Message from @Tero

Discord ID: 571134033468325918


2019-04-26 00:33:06 UTC  

@Fitzydog

The alt-right are loser to socialists than most other ideologies anyway. Like if you listen to Spencer when he gets off the topic of race he sounds more like Bernie Sanders than anyone on the right....

2019-04-26 00:33:37 UTC  

Oh, I don't give any credence to Spencer.

2019-04-26 00:33:57 UTC  

I'm talking about the legit alt-right, not ethnonationalists

2019-04-26 00:34:55 UTC  

Which, would be the Neo-reactionaries, not the alt-right these days.

So ignore all mentions of AR, my bad.

2019-04-26 00:35:04 UTC  

Most people conflate the two

2019-04-26 00:35:51 UTC  

Well I conflate the two because whenever I am assured they are different I ask where these other alt-right are. And am universally directed to ethnats.....

2019-04-26 00:36:52 UTC  

It's like I admit the possibility that there are somewhere in the world gamergaters who really want all women out of video games. I just have never seen one....

2019-04-26 00:37:38 UTC  

>legit alt-right, not ethnonationalists
uh

2019-04-26 00:37:45 UTC  

Fair enough. There's a lot of ethnats in both.

But that's correlation vs causation question, and a chicken and egg scenario

2019-04-26 00:38:31 UTC  

I judge ideas based on their merits, not on their creator's convictions

2019-04-26 00:39:07 UTC  

don't think you could make a solid case that the umbrella term alt-right doesn't include a sizeable portion of ethnats

2019-04-26 00:39:22 UTC  

I'm not. That's why I revoked my use of the term

2019-04-26 00:39:29 UTC  

hence why it's always used to slander moderate right people by the media

2019-04-26 00:39:38 UTC  

^^^^

2019-04-26 00:40:16 UTC  

Although I'm not even sure I'm a moderate. Like fairly extreme groups like the 3% and OK hate the ethnats.

2019-04-26 00:40:31 UTC  

It's kinda universal.

2019-04-26 00:40:56 UTC  

Well ANYWAYS, all of this is irrelevant. Sorry.

I misused a term lol

2019-04-26 00:41:24 UTC  

NO I mean I was more or less agreeing with your point about Zizek...

2019-04-26 00:42:08 UTC  

Yeah, I meant @Tero .

But socialist is the wrong term for Zizek

2019-04-26 00:42:18 UTC  

Damn, this third way shit is difficult to define

2019-04-26 00:42:44 UTC  

it is

2019-04-26 00:44:34 UTC  

I don't find it that complicated but I'm fairly conservative (as Sowell would define it not FOX).

2019-04-26 00:47:28 UTC  

@Jym A point Zizek made, is that from his perspective 'cultural Marxism' and political correctness are a byproduct of a materialistic society, and the free market itself.

What's your take on that?

2019-04-26 01:22:54 UTC  

@Fitzydog

My take has a sort of background count. firstly that I have spent a lot of time arguing with Socialists so I'm fairly familiar with their rhetorical tricks. and secondly I would consider Zizek a Fabian not a Marxist. Fabians are sort of frog-in-the-pot socialists. They recognize that arguing directly for socialism won't work so they argue unrelated problem than offer socialist programs as the solution to them.

This particular spin is familiar. Very often socialists blame all sorts of ills on capitalism because money changed hands at some point in the chain of events. Like calling Leopold in the Congo "capitalist" because he used money. Nevermind he was a King under a feudal system. Never mind that money changing hands took part in nearly every human interaction in recorded history.

2019-04-26 01:35:22 UTC  

@Jym Are you watching the debate?

2019-04-26 01:38:00 UTC  

I listened to it at work the other day. Technology is lovely I can throw my pone on the charger, turn on the bluetooth, and listen to lectures and roundtables all day at work.

2019-04-26 01:38:07 UTC  
2019-04-26 01:38:12 UTC  

lol nice

2019-04-26 01:39:33 UTC  

idk, I don't agree with your assessment of the situation.

2019-04-26 01:42:50 UTC  

OK but listen critically with my theory that he is a Fabian. Like the bit where he brings up ecology. Notice the the utility he sees in environmentalism is that it justifies a sort of central planning. Not that I think he is correct even about that. But isn't it interesting that he had nothing else of substance to say about ecology other than it could be used to justify socialist programing?

2019-04-26 01:44:13 UTC  

Yes, I'm not denying that he's in favor of centralization and planned economies, or market regulations

2019-04-26 01:45:44 UTC  

Yeah that's Fabian. Arguing for socialist structures without directly arguing for socialism....

2019-04-26 01:46:16 UTC  

Socialism is just one form of a centralized economy

2019-04-26 01:46:37 UTC  

You seem to be conflating the two terms

2019-04-26 01:48:38 UTC  

Again this may be a perspective issue. But I am more or less in agreement with Hayek here that they are all akin. He used to refer to the soviets and nazis as "The Russian socialists and the German socialists"

2019-04-26 01:49:45 UTC  

You could, sure. You'd be wrong on a deeply philosophical level, and minimizing both to a epithet, but you could

2019-04-26 01:52:24 UTC  

No offense but I take the unsupported assertion that I (and Hayek) are wrong on this matter with a grain of salt.

2019-04-26 01:52:32 UTC  

Okay

2019-04-26 01:52:45 UTC  

What is the goal of the socialist?

2019-04-26 01:56:00 UTC  

In general to collectivize the product of a nation, people, or culture. There are of course variations on the theme but they are common to both German and Russian socialism.