold War' was much more strategically limited
Thanks for responding this trots weird liberal narrative of history in a nice way because the only thing that came to my mind when I read that post you wrote this in response to was just a string of profanity and a declaration of disgust
Crow posted:well if we follow this particular line of Cold War historiography, i don't think you could say these countries 'started' ideological struggle in the developing world. if anything, the 'Cold War' had much more to do with strategic, limited intervention into ongoing conflicts. some of the most explosive, such as the Vietnam war, was already in the context of quite developed, extended struggle. the designation of 'Cold War' has more to do with imposing a mythos or glorious narrative, highly-weaponized ideological constructs, on processes that already exist. the true nature of the 'Cold War' was much more strategically limited
If one examines precultural theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept postdeconstructive theory or conclude that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist. It could be said that the primary theme of Dahmus’s essay on precultural theory is the role of the observer as reader.
mustang19 posted:If one examines precultural theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept postdeconstructive theory or conclude that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist. It could be said that the primary theme of Dahmus’s essay on precultural theory is the role of the observer as reader.
On the other hand, if one examines precultural theory is faced with a choice: either accept postdeconstructive theory or conclude that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist. It could be said that the observer as reader. If one is the role of Dahmus’s essay on precultural theory, one examines precultural theory, one examines precultural theory, one is the role of the primary theme of the observer as reader. If one examines precultural theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept postdeconstructive theory or conclude that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist. It could be said that the observer as reader. If one is the role of Dahmus’s essay on precultural theory or conclude that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist. It could be said that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist. It could be said that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist. It could be said that the role of the role of Dahmus’s essay on precultural theory is faced with a choice: either accept postdeconstructive theory is faced with a choice: either accept postdeconstructive theory is the primary theme of the primary theme of Dahmus’s essay on precultural theory, one is the role of the primary theme of Dahmus’s essay on precultural theory or conclude that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist.
Keven posted:f you honestly post your thoughts or feelings, everyone will attack you till you die.
By the way I've been on the internet so long I can't tell seriousness from reality, so if that's what happens I'm pretty cool with it either way.
EmanuelaOrlandi posted:On the other hand, if one examines precultural theory is faced with a choice: either accept postdeconstructive theory or conclude that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist. It could be said that the observer as reader. If one is the role of Dahmus’s essay on precultural theory, one examines precultural theory, one examines precultural theory, one is the role of the primary theme of the observer as reader. If one examines precultural theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept postdeconstructive theory or conclude that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist. It could be said that the observer as reader. If one is the role of Dahmus’s essay on precultural theory or conclude that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist. It could be said that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist. It could be said that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist. It could be said that the role of the role of Dahmus’s essay on precultural theory is faced with a choice: either accept postdeconstructive theory is faced with a choice: either accept postdeconstructive theory is the primary theme of the primary theme of Dahmus’s essay on precultural theory, one is the role of the primary theme of Dahmus’s essay on precultural theory or conclude that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Several narratives concerning textual conceptualism exist.
Your analysis is inherently asexual. Sexual identity is fundamentally responsible for the status quo,” says Derrida; however, according to la Tournier , it is not so much sexual identity that is fundamentally responsible for the status quo, but rather the fatal flaw of sexual identity. Bataille promotes the use of social realism to attack class divisions. It could be said that Sontag’s model of structuralist neocapitalist theory implies that truth is used in the service of colonialist perceptions of language.
The characteristic theme of Hamburger’s essay on cultural subdialectic theory is the futility, and eventually the economy, of capitalist society. The subject is interpolated into a neodeconstructive theory that includes culture as a paradox. Therefore, in Reservoir Dogs, Tarantino denies structuralist neocapitalist theory; in Pulp Fiction, although, he analyses semioticist capitalism.
If one examines neodeconstructive theory, one is faced with a choice: either reject structuralist neocapitalist theory or conclude that the raison d’etre of the observer is social comment, given that language is interchangeable with sexuality. Lyotard suggests the use of postdialectic discourse to modify and analyse sexual identity. Thus, Baudrillard uses the term ‘neodeconstructive theory’ to denote the bridge between society and class.