cars posted:the new $eKKKretary of Defen$e is a drunky who would have been celebrating that night so probably this man Pig Hogseth caused the plane crash.
cars posted:i mean Pig Hogseth called for an air limo and they flew directly into the 24/7/365 air lane to pick up a Cabinet-level drunky, not that he was flying the helicopter drunk and died which would have been good and cool because then he would be dead.
what a sublime thing to imagine. ahh. shivers.
lo posted:for all my noided friends out here, hegseth said that the helicopter was doing a drill for a continuity of government exercise
so was it a success?
realsubtle posted:
lo posted:for all my noided friends out here, hegseth said that the helicopter was doing a drill for a continuity of government exercise
another normal military-related-public-death event in a country that experiences many similar normal events
cars posted:Confirmed. NTSB just locked down all information it shares on the Trump official-caused crash to a Trump official-owned Web site (Twitter), so that anything reported can be wiped from the record before it gets into an archive. NTSB would usually send emails that can be saved or forwarded.
cars posted:Helicopter just gained 125 feet in altitude in the NTSB data per their public statements. congratulations and rip to it.
putting that to quick use
lo posted:the john birch society's position of 'the cia is too communist' is back, and this time it's being used to reshuffle USAID's functions directly under the control of private entrerprise and the state department
What would be the point of capitalists handing over direct control over state apparatus to individual personifications of capital. USAID was already under the control of the state department, explicitly stated by the same bill/act that news is claiming established it as an independent agency that competently does evil things that also end up helping the starving people "over there" a little bit without committing unforgiveable crimes e.g killing children or dogs, and "we" have to turn them to the good side. The LARPing of moral greyness as seen in prestige dramas celebrated for voyeuristically "criticising" extreme wealth and hedonism.
§6592. Administrator of AID reporting to Secretary of State
The Administrator of the Agency for International Development, appointed pursuant to section 2384(a) of this title, shall report to and be under the direct authority and foreign policy guidance of the Secretary of State.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title22/chapter74&edition=prelim
We have managed to regress from Proudhon's position that at least had the basic Christian decency to separate good from evil.
Marx posted:Let us see now to what modifications M. Proudhon subjects Hegel's dialectics when he applies it to political economy.
For him, M. Proudhon, every economic category has two sides – one good, the other bad. He looks upon these categories as the petty bourgeois looks upon the great men of history: Napoleon was a great man; he did a lot of good; he also did a lot of harm.
The good side and the bad side, the advantages and drawbacks, taken together form for M. Proudhon the contradiction in every economic category.
The problem to be solved: to keep the good side, while eliminating the bad.
Slavery is an economic category like any other. Thus it also has its two sides. Let us leave alone the bad side and talk about the good side of slavery. Needless to say, we are dealing only with direct slavery, with Negro slavery in Surinam, in Brazil, in the Southern States of North America.
Direct slavery is just as much the pivot of bourgeois industry as machinery, credits, etc. Without slavery you have no cotton; without cotton you have no modern industry. It is slavery that gave the colonies their value; it is the colonies that created world trade, and it is world trade that is the precondition of large-scale industry. Thus slavery is an economic category of the greatest importance.
Without slavery North America, the most progressive of countries, would be transformed into a patriarchal country. Wipe North America off the map of the world, and you will have anarchy – the complete decay of modern commerce and civilization. Cause slavery to disappear and you will have wiped America off the map of nations.
Thus slavery, because it is an economic category, has always existed among the institutions of the peoples. Modern nations have been able only to disguise slavery in their own countries, but they have imposed it without disguise upon the New World.
What would M. Proudhon do to save slavery? He would formulate the problem thus: preserve the good side of this economic category, eliminate the bad.
Hegel has no problems to formulate. He has only dialectics. M. Proudhon has nothing of Hegel's dialectics but the language. For him the dialectic movement is the dogmatic distinction between good and bad.
Let us for a moment consider M. Proudhon himself as a category. Let us examine his good and bad side, his advantages and his drawbacks.
If he has the advantage over Hegel of setting problems which he reserves the right of solving for the greater good of humanity, he has the drawback of being stricken with sterility when it is a question of engendering a new category by dialectical birth-throes. What constitutes dialectical movement is the coexistence of two contradictory sides, their conflict and their fusion into a new category. The very setting of the problem of eliminating the bad side cuts short the dialectic movement. It is not the category which is posed and opposed to itself, by its contradictory nature, it is M. Proudhon who gets excited, perplexed and frets and fumes between the two sides of the category.
Caught thus in a blind alley, from which it is difficult to escape by legal means, M. Proudhon takes a real flying leap which transports him at one bound into a new category. Then it is that, to his astonished gaze, is revealed the serial relation in the understanding.
He takes the first category that comes handy and attributes to it arbitrarily the quality of supplying a remedy for the drawbacks of the category to be purified. Thus, if we are to believe M. Proudhon, taxes remedy the drawbacks of monopoly; the balance of trade, the drawbacks of taxes; landed property, the drawbacks of credit.
By taking the economic categories thus successively, one by one, and making one the antidote to the other, M. Proudhon manages to make with this mixture of contradictions and antidotes to contradictions, two volumes of contradictions, which he rightly entitles: Le Système des contradictions économiques.
*1. This was perfectly correct for the year 1847. At that time the world trade of the United States was limited mainly to import of immigrants and industrial products, and export of cotton and tobacco, i.e., of the products of southern slave labour. The Northern States produced mainly corn and meat for the slave states. It was only when the North produced corn and meat for export and also became an industrial country, and when the American cotton monopoly had to face powerful competition, in India, Egypt, Brazil, etc., that the abolition of slavery became possible. And even then this led to the ruin of the South, which did not succeed in replacing the open Negro slavery by the disguised slavery of Indian and Chinese coolies, F.E.
vimingok posted:lo posted:
the john birch society's position of 'the cia is too communist' is back, and this time it's being used to reshuffle USAID's functions directly under the control of private entrerprise and the state department
What would be the point of capitalists handing over direct control over state apparatus to individual personifications of capital. USAID was already under the control of the state department, explicitly stated by the same bill/act that news is claiming established it as an independent agency that competently does evil things that also end up helping the starving people "over there" a little bit without committing unforgiveable crimes e.g killing children or dogs, and "we" have to turn them to the good side. The LARPing of moral greyness as seen in prestige dramas celebrated for voyeuristically "criticising" extreme wealth and hedonism.
§6592. Administrator of AID reporting to Secretary of State
The Administrator of the Agency for International Development, appointed pursuant to section 2384(a) of this title, shall report to and be under the direct authority and foreign policy guidance of the Secretary of State.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title22/chapter74&edition=prelim
We have managed to regress from Proudhon's position that at least had the basic Christian decency to separate good from evil.
Marx posted:
Let us see now to what modifications M. Proudhon subjects Hegel's dialectics when he applies it to political economy.
For him, M. Proudhon, every economic category has two sides – one good, the other bad. He looks upon these categories as the petty bourgeois looks upon the great men of history: Napoleon was a great man; he did a lot of good; he also did a lot of harm.
The good side and the bad side, the advantages and drawbacks, taken together form for M. Proudhon the contradiction in every economic category.
The problem to be solved: to keep the good side, while eliminating the bad.
Slavery is an economic category like any other. Thus it also has its two sides. Let us leave alone the bad side and talk about the good side of slavery. Needless to say, we are dealing only with direct slavery, with Negro slavery in Surinam, in Brazil, in the Southern States of North America.
Direct slavery is just as much the pivot of bourgeois industry as machinery, credits, etc. Without slavery you have no cotton; without cotton you have no modern industry. It is slavery that gave the colonies their value; it is the colonies that created world trade, and it is world trade that is the precondition of large-scale industry. Thus slavery is an economic category of the greatest importance.
Without slavery North America, the most progressive of countries, would be transformed into a patriarchal country. Wipe North America off the map of the world, and you will have anarchy – the complete decay of modern commerce and civilization. Cause slavery to disappear and you will have wiped America off the map of nations.
Thus slavery, because it is an economic category, has always existed among the institutions of the peoples. Modern nations have been able only to disguise slavery in their own countries, but they have imposed it without disguise upon the New World.
What would M. Proudhon do to save slavery? He would formulate the problem thus: preserve the good side of this economic category, eliminate the bad.
Hegel has no problems to formulate. He has only dialectics. M. Proudhon has nothing of Hegel's dialectics but the language. For him the dialectic movement is the dogmatic distinction between good and bad.
Let us for a moment consider M. Proudhon himself as a category. Let us examine his good and bad side, his advantages and his drawbacks.
If he has the advantage over Hegel of setting problems which he reserves the right of solving for the greater good of humanity, he has the drawback of being stricken with sterility when it is a question of engendering a new category by dialectical birth-throes. What constitutes dialectical movement is the coexistence of two contradictory sides, their conflict and their fusion into a new category. The very setting of the problem of eliminating the bad side cuts short the dialectic movement. It is not the category which is posed and opposed to itself, by its contradictory nature, it is M. Proudhon who gets excited, perplexed and frets and fumes between the two sides of the category.
Caught thus in a blind alley, from which it is difficult to escape by legal means, M. Proudhon takes a real flying leap which transports him at one bound into a new category. Then it is that, to his astonished gaze, is revealed the serial relation in the understanding.
He takes the first category that comes handy and attributes to it arbitrarily the quality of supplying a remedy for the drawbacks of the category to be purified. Thus, if we are to believe M. Proudhon, taxes remedy the drawbacks of monopoly; the balance of trade, the drawbacks of taxes; landed property, the drawbacks of credit.
By taking the economic categories thus successively, one by one, and making one the antidote to the other, M. Proudhon manages to make with this mixture of contradictions and antidotes to contradictions, two volumes of contradictions, which he rightly entitles: Le Système des contradictions économiques.
*1. This was perfectly correct for the year 1847. At that time the world trade of the United States was limited mainly to import of immigrants and industrial products, and export of cotton and tobacco, i.e., of the products of southern slave labour. The Northern States produced mainly corn and meat for the slave states. It was only when the North produced corn and meat for export and also became an industrial country, and when the American cotton monopoly had to face powerful competition, in India, Egypt, Brazil, etc., that the abolition of slavery became possible. And even then this led to the ruin of the South, which did not succeed in replacing the open Negro slavery by the disguised slavery of Indian and Chinese coolies, F.E.
