Is this true Yea Forums? Further books to support this?
Is this true Yea Forums? Further books to support this?
Bentley Young
Kevin Thomas
Kayden Thompson
whats the appeal of onions? is it like 50% sugar or something? why would someone buy this over a 99 cent clifbar?
Brandon Ward
Bottom pic has to be bait; it’s been a meme forever now they know
Liam Murphy
This proud American's shelf contains all the books you need to support that mindset.
Nicholas Lewis
It's funny but apparently true.
theindependentwhig.com
So apparently "The Righteous Mind" is the book you want, can't speak as to whether it's any good or not though.
Ayden Sullivan
relevant bit since you're too lazy to click the link:
>In a study I did with Jesse Graham and Brian Nosek, we tested how well liberals and conservatives could understand each other. We asked more than two thousand American visitors to fill out the Moral Foundations Questionnaire. One-third of the time they were asked to fill it out normally, answering as themselves. One-third of the time they were asked to fill it out as they think a “typical liberal” would respond. One-third of the time they were asked to fill it out as a “typical conservative” would respond. This design allowed us to examine the stereotypes that each side held about the other. More important, it allowed us to assess how accurate they were by comparing people’s expectations about “typical” partisans to the actual responses from partisans on the left and the right)’ Who was best able to pretend to be the other?
>The results were clear and consistent. Moderates and conservatives were most accurate in their predictions, whether they were pretending to be liberals or conservatives. Liberals were the least accurate, especially those who described themselves as “very liberal.”
Adrian Bell
i wonder how many "people" base their worldviews on juvenile pics like this LOL
Henry Davis
How does one ascend
Caleb Sanders
capitalists are not conservative, nor are liberals socialist.
Andrew Allen
books ;)
Ryder Phillips
>liberals are socialist
*autistic screeching from distant college dorm
Luke Hall
Which ones
Dominic Williams
you already fucked up user, just read books
Blake Russell
But there are so many
Liam Miller
what does any of that have to do with socialists though?
Jose Lewis
political philosophy and economics, any ideological perspective. sticky. anything is better than dumb crap like op post made by poo ppoo lice buggers in the brain
Lincoln Thompson
better get to work
Samuel King
more offended at the display of console cuckoldry awful taste underneath all that toilet paper on top
John King
how can someone be so retarded. no seriously, i really want to know how can someone fuck up so badly in 1 and only life.
Logan Brown
that if you understood how basic economics worked you wouldn't be a socialist
Brayden Martin
what you quoted was a personality test it had nothing to do with economics
Jackson Ortiz
You're implying there is a difference when there isn't. When people pick their political tendencies temperament has a lot more to do with it than any feigned rational choice. Leftists choose leftism (of any kind whether it's neoliberalism or demsoc or an-com) because of a moral/religious conviction, not any sort of actual grappling with whether their beliefs correspond to any sort of functional concept of reality. It's all ideological and sourced externally from authority figures never their own rationalization of their understanding of the world.
Jacob Butler
But I'm a socialist, I want to do away with money
Why the fuck should I care about economics
Camden Wood
the personality test had nothing to do with leftists, liberals, and particularly neoliberals, are not leftists by any sense of the imagination outside of burgerland clown logic.
>liberals are deluded and have no grasp on reality
literally every socialist/communist who has read a book will agree 100% with that statement
Angel Long
>leftism (of any kind whether it's neoliberalism
tfw thatcher and reagan were leftists...
Cooper Mitchell
Its a dumb meme but its true. We've been trying to use government to fix the same societal problems for the last century (in america). No matter how much regulation we throw at it, or social programs, the problems seem to get worse anyways.
So why is it failing?
The socialist response is that evil capitalists show up every-time and foil our plans for a great society. (the buzzword neoliberalism tries to make this "logic" sound academic)
Problem is this isnt very empirical. The capitalist looks at the problem and tries to figure out the root cause. What we find out is that almost every regulation and government program worsens the economy. Which means that the cost of everything goes up, jobs are harder to find, social mobility is lower -- everything becomes shittier. Meaning every attempt to fix the problem has actually made it worse.
Actually fixing this is probably impossible in a democratic state; its hard to just tell the government to stop doing stuff. Especially when the government is such a massive business. A libertarian state is as much of a fantasy as a communist state. And is probably equally undesirable.
Leo Davis
>The capitalist looks at the problem and tries to figure out the root cause
when has a capitalism ever tried to solve a problem? this is nonsensical. you have somehow diafied the economy even more than socialists
Gabriel Garcia
Capitalism is literally about solving problems for financial incentive
Main point is socialists have a nonsensical theory about why their projects always fail
Whereas if you actually look at what is causing societal issues you’d realize that less regulation and less socialism is the solution.
Nathaniel Robinson
And its provable that regulation fucks up society:
All regulation increases the cost of doing business
Forcing businesses to charge more for their services
Which means prices are raised for the consumer, causing all sorts of issues
Now consider that there are millions of regulations in every sector of the economy so you are literally being fucked from every possible angle. Thats why its so hard to pin down the cause
Samuel James
wait, do you think regulation and socialism is the same thing? please don't tell me you are a burger
Noah Hill
no they arent the same. but i use them interchangeably because in terms of their economic effect
Capitalists see the same societal problems as you do. Difference is one of us is at least. Trying to be empirical
Mason Lee
I'm pretty sure most of what Marx wrote was about capitalism but whatever
you americans probably think democrats are "socialists"
Brayden Russell
>literally every game is a fighting game or a shooter
>buying every installment in a yearly franchise that does not vary
>duplicate remasters
>WWE no less
Hunter Sullivan
read hegel then read capital vol I-III and the manifesto then read lenin, stalin, mao and deng if you want to understand how each communist state worked. then read paul cockshott to understand how future socialist states could work.
some background knowledge in classical economics, neoclassical economics and history would help you
Lucas Jenkins
>people like this exist
Carter Cruz
>terrible taste in everything
>being an unironic trumpfag
yeesh, you're even more retarded than the average /pol/tard
Evan Carter
>paul cockshott
Kevin Rivera
because economics is still the management of finite sources with people's infinite demands
Owen Reyes
>capitalism
>trying to be empirical
Then why do we continue to deregulate when it has demonstrably fucked us in a number of ways?
Easton Harris
WTF are you on about, tard? America hasn't regulated shit, they're going the complete opposite way, deregulating everything and creating monopolies which has resulted in the shittiest products for the highest prices. There is a reason why USA counts as a third world shithole and Europe as the civilized part of the world.
>b-b-but the TV said I'm free and murrica is #1 at everything
lmao, my nigga, lmao
Xavier Sanchez
today he is the only one that is bringing new ideas instead of another rebranded marxist theory or unmarxist idpol wankery
Aiden Miller
Sebastian White
...
Camden Brooks
>We've been trying to use government to fix the same societal problems for the last century (in america). No matter how much regulation we throw at it, or social programs, the problems seem to get worse anyways.
>So why is it failing?
Imagine believing this. Societal problems got worse after neoliberal policies were put in place and when deregulation was embraced.
Angel Wood
>We've been trying to use government to fix the same societal problems for the last century (in america). No matter how much regulation we throw at it, or social programs
fucking lmao, you didn't add a fraction of the regulations that exist in north Europe, for example, and US remains a fucking wild west of economics
>Forcing businesses to charge more for their services
As opposed to businesses charging more because they can and like ripping people off
Camden Davis
If you think the U.S. has very little economic regulation you are mistaken. There are hundreds of federal regulatory agencies, as well as regulators in every state, city, and county. The federal governments bureaucratic agencies consistently pass several thousand regulatory rules every year. Deregulation is not occurring, and blaming our problems on it is empty political rhetoric.
How do you not see that the “businesses are greedy and evil” idea is a weak argument?
Learn economics and open your mind
Austin Howard
and if you developed a more advanced conception of economics, you would be a socialist again.
Nathan Davis
>FALL FOR THE "DAS CAPITAL' MEME
>OPEN BOOK
>PAGE AFTER PAGE OF CRUDE MS PAINT DRAWINGS
WTF, LEFTISTS?
Henry Murphy
>what is Das Kapital
just kek
Socialists have produced more in depth critiques and analyses of capitalism than anyone else.
Jonathan Williams
except all of the critiques of socialism in Figure 3 are complete dogshit that have been resolutely debunked by socialist thinkers decades if not centuries ago. The most offensive one is probably part 4; implying that capital accumulation leads irrespective of any particular case to job expansion is an ethology which may have been tenable 250 years ago, but in modern monopoly and oligopoly capitalism is completely incongruent with the near-starvation wages being paid to employees and unsustainable salaries of CEOs and executives. Most of that money would otherwise go into share buybacks or other shiftings-around of money, lobbying, political advertising, &c., not actually into the productive capacities of the industry itself. Capitalist critiques of socialism are out of date, naive misunderstandings of bureaucratic and corporate behavior which have really no explanatory value in modern society, but then again, I wouldn't expect capitalists to have a deep or even nuanced understanding of the real-world implications of their own arguments, so what can ya do?
Jayden Collins
whoops except socialist services in europe are worse than their capitalist alternatives. and the european economy is getting worse, all the while more people are becoming dependent on social services. sounds like a stable solution though
I cant wait for democratic socialism to fail so future apologists can tell us how “it wasnt real socialism!!!!”
Jackson Cox
bothering yourself with bad bait posts is bad praxis comrade. the bourgeoisie and their bootlickers don't know how to read
Andrew Lee
user I...
Xavier Anderson
Ironic that you use the term bootlicker while you lick the boots of bureaucrats and politicians (and the biggest secret of all - companies lobby for socialism because it gives them govt protection - so you’re sucking corporate cock too)