/siberia/ - Off-topic

liberalism and social democracy are criminally underrated considering some of the things above them and some of the things they're alongside.
(You don't truly hate Blairism until you learn to hate it not just as a socialist, but as a socdem and a neoliberal as well)
McLuhan should be at least one tier up, probably two, one of the most important figures in modern history. rational choice theory should get a bump, good explanatory value even if pushed by monsters (it will tell you why neoliberalism flopped!). Hayekism also possibly deserves a bump up (the guy was a sociopathic cunt but once you get his narrow point about price signals you can sympathise without becoming a cunt yourself), Corbynism should be bumped down in reality because of the Your Party farce but i can see why, for the ideal 2017 version it'd be elevated, finally, coming full circle: Blairism and New Labour are duplicates.

I have other thoughts but I like to get in early with my devil's advocacy

>>814711
I know you're the anon who's been posting recently defending neoliberalism. See the problem is that both neoliberalism and Keynesian ism are not really ideologies like Marxism or Nazism where's it's adherents work to convince people and then successfully come to power. Rather, both are just the post-hoc justifications for what Capitalists where already planning to do.

Rate of profit collapsing? Let's outsource industry, liberalize finance and prop up neoliberals as the face of actions that we already wanted to do.

Great power competition increasing? Let's bring in bit of protectionist and mercantilism and then prop up Keynesian figureheads as if these actions are the result of people being "convinced" of their ideas.

>>814714
In large part I agree, my aim is basically to rescue useful analytical frameworks from association with their poor "implementation". e.g. neoliberals and Keynesians both said many true and useful things, but the real power brokers were always using that to save face for what they'd do anyway, rather than actually listening.
Keynesians have a bit of sympathy and you can get a hearing for post Keynesians explaining how real Keynesianism has never been tried, but neoliberals have never been so lucky. (I must draw a line and say that personally most of them were sociopath freaks, but even sociopath freaks sometimes understand something valuable.)

As it stands most people have it backwards: "neoliberals made capitalism bad." No! Capitalists made neoliberalism bad! And as you recognise, when it's necessary, things get rearranged again. That we now see a rising disavowal of neoliberalism is not a sign we're returning to a cosy Keynesian consensus, but one that we're getting more guns, less butter, and more arbitrary protection of domestic warmongers and monopolists. Much worse than free trade!

>>814720
>Much worse than free trade!
<neo liberalism is free trade
you are such a stupid moron. just piss off and read something more than wikipedia you clown.

>>814722
You know nothing of what I know, conclusion jumper anon. Reading people in bad faith is a terrible vice, not even reading them and just putting words in their mouths is even worse

>>814720
>>814722

Come on now, we can have a discussion without namecalling. I disagree with neoliberal anon, but he does have a point. There isn't really any monolith called neoliberalism that all self described neoliberals accept. For example, even Krugman himself is now against unrestricted free trade against countries that manipulate currencies or suppress the labor share of income

>>814714
I see now who you confused me with…

Looking at the graph it seems that we got lost in the library on our way to help the worker.

>>814728
There needs to be some uncontrolled variable or an uninvolved referee to have a fair game. Ego is equally distributed so it has to be the former. Free consensual trade is probably the best form of uncontrollable variable to hedge it all against.

Everything else is just musical chairs of who gets to go to the gulag but that just reduces to monopoly. Ah shit.

>>814727
holy fuck are you an insufferable dishonest and disengineous cunt. neither neo liberalism nor keynsianism are 'analytical frameworks' with any merit or useful parts whatsoever.
they are reformist sets of economic policy to keep an unsustainable mode of production from devouring itself. why should i bother to discuss how to prolong the life of a terminally ill cancer patient when there is a cure. what is this bullshit.

This is ivory tower brainrot.

>>814783
You have a very distinctive typing style and I'm 100% sure you confused me with another anon because he mentioned "incentives", which amused me a great deal since I have a very distinctive set of ideas.

If you do not understand capitalist ideas on their own terms, you will have an inaccurate understanding of how people operating under those ideas behave. It is through understanding Keynes that Kalecki (a Marxist Keynesian if you will) correctly understood the internal contradictions of full employment in a class society, while pseuds like you were going "no, it'll never work at all, Keynesians simply cannot spend their way out of a recession, revolution SOON!" (It never came)

You do not understand my purposes and instead of asking or listening, you presume. You (pretend to) have read one book and think you know everything.

>>814786
Yeah and the other side's just khorny klass kucks

Fake and gay nazbol gang deserves to be on top

>>814877
Nazbol kang