#41
https://fractalplanet.wordpress.com/2014/02/17/how-guy-mcpherson-gets-it-wrong/

oh well he's a crackpot but he shifts the overton window so good on him. we may yet survive...
#42
reminder that "the overton window" is something liberals use to describe themselves as left-wing
#43
i thought it was all about how framing the discourse by having extremists present options that are scary allows you to win more moderate political goals. but i guess if you're a liberal you can claim you're radical because the current window is so far right?
#44

NoFreeWill posted:

i thought it was all about how framing the discourse by having extremists present options that are scary allows you to win more moderate political goals. but i guess if you're a liberal you can claim you're radical because the current window is so far right?

The "scary options" are the ones that are actually necessary, such as an end to American imperialism, while the "more moderate goals" are the goals of the liberal bourgeois, and do not include an end to American imperialism. The more "moderate" goals are only relevant to the "moderates" who really have nothing in common with actual Leftians as I suddenly call them.

#45
right but the extreme goals tend not to get achieved, though that doesn't make them less worth pursuing (but rather more if overton's theory is correct).
#46

NoFreeWill posted:

right but the extreme goals tend not to get achieved, though that doesn't make them less worth pursuing (but rather more if overton's theory is correct).

I don't think a one- or two-factor political "continuum" is a good way to understand these relationships. The goals of the MLM left are not "extreme" versions of the goals of the bourgeois, progressive "left." The achievement of "moderate" goals in the place of "extreme" ones does not incrementally move the world toward the "extreme" goals, because the goals of "moderates" are not prerequisites for the goals of "extremists." These words imply a relationship that is almost totally opposite to their actual relationship, where liberal bourgeois support for left ideas is continually undermined by class comforts, given in the place of real reform.

And for any goal you want to reach - overreaching is always a bad idea. You don't learn Korean by saying, I'm going to spend 18 hours a day reading this Korean to English dictionary and watch Korean soap operas until I'm fluent in Korean, and even if that doesn't last, I'll at least have learned some Korean. No, you set attainable goals for yourself that are logical, necessary steps toward the larger goal of fluency.

#47

NoFreeWill posted:

right but the extreme goals tend not to get achieved, though that doesn't make them less worth pursuing (but rather more if overton's theory is correct).


congratulations on your Liberalism. i hear the state department is hiring.

#48
thats sort of how the frso does shit. demands stuff they know they wont get in order to get anything at all
#49

shriekingviolet posted:

.custom272822{}NoFreeWill posted:right but the extreme goals tend not to get achieved, though that doesn't make them less worth pursuing (but rather more if overton's theory is correct).

congratulations on your Liberalism. i hear the state department is hiring.


it's hard to look at the historical record and be optimistic. and the "Progress" that was achieved was almost entirely due to exploitation of cheap resources that are going away. The Great Unravelling will be interesting... does feudalism succeed capitalism in this inverted history?

#50
my bet is on the destructive unravelling but there is a tiny chance we'll discover some new form of energy. in which case... capitalism will still not have found its breaking point and things will continue to worsen. either way horrible shit. maybe all threads should be in the drinking forum
#51

swampman posted:

.custom272822{}NoFreeWill posted:right but the extreme goals tend not to get achieved, though that doesn't make them less worth pursuing (but rather more if overton's theory is correct).I don't think a one- or two-factor political "continuum" is a good way to understand these relationships. The goals of the MLM left are not "extreme" versions of the goals of the bourgeois, progressive "left." The achievement of "moderate" goals in the place of "extreme" ones does not incrementally move the world toward the "extreme" goals, because the goals of "moderates" are not prerequisites for the goals of "extremists." These words imply a relationship that is almost totally opposite to their actual relationship, where liberal bourgeois support for left ideas is continually undermined by class comforts, given in the place of real reform.

And for any goal you want to reach - overreaching is always a bad idea. You don't learn Korean by saying, I'm going to spend 18 hours a day reading this Korean to English dictionary and watch Korean soap operas until I'm fluent in Korean, and even if that doesn't last, I'll at least have learned some Korean. No, you set attainable goals for yourself that are logical, necessary steps toward the larger goal of fluency.


achieving the moderates goals with the help of the extremists demands actually often results in the undermining of the basis for these demands, then resulting in stagnation of the extreme left, weakening the moderates position, and the counterforces growing stronger. this is why the New Deal is being rolled back, and why revolutions happened where reformism couldn't function.

while spergy political "science" approaches to politics are often silly, I find the concept useful. For every MLM group demanding full communism and revolution theres 8 splinter groups that are in various stages of Trotskyist decay and tainted Liberalism and whole hordes of groups that claim to be socialist but are social democratic or whatever. the whole "spectrum" between moderate and extreme is covered and competition and collaboration between the groups produces certain dynamics i think the concept captures.

in your language learning example, the immersion learning experience works the same way. throwing people off the deep end and forcing them to learn doesn't make people fluent, but it achieves results. obviously for this to work you also have to take some " logical, necessary steps toward the larger goal of fluency." and get a basic understanding first. in this weird analogy that's movement building or strengthening unions or whatever idk

#52

drwhat posted:

my bet is on the destructive unravelling but there is a tiny chance we'll discover some new form of energy. in which case... capitalism will still not have found its breaking point and things will continue to worsen. either way horrible shit. maybe all threads should be in the drinking forum


all bets are off if we discover a good way to get energy from fusion, but having recently visited a very impressive facility I think it's still true that fusion is always 30 years away.

#53
we currently have the capability to produce extremely safe and cheap thorium based nuclear power and we're not. the technology has been all but ignored for going on 50 years due to oil-funded hippy idiots and the fact that you can't make nukes with it. if someone discovered easy fusion power tomorrow the process would immediately be discredited and suppressed.

the empire of global capitalism would rather slam dunk us into extinction than abandon all the power, infrastructure and murder built into the petrostate military industrial complex by adapting to a superior energy paradigm. RIP
#54
that's a good point and now I feel really stupid. what the fuck is going on with nuclear
#55

NoFreeWill posted:

right but the extreme goals tend not to get achieved, though that doesn't make them less worth pursuing (but rather more if overton's theory is correct).


i think its remarkable how often people assume that the space of political options is literally the most simple nontrivial space they can think of.

#56
in fact it's actually a horseshoe...
#57
horses are wild as all hell lets get some horses up in here
#58

c_man posted:

NoFreeWill posted:

right but the extreme goals tend not to get achieved, though that doesn't make them less worth pursuing (but rather more if overton's theory is correct).

i think its remarkable how often people assume that the space of political options is literally the most simple nontrivial space they can think of.



i've been thinking a lot about how the "spectrum" or "line" analogy/model of political opinions is super facile and misleading because opinions cannot meaningfully be modeled in relation to each other in geographic space

#59
i like hot dogs with mustard but think ancient carthage is a victim of history written by the victors while you think that the 1980s boston celtics were the best all around basketball team of all time. therefore you are 15 points to the northeast of me.
#60
The geography of facts is a fun phrase to say.
#61
Deleuzian Topography, what's up with that???
#62
just once i wanna see someone propose a political spectrum that isn't hausdorff, or at least locally compact
#63

NoFreeWill posted:

https://fractalplanet.wordpress.com/2014/02/17/how-guy-mcpherson-gets-it-wrong/oh well he's a crackpot but he shifts the overton window so good on him. we may yet survive...


Yeah I was gonna say McPherson is full of it. He's good with highlighting stuff that climatologists are reluctant to address because there aren't good ways to predict it scientifically (feedback etc.) tho.

#64

c_man posted:

just once i wanna see someone propose a political spectrum that isn't hausdorff, or at least locally compact


the possibility space of political opinions is a fractal cloud but since we live in flatland it appears to us as a line.

#65
we need more dimensions and less euclidean geometry for our political maps

we need political hypercubes
#66
#67
#68
those shitty tests you can take to determine where you are on the political autism spectrum, they try to get you to respond honestly to barely obfuscated moral questions that relate to aspects of different political philosophies, which is not a terrible way of doing it, but it misses the point that moral positions tend to be deeply held, subconsciously, and politics is an attempt to rationalise those morals and pretend you came to a conclusion purely through logic or whatever. so instead of asking how much control government should be able to exert over citizens in a given situation, they should ask how much of a panic attack you have when you think about not being personally in control in that situation, &c.
#69
that might be tough because there are a lot of decisions that i really would prefer were handled by government because i'm stupid at decision making like every individual person. but if you asked it like that i'd say, let me do it, because the government that would handle them well isn't in charge of the part of the world where i live.
#70
lets set up the rhizzone political test site. it will statistically determine your true political opinions from your tax return. it will still suck but at least we'll have a lot of people's social security numbers
#71

daddyholes posted:

that might be tough because there are a lot of decisions that i really would prefer were handled by government because i'm stupid at decision making like every individual person. but if you asked it like that i'd say, let me do it, because the government that would handle them well isn't in charge of the part of the world where i live.


yeah but the question needs to be more abstract than that. like, you wouldnt ask "should you be in control of how (political issue) is handled". id explain myself better but ive been sick for three days now and im about to have explosive diarrhea again. insert joke here about my posting, haha.

#72
drink lots of fluids. godspeed petrol
#73

Petrol posted:

yeah but the question needs to be more abstract than that. like, you wouldnt ask "should you be in control of how (political issue) is handled". id explain myself better but ive been sick for three days now and im about to have explosive diarrhea again. insert joke here about my posting, haha.



i hope you feel better. about polls, that's what i mean sort of. as in, if someone was like, "okay so it's 3 pm on Thursday and you have to pick a job. would you get upset if someone picked it for you?" i'd probably think semi-consciously "well I don't live in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea so i would probably get real pissed off..."

#74

daddyholes posted:

Petrol posted:
yeah but the question needs to be more abstract than that. like, you wouldnt ask "should you be in control of how (political issue) is handled". id explain myself better but ive been sick for three days now and im about to have explosive diarrhea again. insert joke here about my posting, haha.


i hope you feel better. about polls, that's what i mean sort of. as in, if someone was like, "okay so it's 3 pm on Thursday and you have to pick a job. would you get upset if someone picked it for you?" i'd probably think semi-consciously "well I don't live in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea so i would probably get real pissed off..."

so it's voight-kampff for capitalists. i'm in

#75
thnks for the well wishes. i feel a lot better now. i think my illness was, not fake, but made worse by psychosomatic reasons. like, if things in my life freak me out enough, i will totally internalise it and turn it into actual physical distress before i even know what the fucks going on. anyway, i saw a doctor finally and got a script for this stuff i was taking for a while that helped and then i wasnt taking it for weeks because i ran out and kept forgetting to get more. mental illness is real anyway so i figure that or some proper viral shit, its six and half a dozen, am i right. as you can see, i am much better
#76

shriekingviolet posted:

we currently have the capability to produce extremely safe and cheap thorium based nuclear power and we're not. the technology has been all but ignored for going on 50 years due to oil-funded hippy idiots and the fact that you can't make nukes with it. if someone discovered easy fusion power tomorrow the process would immediately be discredited and suppressed.

the empire of global capitalism would rather slam dunk us into extinction than abandon all the power, infrastructure and murder built into the petrostate military industrial complex by adapting to a superior energy paradigm. RIP


i was just thinking about this again so i am bumping it for new people to read or old people like me to think about again

#77
thank you for this timely reminder of the time i had explosive diarrhoea for days because of a brainwrong.
#78
but enough about your posting
#79
godspeed you! datura ninja guy
#80
humans aren't going extinct, we're the ultimate weed species

edit- lol cman w/ the topology joke, i see you