tpaine posted:

who are you even talking to, fokker?

i thought that would be obvious, goatstein and the people who think his post is a response to the OP. i mean, i agree that greenwald is a thin-skinned mass media reject, over his career i've personally provoked him into losing his shit in his responses a few times because it's really easy. and i really miss the old Worst D&D Poster the thread, but its leading men are not representative of the movers of the media or their handlers in the government. they're complete goobers who spend all their time on the outside. and this "well you don't interact with the ruling class as much as i do" thing, come on. this isn't old LF circa 2005. all of this seems really primed for aging regret filled posting-men to imagine they are just like their rulers and every point scored against evilweasel is a blow to tyranny. i know no one would admit that here but that's how it looks.

while i don't agree with a lot of your post tpaine, i think its a good observation that we usually know what happens from what we observe from the outside.

conec posted:

i`m on team daddyholes btw ~~

confirmed.

tpaine posted:

i'm sorry for trying to turn this into a more grandiose discussion, you can go back to plinking away at whatever gay little targets you've set up for yourselves

funny, seems more like you're trying to derail the thread with defeatist non sequiturs.

'human nature' and evolution are commonly deployed explanations for the capitalist system (which, by the way, is what i refer to when i say 'the present system'). the problem is that capitalism is far from natural in the sense of biological evolution. capitalism always has to rely on extraordinary methods to perpetuate itself. michael perelman's the invention of capitalism is, imo, a good account of how the historical process of capital accumulation has been concealed - fundamental to this concealment has been the propagation of this myth of capitalism as a natural evolution towards a more efficient, if not emancipatory, system of production.

given that none of us posting in this place believe the capitalist system is either efficient or emancipatory, why would any of us want to naturalise it on the even more abstract level of human nature?

obviously the rich are not special in the sense of being another species. perhaps it's worth considering the other ways in which they are different. the culture of the rich is, i claim, essentially a program to produce generation after generation of the kind of sociopaths required to perpetuate brutality against the poor. it can be difficult to comprehend how different that culture really is. if you haven't seen the documentary 'born rich', i recommend it as a small window into that world.
7xhuSxyHWRw

it is the military-intelligence complex that plans and performs the pointy end of oppression, and its culture similarly insular. john singlaub, who i mentioned earlier as the head of the OSS society and a revered figure in the contemporary special operations community, worked closely with ted shackley in the korean and vietnam wars, including the development of the phoenix program. john mccain was famously tortured as a POW in vietnam. the ongoing involvement of people like this in directing covert operations means that huge amounts of trauma and self-justification are invested in perpetuating the most vicious kinds of brutality imaginable.

in short: this is battery acid you slime

daddyholes posted:

NoamTrotsky posted:

tell me more about how the elite are special and exceptional daddyholes.

they are special in that they run things and have more; they are exceptional in that they are the exception to the rule. people get into different circumstances and they change. you can't just leap sideways from some dickhole you used to run over on SA to the people actually sitting down to discuss what is to be done about Putin.

Sure, but they are the same people. They think the same way and come from the same place. The question isn't if Eric Cantor is more powerful than evilweasel. The question is if he is fundamentally better. The answer is no.

tpaine posted:

Petrol posted:

tpaine posted:

i'm sorry for trying to turn this into a more grandiose discussion, you can go back to plinking away at whatever gay little targets you've set up for yourselves

funny, seems more like you're trying to derail the thread with defeatist non sequiturs.

'human nature' and evolution are commonly deployed explanations for the capitalist system (which, by the way, is what i refer to when i say 'the present system'). the problem is that capitalism is far from natural in the sense of biological evolution. capitalism always has to rely on extraordinary methods to perpetuate itself. michael perelman's the invention of capitalism is, imo, a good account of how the historical process of capital accumulation has been concealed - fundamental to this concealment has been the propagation of this myth of capitalism as a natural evolution towards a more efficient, if not emancipatory, system of production.

given that none of us posting in this place believe the capitalist system is either efficient or emancipatory, why would any of us want to naturalise it on the even more abstract level of human nature?

obviously the rich are not special in the sense of being another species. perhaps it's worth considering the other ways in which they are different. the culture of the rich is, i claim, essentially a program to produce generation after generation of the kind of sociopaths required to perpetuate brutality against the poor. it can be difficult to comprehend how different that culture really is. if you haven't seen the documentary 'born rich', i recommend it as a small window into that world.
7xhuSxyHWRw

it is the military-intelligence complex that plans and performs the pointy end of oppression, and its culture similarly insular. john singlaub, who i mentioned earlier as the head of the OSS society and a revered figure in the contemporary special operations community, worked closely with ted shackley in the korean and vietnam wars, including the development of the phoenix program. john mccain was famously tortured as a POW in vietnam. the ongoing involvement of people like this in directing covert operations means that huge amounts of trauma and self-justification are invested in perpetuating the most vicious kinds of brutality imaginable.

in short: this is battery acid you slime

i remember why i stopped trying to argue seriously here

because you lose every argument?

postposting posted:

idk if viewing the ruling class as ultrahuman geniuses is very conducive to action

it isn't, so don't

NoamTrotsky posted:

Sure, but they are the same people. They think the same way and come from the same place. The question isn't if Eric Cantor is more powerful than evilweasel. The question is if he is fundamentally better. The answer is no.

"the question is", huh? you can't dismiss the possibility of worldwide media manipulation, manipulation of both sides of regional political struggles, things that have happened over and over and quickly become accepted parts of mainstream history once challenging them will do no good, because you suspect the people behind it are tendentious backstabbing goons like in your Japanese animes. that's what i mean about how vilerat was a CIA tool and a war criminal in my book but we all know he probably would not have made it to the post of ambassador or even to becoming one of those doomed CIA chuds launching mortars off the roof above his dead ass skull. none of that has anything to do with his virtue and it has everything to do with economic class. in contrast to him most of the people actually in charge are well-adjusted enough with good enough golf games and teeth and employees to do something like weaken one of their own client states by funding an insurgency or run flak for someone doing the same. it happens all the time.