You make a common mistake. He has no fundamentally different beliefs than 19 years ago. He’s just now feels empowered to embrace it. There are millions of others just like him.
‘Socialism’ works in small groups because in such groups people know and understand each other, and therefore have trust. Also, small groups can communicate easily within their numbers, making self-organization possible.
Look up ‘Dunbar’s Number’. Groups at roughly this size and below can function informally and charitably with each other, and share resources with each other, because everyone knows everyone else and people who don’t play the game can be spotted and either criticized or ostracized. Therefore, everyone has an interest in the group doing well, and trust levels are high.
This model does not scale. The minute you try to apply it to large communities where people don’t know each other, trust starts to break down. And when there is no trust, you can’t self-coordinate, and you need laws, government, and authorities. Socialism just doesn’t work at this level, because the people tasked with making decisions for the collective do not have the information required to make rational choices. This is why we need markets: To coordinate economic activity between people.
Societies are complex systems. In complex systems, the vast amount of information is created from the bottom up. The people at the top just don’t know what the people at the bottom need or want. And without market forces, no one can assign relative values to goods and services.
This is a seminal paper by Friedrich Hayek: The Use of Knowledge in Society. This is the subject for which he won his Nobel prize. It’s short, and it’s worth reading even if you are on the left.
The first paragraphs:
The first paragraph generally describes the assumption of central planners: If we just had really smart people, and maybe lots of computers, we can scientifically plan society and help everyone get what they want and need. This is better than the ‘chaos’ of the market. Unfortunately, it can’t work. You can’t figure out what people need, because absent personal agency and bidding between citizens for goods and services (i.e. a market), the information does not even exist.
Markets are a process of DISCOVERY. We constantly test new goods and ideas in the marketplace, and by so doing we discover what people want. When we sell goods at a specific price, it establishes that good in the hierarchy of values of the purchaser. We discover, for example, that an iPhone is worth more than a meal, and that a car is worth more than an iPhone. And through failed products we learn what people do not want or need. There is no way for central planners to know this, because the information does not exist without a market.
The old Soviet Union tried very hard to scientifically manage the economy. GOSPLAN, the state planning bureau, hired thousands of scientists, engineers, economists, accountants, etc. They spent enormous energy determining the exact mix of goods and services the people needed, and they tried to plan out the various industrial supply chains, etc. Despite enormous effort, they failed miserably. And they had lots of help by being able to inspect the markets of other countries and determine relative values that way. In addition, they tolerated extensive black markets to take the pressure off of lousy state planning.
In very small groups, you can sort out supply and demand by simply talking to each other, trusting in the others to tell you straight and not scam you. But if a regulator for a million people says, “Who needs a free hammer?”, what do you think will happen? Lots of people will say “I DO!”, even if they don’t. Because hey, free hammer. And trying to figure out exactly who does need a hammer is impossible. For example, I may have an old, chipped hammer, so I say I need a new one. But maybe other people don’t have one at all. How am I to know? Or maybe I don’t have a hammer, but neither does the guy in another city who desperately needs one for his activities, and I just need one ‘in case’. How can this be sorted out absent a market that sets prices? How can a central regulator possibly figure out how to deliver a million hammers to the right people? Answer: She can’t. She doesn’t have the information, because it doesn’t exist.
As a bookend to Hayek’s paper above, you might like to read his Nobel acceptance speech, on the The Pretense of Knowledge
Notice that there isn’t a hint of bigotry in any of these ideas.
And yet, somehow, the fire department works without bankrupting society. In fact, no one has figured out a better system to fight fires than the fully government funded and entirely “free” (as far as anything funded by government is free) service of fire departments.
And that’s not the only example. Socialized health care works in many societies better than the US’s partially free market system in terms of efficiency and delivering care to all who need it.
There are others. Which is not to say that socialism is always superior – it very clearly is not. But it’s sometimes superior, when well run.
This is not an argument against any government services. It’s an argument against trying to ‘plan’ an economy.
Did you even read any of the links before responding with the usual ‘But fire departments!’ argument?
No one is arguing in favor of trying to plan an economy. American “socialists” want socialized health care, safety net, etc. They’re not trying to take food trucks away from entrepreneurs.
Technically, I want socialized insurance, not health care. The govt is good at collecting and distributing money, but I don’t want it to run my doctors practice.
Not wanting the government to run your doctor’s practice is super racist. Or bigoted. Or both.
Many classically conservative values don’t appear to be based on bigotry, IMO. Supporting Trump, on the other hand, requires bigotry (and misogyny), tolerance of bigotry (and misogyny), or ignorance of bigotry (and misogyny), IMO.
That’s not fair. The dude self-waterboarded to ascertain whether or not Bush’s “it’s not torture, it’s really not that bad !” apologist crew were blowing smoke up America’s collective ass. He didn’t *use *to be all mindlessly locksteppy.
[QUOTE=Scylla]
Go point out how Ilhan Omar’s anti-semitism and the Democrats’ defense of it is reprehensible.
[/QUOTE]
What defence ? As far as I know she got pounded on, apologized, deleted the tweets and clarified that her comments had been made in ignorance of historical anti-semitic tropes and that she was criticizing Israel’s current policies and AIPAC specifically - not Jews. In fact, if you look even just a little bit beyond Fox News coverage of two tweets you’ll find e.g. this video of her in Congress in Feb. 2017 (so, a good year before the pitchforks ; but still within the context of defending the right of individuals to BDS Israel) :
[QUOTE=Omar]
I certainly never advocate for any type of discrimination, I never will, but what I do advocate for is for all of us to work towards furthering peace in the world, and I do believe that you never get to having peace without justice. […] We know, and I am certainly saddened by the rise of antisemitism, and I have been part of a community that has been raising funds to support the Jewish community in this time of need, because as my community is struggling with the particular ban the President wants to put on us, the Jewish community has been side-by-side, fighting with us, making sure we have everything we need.
[/QUOTE]
Jeez, what a fucking antisemite, huh ?
Meanwhile hundreds of MAGAheads keep writing actually anti-Semitic shit (like House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy who, in oct. 2018 tweeted “We cannot allow Soros, Steyer and Bloomberg to buy this election ! Go out and vote Republican on Nov. 6 ! MAGA !”. He wrote this *after *Soros was sent a pipebomb in the mail BTW. Can you hear the strong condemnations he keeps being hammered with from his party ? Oh no wait, I’m sorry, that’s just crickets.
[QUOTE=Scylla]
Go denounce the Antifa attack on a journalist
[/QUOTE]
What attack ? What journalist ? Are you talking about the Andy Ngo thing ?! Because if so, holy fuck. He’s barely a journalist, he’s a guy who knowingly goes out with Proud Boy gangsters setting out to commit violence (he, in fact, participates in the planning) ; and gleefully filmed a group of them attacking a leftist woman and* breaking her fucking spine* with metal batons. He then proceeded to doxx her for her trouble. Fuck that guy, for real.
(but then again, Joe Biden and Andrew Yang both condemned the attack and expressed support towards Ngo. So there you go.)
[QUOTE=Scylla]
their takeover of Oregon
[/QUOTE]
What are you talking about ? Like, there are right wing militias (and congresscritters) threatening to shoot government officials for doing their constitutional job, sure… how is that a librul takeover ?
[QUOTE=Scylla]
their bombing of a detention center filled with immigrants
[/QUOTE]
Yup, that’s totally a librul thing. Do you want to own up to your gunning down 51 Muslims in New Zealand, or would you rather admit to being beyond silly there ?
[QUOTE=Scylla]
congratulate the Republicans for kicking King off the commute assignments.
[/QUOTE]
Fuck that. It’s not like he suddenly came out as a White Power guy. He was, openly so, proudly so when he was elected without any GOP challenger. He’d been for decades. And was he ostracized when he arrived in Washington ? Of course not - they gave him assignments and everything. It’s only when Democrats made noise that Republicans kicked him off. They sure as shit didn’t do it on their own.
But sure, your guys get the yuuuugest gold star for kicking him out of a few committees. After letting him get elected unchallenged 9 times. Getting party funding all that time. And *still *not disavowing him or kicking him out of the party.
Openly anit-semitic or crypto-anti-semitic? You be the judge.
You may not be racist yourself, but if you voted for him, or people spouting the same hate, or you would be willing to for some other purpose, then you’re okay with it. Is that actually better, though?
Then kindly do so, instead of doubling down, Trumpishly, when you’re shown to be factually wrong, as in the following:
Funding that goes to schools only affects those IN school, temporarily.
Funding special needs kids/adults for job programs is also fine with me as well since you know, they are actually actively doing something to better themselves.
Governmental assistance is a temporary solution to what should be temporary problems but what we see is that people become reliant on that governmental assistance instead of striving to be off of it and better themselves financially.
The fact that this adversely affects minorities and the fact that (with a broad brush) Democrats favor a very strong and mostly permanent safety net also coincides with minorities greatly leaning Democrat.
That’s too simplistic an not a very useful definition. A tax has to “hurt” equally. Hurt meaning discomfort, not literal dollar values.
Not an apology. She never walked back her words and has continued saying similar things since. BDS is an openly anti-Semitic group, as Nancy Pelosi herself pointed out two weeks ago.
You make my point for me, defending the indefensible because it is on your side
Jesus fucking Christ, do you read anything but the shit Antifa put out after the incident? It’s not fucking true. He doxxed no one. He was standing there doing nothing but filming and they beat the shut out of him and gave him a brain bleed.
Yeah. They are the exception.
Yeah, my bad. I guess it’s all just fine, then. Congratulations on your moral high ground.
You (or Haidt) are hung up on literal dollar values. That’s not the point. But just keep talking about how your amplifier goes to 11.
Sounds like you’re not going to answer. Didn’t expect you would, though.
So it’s got nothing to do with whether the funding is permanent or temporary; it’s got to do with whether the people benefitting are, in your opinion, trying to “better themselves”.
That’s an arguable position, and I could say several things about it and might when I have the time; but it’s not the same thing as “What I’m after is governmental assistance that is ‘temporary’ is perfectly acceptable in my eyes. ALL of it. The permanence of it is unacceptable.”; which is what you said in post #256. The distinction you’re making isn’t between “permanent” and “temporary”; it’s between people who you think deserve it and people who you think don’t.
It can be both. Imagine a line.
Those who can help themselves but don’t much care to.
Those that cannot.
I am not mindlessly advocating for a temporary solution to a permanent fix that we don’t have a solution to. (Special needs or those who flat out cannot work) but AM advocating a temporary solution to those who can
Nancy Pelosi is wrong. Being anti-Israel (or more properly anti-Israeli-policies) is not anti-Semitic, much like being anti-South Africa wasn’t being anti-Dutch. You may not agree with them, but they absolutely have the right to decide that they don’t want any of their money to fund Bibi. Why do you hate freedom, brah ?
Do you read *anything *Antifa actually says ?
["]Yes. He did.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/It’s not fucking true. He doxxed no one. He was standing there doing nothing but filming and they beat the shut out of him and gave him a brain bleed.
[/QUOTE)
He’s also published a list of journalists “tied” to Antifa according to him. The list has been making the rounds at StormFront and Atomwaffen Division. Real stand-up kind of guy.
He’s affiliated with the Proud Boys and follows them around, helping them stir violence. He’s an asshole who enables violence and regularly calls for it. He’s scum, plain and simple. That doesn’t mean he deserved to catch anything more than a milkshake, but I won’t cry bitter tears for him either.
It’s really not the point. I’m really, REALLY wondering how anyone could spin “a right wing militia is essentially besieging the House” as a liberal take over.
One also pointedly notes you quietly dropped the other two items on your list.
Is the conservative tendency to place people in groups and then place valuations on worthiness of those groups of humans, ala Kearsen’s post above… is that “bigoted”, even if the valuations are made on non-racial grounds?
<Maybe that’s y’all’s problem: You place people in groups and then assign dollar bills as to their worthiness. Well, stop it. Get some help.>