## Neoliberalism explained

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

### Neoliberalism explained

after several very ugly days of working before Thanksgiving,
during which I was also sick, I finally have a couple of days off...
I shall be writing until the cough medicine kicks in and then
off for a nap...

I was just randomly thinking, throwing out idea's in my head,
when I thought of Neoliberalism.....and it got me to thinking,
what exactly is "Neoliberalism"?

Once again, one has to be careful to avoid mixing up
the economic and the political...we see the word "Neoliberal"
and we think because of the word "liberal" it has a political
connotation... but the very word is a economic word, not
a political word.. and you have to understand that right from the start...

Neoliberalism is a right wing economic theory...embraced by right wing
thinkers and economist....for examples are Friedrich Hayek and Milton
Friedman and Ronald Raygun and Margret Thatcher and Alan Greenspan...

The Neoliberals favored less regulation, less government intervention,
eliminating price controls, lowering trade barriers and deregulating capital
markets.. any of this sounds familiar? this is the basic Republican
message since the 1980's....and its overarching value is freedom,
although it is a fake freedom and I get into that in a bit....

the basic idea is that the market can best work out its solutions
and the government will only make things worse.. basic Raygunomics….

the political aspect was that by making the market free, you will enjoy
greater political freedom... but once again that makes the vital and false
assumption that suggest that freedom is connected to the economic and
not to the political... whereas as I have suggested, we are facing an economic
tyranny, not a political tyranny...and by giving such freedom to the economic
forces without any oversight, we allow those economic forces to control
and dominate our lives.....

Now Neoliberalism does want an overall one world because it
will allow them to dominate the world economically and it
doesn't really matter what the political status is because the
the economic can control the political as shown by the example
of the United States where we have the economic forces in
control of the government, not government of the people, for
the people by the people, but government of business, for business
and by business...and that is where we are at now.....

and this is due to the complete capture of all the world's government
by Neoliberalism...… and the basic failure of the concept of
Neoliberalism is that the Market forces that is supposed to be
open and free to act as it will, doesn't.. it is directed by those
economic forces to do the will of the dominating forces of Neoliberalism....

the enemy is not a political term, but the enemy is the economic
domination of Neoliberalism...let is take for example the massive
and overwhelming concentration of wealth, income inequality that
exists today... that is due to the Neoliberals economic policy...
8 people hold more wealth then half the world put together...

and if that isn't complete and total dictatorship, then I don't know what
is...if we allow this complete privatization of the public sphere, then
then how is the people, us, suppose to have control in our lives?
if the big corporations have complete control, then they have
no reason, no incentive to listen or engage with those who must
have their services.. we have a dozen monopolies that dominate
the economic world.. for example, exactly how many car companies are they?
not that many.. we have 14 major global corporation that control more
then 60 auto brands in the world... we have 6 corporations that control
over 90% of American media.. we have 5 companies that make the
breakfast cereal you eat... at every level, the corporations dominate
the economics life you lead...the solution it is said, is to vote with
your feet.. but you can't... where do we go to if every aspect of our lives
is dominated by only a few corporations?

we cannot quit our job because every single corporation is controlling
our fate by belonging to this Neoliberalism that has taken over
the earth.....the economic domination and by controlling the
economic, they dominate the political...for example, the Koch
brothers simply buying up entire state legislatures, Wisconsin
and Nebraska for example....this buying and selling of our political
"leaders" and I use the word "leaders" loosely, has meant we have forfeited
any possible means to recover our lost political and economic freedom...

the corporations can dominate us by a simple demands that is followed
by the threat of leaving the city, state or country.. and us losing those jobs...
for example, if you don't give us complete autonomy over our taxes, we will simply pack
our bags and leave.. and you will lose all your jobs....

we are completely at the mercy of big corporations if, if we accept the
notion that human beings are "Homo Economicus" but if we reject that notion
and discover that human beings are not economic beings, not even political
beings, but being who find their meaning outside of the economic
and outside of the political... we find our meaning in what makes us
more complete human beings....

at this point, I suspect that we must completely tear down
the system and rebuild it to better represent us as human beings....

Neoliberalism makes the economic the most important aspect
of our lives.. and that is the beginning of the failure of Neoliberalism...
it begins at the very wrong start and end in the wrong place....

Neoliberalism doesn't make the individual the center of
its theory, no, Neoliberalism makes the Market the center
and thus like communism and Catholicism and Christianity
makes the individual a secondary part of the overall
plan in which we are simply pawns to be used in some
overall scheme... we are sacrificial lambs in the eyes
of the market, of god, of dialectical materialism...

the individual has no other function then to serve its
master, regardless of the name of that master,
be it Neoliberalism or communism or Catholicism...

and we must reject that notion... but what is the solution?

how do we find "salvation"?

and by "salvation", I would suggest is freedom from the various
ism's and ideologies that seek to dominate and control our individual
lives....how are we suppose to "become who we are" if we are subject
to the domination of our corporate masters?

the first step is as always, become aware... understand what is happening...

what is the real value in your life? is it love or understanding or
finding justice or finding truth? the answer lies in how do we achieve
that value given the domination of the Neoliberal domination of our world....

the search for profits has devalued, dehumanized our values, be it love
or justice or truth and that is where we are today...we need to recover
that search for what it means to be human and that search isn't about
profits or our being able to buy a new car or a new TV... no, "becoming who
you are" isn't an economic or a political solution but an individual solution
and once you have discovered what it means to be human individually,
then and only then can you venture out into the world and try to create
the change that is necessary to recover our planet from the damaging
and destructive ism that is Neoliberalism....

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend

Posts: 7493
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

### Re: Neoliberalism explained

Peter Kropotkin wrote:Neoliberalism is a right wing economic theory...embraced by right wing
thinkers and economist....for examples are Friedrich Hayek and Milton
Friedman and Ronald Raygun and Margret Thatcher and Alan Greenspan...
Kropotkin
Though despite the rabid red scares around Obama he was also a neoliberal or his admin functioned as that...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/opin ... risis.html

And so was Clinton, and I have little doubt that the other Clinton would be one also.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher

Posts: 2489
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

### Re: Neoliberalism explained

I have always stated that Obama was a center right
politician, he wasn't liberal in any way, shape or form...
as for Clinton, he too adapted certain aspects of neoliberalism....
thus if understood correctly, every white house administration since
1980 has either used or had Neoliberalism at its core...
and if we look objectively at the economic world today,
we are in some deep and serious trouble in a wide variety
of areas....and those area's are troubled because of the Neoliberalism
that has driven the economic and political sphere since 1980

in other words, we have massive income inequality and climate change
and serious pollution issues and a alienated and disconnected human race
and all because of Neoliberalism....as an economic policy...

but this leads us to a couple of questions.. what is the exact role of
government in our lives? what is the exact role of the economic
in our lives? and is our "meaning" found in the role of the political or
in our economic status of human beings?

let us first think about the role of government in our lives...

what should the role of government play in our lives?

forget the ism's or ideologies.. what should government be doing
in our lives?

I see government playing several roles, one is as an umpire...not taking sides
but simply calling the game as defined by the rules...and by this, we mean justice...
justice is simply the game called equally without reference to title or wealth or
status...the picture of justice is the blindfolded women with a scale...
and justice must be blindfolded to be equal....justice cannot and must not
see white or black or rich or poor or man or woman... it must only see human beings...
without recourse to external status... but does that mean we must, must toss
a man into jail because he stole a loaf of bread to feed his family?

Justice must also be tempered with mercy

but this leads us into the next aspect of government....
we know, know that we have quite different starting places
for our citizens... the wealthy and upper class do not need
as much help as the poor or middle class.. in other words,
we must make the starting line equal for all parties concerned...

we must give people an equal chance to succeed....success
is possible for anyone given the tools to succeed..
if we have an equal starting gate for everyone, then
we can allow people to find their own measure of success..
so government is used to equalize the field of play for the
players.... if in baseball, we allow players to use their inherent
advantage to begin a game, that game isn't really fair
for example, if we allow one team to begin the game with
a four run lead, that by definition isn't fair... but we do this
every day socially when we don't treat the players, those
in this case to be educated equally....the path to justice is
by giving everyone an equal chance to be properly educated...
and this begins in kindergarten and goes on through high school...
to deny someone to be educated by wealth is justice denied..
an example is I live in pretty wealthy area.. we have a very good
school system because this is a wealthy town..(the average home sale
is 1.7 million dollars and condo's are quite often above a million dollars)
and wealthy towns have better schools systems because we can put more
money into our schools.. the next town down is not as wealthy and
their school district is not as good.. a city's wealth is a direct correlation to
the quality of schools... simple fact...wealth can attract better teachers
get better equipment, have better resources.....if you want better education,
then you must give the schools better resources...…

so the role of government is to equalize this situation by giving poorer
area's more money to compete with the surrounding wealthier
cities...to equalize education by creating equal school districts..
creating an equal starting gate in education for all...
that is the role of government... to create equality, an equal starting
gate for its citizens...this drive for equality isn't meant to drive the wealthy
down or deny them, it is simply to bring the poor and minorities up to the level
of being able to compete with those who have been blessed with greater
resources.... bring people up, not bring people down.. that is the point of
and the goal of government.....to equalize the playing field of all the players,
in all the area's that need to be equalized...… justice demands that
we play on an equal playing field.. given an equal chance to succeed or fail...
the government doesn't pick the winners or the losers.. it simply levels
the playing field.... and sports does the exact same thing... in the draft
in any sport is done as the worse team gets a better selection place..
the worse team in that sport gets the a higher choice of players..
so the worse team will get the number one choice in the draft
and the second worse team will get the second choice and the third
worse team will get the third choice and so on.... this allows
teams a chance to become level partners in the game....
this doesn't tell the team who to choose, it just allows them
the choice of the number one pick.. it levels the playing field
without telling teams who to pick...it allows the teams the freedom
to make their own choices and make their own success or failure...

and this is the role of government....to equalize the playing field
but not to dictate how the players are to make their choices..
the government simply equalizes the field.. the rest is up to the
individuals players or teams involved...

so with this idea in mind.. we turn to some test cases...
for example abortion.... the role of government is to make
a level playing field for all the players involved.. thus to make
a level playing field.. we legalize abortion.. for any one who wants
it....thus the poor have an equal access to abortion as the wealthy does...
we level the playing field.... the government doesn't tell anyone
if they can or cannot get an abortion.. we leave that choice to the players
involved.. the government role is to create a level playing field where
all players have an equal opportunity to make their choices
the government doesn't tell the players what to do, it simply creates
an equal playing field...

if you want justice, then you must have equality and that is the role
of government... to create an equal system for all players to engage in...

this example of equality isn't just a political example, we must
create an equal playing field economically as well as politically...

thus the role of government is to create an equal playing field for
all its citizens.. the government doesn't tell the players how they
must play or what to do, it simply just creates an equal playing field...

are there limits? of course, we don't allow or encourage absolute
freedom.. we cannot.... an example of this is the old idea of
yelling fire in a crowded theater... yes, you have freedom of speech but
that freedom of speech isn't absolute because of the dangers inherent
in absolute freedom of speech...of yelling fire in a crowded theater will
cause a panic that will hurt or even kill many people...the danger outweighs
the right of freedom of speech.. everyone can see this....

so, what does this tell us about.. say gun rights for example?

we don't have absolute right to freedoms because of the risk, the
danger involved in pursing our absolute rights to others....

thus we can and must insure the level playing field of safety
for people in society.. so the level playing field looks like this
in regards to gun laws...we restrict guns in the exact same way
we restrict driving to license personal.. a shorthand understanding
of a license is "an authorization to use licensed material" and as we
already use an license to restrict access to alcohol and cigarettes...
and we also use an license to restrict access to many types of
pharmaceuticals for example, just today I bought some cough
medicine and I was carded....I had to show my license to purchase
simple cough medicine... we give the government the right to
engage in this matter because we see or understand the
problems of having unlimited access to certain medicine
which could cause problems...the right to access certain medicine
isn't absolute.. it is limited for our protection and under this idea
we can also use to license firearms.. I don't see how we can
level the playing field by removing all the guns from everyone's
hands because of the example of the prohibition of alcohol in
the 30's..... we can see how the was a complete an absolute
failure..so somehow removing guns isn't an option.. so we must
turn to the restricting and licensing of firearms as our best choice
to ensure a level playing field for all involved and that is
the proper role of government....

we begin to see the proper limit and role of government....
we can see how government can and must provide us with
a level playing field in which we can then compete with others
on a equal basis.. the choices still remain with us, we just are
allowed to compete equally... and that is the role of government...
not to make the choices for us.. just to allow us the opportunity
to make our own choices on a level playing field with others...

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend

Posts: 7493
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

### Re: Neoliberalism explained

Speaking in my other thread from the far-right perspective I illustrated how it's split down in the middle where 50% support Donald Trump and where the other 50% despise him. I represent the portion of the far-right that despises him. Within far-right circles it is very fragmented currently upon this very issue causing even more disunity. There's a lot of mud slinging over Trump going back and fourth non-stop.

The imbecile white nationalists see him as as the savior of America ready to usher in the good old days of American capitalism like the 1980's under Reagan. [Whatever the fuck that's suppose to mean.] My faction of white nationalism sees him as a Jewish globalist puppet and promoter of crony capitalism where he is nothing more than a Wallstreet whore. We view him as controlled opposition and as a political puppet of the establishment.

So Peter, I'm going to shock you in saying this but I don't like Donald Trump either. We're actually in agreement upon that although I do find your political impeachment proceedings to be amusing, unprecedented, fabricated, and laughable only because it's ineffective borderlining on mental retardation. Still, I don't like Trump where I would shed no tears if he was gone only because my side would see that as an opening for us, definitely not because we support any of your candidates, we wouldn't.

We're also in agreement that the current economic system is terrible and unsustainable, where we disagree is that you still think it can be politically reformed whereas I don't where instead I see the United States economically collapsing in the near future. [My estimation puts it quite possibly collapsing next year or at 2026 the latest. So basically anywhere from one to six years.]

I also am an economic socialist although I embrace a moderate centrist form of economic socialism where I'm not sure what kind of economic socialism you embrace.

What we disagree upon is democracy, open borders, globalism, radical feminism, radical individualism, multiracial societies, and foreign immigration.

Neo-liberals think it is fine and dandy if we white European people became the new racial or ethnic minorities where still even yet some would be very happy if we went extinct altogether. For me that would be a tragedy and a future I don't want to see happening.

So we have some things we can agree upon which may shock you where we also disagree on many issues as well for more obvious reasons.
"I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$Zero_Sum Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire. Posts: 2624 Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America. ### Re: Neoliberalism explained I hear you.. however I must caution you to understand the difference between the political and the economic... it is quite clear far too many people mix and match the two distinct and different ism's....the reason I offer up this caution is because of a phrase you used... Neo-liberals.... are you using this in the economic phrase "Neoliberalism" or are you using this in a political sense? it is important to keep the two distinct and separate because therein lies the failure of say, soviet communism... they, Lenin and Stalin, they tried to stretch an economic theory into a political theory and it fail, a rather spectacular failure to be sure.... and that failure has tainted communism... but we must understand what the failure was... we cannot use an economic theory as a political theory... this is done all the time and in fact what has happened in the U.S... the economic theory of democracy has gone underneath the economic theory of capitalism...the political has become subservient to the economic.. to the detriment of both..... we view the United States as an economic entity whereas our founding fathers saw it as a political entity.. and therein lies the great problem we are facing.... the real question becomes this: what does it mean to be an American? I view the questions you raised from a different standpoint then you, questions like democracy, open borders, globalism, "radical" feminism, radical individualism, multiracial societies and foreign immigration... is American still America if whites are no longer a majority? and the answer is, of course it is..... you view America through a certain lens as do I...my lens is far different then yours because I don' see white Americans as being somehow superior to other races or ethnic minorities...for example, America has always, always been a multiracial society...I am Irish-English... in the 1820's to the start of the civil war, the Irish was the most despised nationality in America, bar none. it was quite common for signs to be in stores, bars, restaurants "Irish not allowed"..... simple and to the point... the Irish was the single most discriminated against nationality in America for over 30 years...it wasn't until the Irish entered various police forces en masse that the Irish became part of America and that was in the 1870's to 1900...now tell me, what has the Irish contributed to America over the last 120 or so years? what haven't they contributed? in every aspect of America life, the Irish have help create modern America... without the Irish, America would have been a whole lot poorer.... your idea's, your viewpoint would keep the Irish out and we would have been the worse for it... I am a amature historian... I love reading about history... Rome was a falling society around 270 to 300 AD.. what saved it? Rome brought in various tribes into the Roman society... The Visigoths for example were one tribe that Rome brought into the empire peacefully...it was known as the "volkerwanderung" "the Wandering of the peoples" this stabilized the Roman empire to the point where Rome lasted 170 years past the point where it should have collapsed... the mass migration of gothic tribes allowed the Roman empire to last another several generations.... did the "Roman's" ever become a minority? no, but is that important? no.... it depends upon how you define the "Romans"? how do you view the Romans and more importantly, how did they identify themselves? the incoming tribes wanted to be Romans, they wanted the higher standard of living the Romans has.. does this sound familiar to immigration today? I believe in open borders because I don't think of people as being different...we human beings have certain needs that must be met.. we need love and food and water and shelter and security and health care and education.. all those basic needs are what every single person on planet earth needs....the great damage isn't from the common person seeking a better life, no the great damage comes from those who already have the basics and they want more, more power and money and fame and influence....the great damage done to America isn't being done by the average immigrant, but is done by the wealthy like the Koch brothers and Sheldon Anderson... those who contribute to the dangerous and damaging Neoliberalism that infects the landscape of America... but once again it depends upon how you view America......that is the criteria that is needed to decide what is "right" or "wrong" for America.. Kropotkin "Those who sacrifice liberty for security wind up with neither." "Ben Franklin" Peter Kropotkin ILP Legend Posts: 7493 Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am Location: blue state ### Re: Neoliberalism explained White nationalism at least my variation of it has nothing to do with being superior or supremacism, those are mainstream political propaganda talking points Peter utilized to constantly smear against us. I don't believe in the narrative that whites are superior at all to other races or vice versa. We simply just want to survive, exist, have our own vibrant white European communities, and be left alone to ourselves independently without being forced into multiracial integration. We see no future for ourselves in such a forceful or imposed multiracial integration process. As for the Irish, I like the Irish. Will respond to your other points later Peter. "I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$$Zero_Sum Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire. Posts: 2624 Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America. ### Re: Neoliberalism explained Foreign immigration is merely a tool utilized by private corporations to bring down wages and bring in cheap foreign labor as a sort of arbitrage in suppressing the working classes, this why the open borders multiracial neo-liberals I find to be entirely amusing. On the one hand you say that you care about the American working class where on the other you support the very things that seeks to stamp it out of existence and reduce it to nothing. The common denominator of all foreign immigrant sanctuary cities or regions is that they're all sanctuaries for cheap foreign labor ensuring the wages of the working class remain artificially stagnant. The hypocrisy and double standards of both communists or neo-liberals on this subject are mind boggling. I don't even know how you guys keep a straight face anymore talking such nonsense with your open borders tripe. "I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$Zero_Sum Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire. Posts: 2624 Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America. ### Re: Neoliberalism explained I think liberalism as a two fold inverted pyramid, with Liberalism at it's head and neo-liberalism and the 'New Left ' having similar attributes , with the New Left perverted the distinction between the material and politically devised transformation at it's heart- began the bargaining chip for the downgrade of politocal their I and honesty, ending in the cliche - 'polotocal correctness- a generation later, whereas that correctness was paid for by the Freudian economic laxity, in the form of cheaper moral prices and standard flagbearers . Orgies of depravity created bubbles of nationalistic nationalistic discontent, and the Deep South changed alliances on the basis of biblical mythologies. Now , where in the heck can the judiciary, and the executive develop intelligence corresponding to control issues related to the execution of the great divide that has to diminish am undervalued executive power , and undervalue it's minimalization? Trumpism was created way before Trump. The corporation understands only one language : its either my way or no way. Meno_ ILP Legend Posts: 5580 Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am Location: Mysterium Tremendum ### Re: Neoliberalism explained Meno_ wrote:I think liberalism as a two fold inverted pyramid, with Liberalism at it's head and neo-liberalism and the 'New Left ' having similar attributes , with the New Left perverted the distinction between the material and politically devised transformation at it's heart- began the bargaining chip for the downgrade of politocal their I and honesty, ending in the cliche - 'polotocal correctness- a generation later, whereas that correctness was paid for by the Freudian economic laxity, in the form of cheaper moral prices and standard flagbearers . Orgies of depravity created bubbles of nationalistic nationalistic discontent, and the Deep South changed alliances on the basis of biblical mythologies. Now , where in the heck can the judiciary, and the executive develop intelligence corresponding to control issues related to the execution of the great divide that has to diminish am undervalued executive power , and undervalue it's minimalization? Trumpism was created way before Trump. The corporation understands only one language : its either my way or no way. There really is no difference between democratic neo-liberals and republican neo-conservatives, concerning both political parties they take their orders from Jewish zionist Wallstreet. The differences are minor and trivial at best. One reason why I have no loyalties to capitalism and the very reason I'm a national socialist is because capitalism is only loyal to greed, profit, or cheapening economic profits. That is why white nationalism and capitalism are not compatible, it is why international capitalism seems to undermine white identity or hegemony because its loyalty is to money alone. It will continue on destroying or devastating white western civilization if it can make an easy quick buck to do so in the name of private capital accumulation. International capital has no loyalties to nation, public well being, culture, family, race, ethnicity, tradition, society or family, its loyalty is to profit accumulation alone. Capitalism doesn't seem to elevate human beings into a higher transcendental experience, instead it seems to reduce human beings to the lowest common denominator to a captive herd of mindless consumers, debt slaves, and gears within the global homo machine. This is where I criticize other white nationalists with their so called envisionment of some kind of national capitalism, no, the only way of protecting or safeguarding a nation state is within a firm intervening socialist framework. "I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$$

Zero_Sum
Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire.

Posts: 2624
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America.

### Re: Neoliberalism explained

Zero_Sum: White nationalism at least my variation of it has nothing to do with being superior or supremacism, those are mainstream political propaganda talking points Peter utilized to constantly smear against us. I don't believe in the narrative that whites are superior at all to other races or vice versa.

We simply just want to survive, exist, have our own vibrant white European communities, and be left alone to ourselves independently without being forced into multiracial integration. We see no future for ourselves in such a forceful or imposed multiracial integration process. As for the Irish, I like the Irish.

K: and we have the great myth....that there is some sort of "vibrant white European" culture...
it doesn't exists.... can you tell me what the "vibrant white European" music is?
or what the "vibrant white European" culture even is?

there is no such thing as a "vibrant white European community" what is in fact true, is that
all cultures, beg, borrow or steal culture from other cultures....music for example,
Rock and Roll, sounds simple enough and yet, it derives from American Blues.. and we
have such musicians as the Rolling Stones, the Who, Eric Clapton admitting as much....
without the blues, we don't have Rock and roll....let us try this, remove the blacks
from the modern rock scene, what is left? basically you have Andy Williams and
Pat Boone.. sad as that sounds....and this is true in music, art, painting, sculpture,
our social construct of America is based upon a mix of vastly diverse cultures that
has impacted America.... it has become so entrenched that we cannot see it anymore,
but our social, economic, political, cultural milieu is one that is constructed by and
defined by immigrants, past and present.....

we cannot escape the influence of immigrants in our society for immigrants
have defined and redefined what it means to be an American.....

the list of immigrants that have defined America is long and vast from Alexander
Hamilton to Natalie Portman and including (in no particular order) Bruce Willis,
Arnold Schwarzenegger, Albert Einstein, Sergey Brin, Tesla, Mila Kunis, Sammy Sosa,
Levi Strauss, Charlize Theron, Henry Kissinger, Guillermo del Toro... tell me that they had no
direct impact or influence on America politically, culturally, socially, economically...

your life today is dramatically and powerfully impacted by these and other immigrants....

your basic premise is wrong.. end of story...

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend

Posts: 7493
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

### Re: Neoliberalism explained

"Wallstreet whore."

Wallstreet PIMP, thank you.

Pedro I Rengel
Philosopher

Posts: 3254
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

### Re: Neoliberalism explained

Kropotkin claims whites have no culture, cites rock and roll as an example.

1stly, white music is more than popular music, it's also folk and classical music.
2ndly, white popular music is more than rock, it's also country, pop and electronic music.
3rdly, white artists like Bill Haley, Elvis Presley and Jerry Lee Lewis were arguably just as pivotal to rock's formation as black artists like Chuck Berry.
4thly, black artists used instruments and technology like drum kits, electric guitars, pianos, amps , mics and recorded it on, records, instruments and technology invented by whites.
5thly, black artists were just as influenced by white music in general with its emphasis on chord progressions and harmony as they were by their own music with its emphasis on rhythm.
Finally, rock has evolved way beyond Chuck Berry e.g. prog rock, heavy metal, new wave, etcetera.

Rock is mostly a white thing.

Whites have their own music, just as we have our own everything, our own art, architecture, cinema, literature, fashion, cuisine, our own philosophy, religion and science (for me, science is partly cultural, I don't see it as being this wholly objective, universal enterprise, for instance there're scientific theories widely accepted by western scientists that're widely rejected by Chinese and Indian scientists, but I digress), our own customs, history and values.
Of course we've been influenced by others, but in the last several centuries, who's been doing the lion's share of the influencing?
Whites invented the modern world, both materially, and culturally.

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 1792
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

### Re: Neoliberalism explained

Pedro I Rengel wrote:"Wallstreet whore."

Wallstreet PIMP, thank you.

I look forward to the dollar crashing where your pimps and whores are emptied onto the street hanging from trees with nooses around their necks. If I was Trump, I wouldn't want to be president when this occurs, same for the democrats also. Doesn't really matter who is president at the time.
"I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$Zero_Sum Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire. Posts: 2624 Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America. ### Re: Neoliberalism explained Peter Kropotkin wrote:Zero_Sum: White nationalism at least my variation of it has nothing to do with being superior or supremacism, those are mainstream political propaganda talking points Peter utilized to constantly smear against us. I don't believe in the narrative that whites are superior at all to other races or vice versa. We simply just want to survive, exist, have our own vibrant white European communities, and be left alone to ourselves independently without being forced into multiracial integration. We see no future for ourselves in such a forceful or imposed multiracial integration process. As for the Irish, I like the Irish. K: and we have the great myth....that there is some sort of "vibrant white European" culture... it doesn't exists.... can you tell me what the "vibrant white European" music is? or what the "vibrant white European" culture even is? there is no such thing as a "vibrant white European community" what is in fact true, is that all cultures, beg, borrow or steal culture from other cultures....music for example, Rock and Roll, sounds simple enough and yet, it derives from American Blues.. and we have such musicians as the Rolling Stones, the Who, Eric Clapton admitting as much.... without the blues, we don't have Rock and roll....let us try this, remove the blacks from the modern rock scene, what is left? basically you have Andy Williams and Pat Boone.. sad as that sounds....and this is true in music, art, painting, sculpture, our social construct of America is based upon a mix of vastly diverse cultures that has impacted America.... it has become so entrenched that we cannot see it anymore, but our social, economic, political, cultural milieu is one that is constructed by and defined by immigrants, past and present..... we cannot escape the influence of immigrants in our society for immigrants have defined and redefined what it means to be an American..... the list of immigrants that have defined America is long and vast from Alexander Hamilton to Natalie Portman and including (in no particular order) Bruce Willis, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Albert Einstein, Sergey Brin, Tesla, Mila Kunis, Sammy Sosa, Levi Strauss, Charlize Theron, Henry Kissinger, Guillermo del Toro... tell me that they had no direct impact or influence on America politically, culturally, socially, economically... your life today is dramatically and powerfully impacted by these and other immigrants.... your basic premise is wrong.. end of story... Kropotkin The fact you say white people or white Europeans don't have any culture shows it was a mistake thinking I could even talk to you as a rational adult. I won't make that same mistake, enjoy this thread by yourself if you insist on being ignorant or irrational. I should of known better from the start. Last edited by Zero_Sum on Sun Dec 01, 2019 3:08 am, edited 1 time in total. "I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$$Zero_Sum Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire. Posts: 2624 Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America. ### Re: Neoliberalism explained Gloominary wrote:Kropotkin claims whites have no culture, cites rock and roll as an example. 1stly, white music is more than popular music, it's also folk and classical music. 2ndly, white popular music is more than rock, it's also country, pop and electronic music. 3rdly, white artists like Bill Haley, Elvis Presley and Jerry Lee Lewis were arguably just as pivotal to rock's formation as black artists like Chuck Berry. 4thly, black artists used instruments and technology like drum kits, electric guitars, pianos, amps , mics and recorded it on, records, instruments and technology invented by whites. 5thly, black artists were just as influenced by white music in general with its emphasis on chord progressions and harmony as they were by their own music with its emphasis on rhythm. Finally, rock has evolved way beyond Chuck Berry e.g. prog rock, heavy metal, new wave, etcetera. Rock is mostly a white thing. Whites have their own music, just as we have our own everything, our own art, architecture, cinema, literature, fashion, cuisine, our own philosophy, religion and science (for me, science is partly cultural, I don't see it as being this wholly objective, universal enterprise, for instance there're scientific theories widely accepted by western scientists that're widely rejected by Chinese and Indian scientists, but I digress), our own customs, history and values. Of course we've been influenced by others, but in the last several centuries, who's been doing the lion's share of the influencing? Whites invented the modern world, both materially, and culturally. Ignore this one Gloominary, he's far too gone. Save your energy and don't waste it on him. He's clearly a white self hating anti-white reject. "I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$Zero_Sum Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire. Posts: 2624 Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America. ### Re: Neoliberalism explained Gloominary: Kropotkin claims whites have no culture, cites rock and roll as an example. K: yep and the reason is quite simple, that there is no such thing as a "white" culture, society or science or technology.....I am white and yet my mom who did one of those ancestry DNA test came up with some surprises.. we have a bit of Ashkenazi Jew in us as well as two separate African hits and some native American.. but we are mostly Irish-English...take a DNA test and you will find that you are not white.. you are a mixture of a vast number of people... there is no such thing as a "white" culture because there is no such thing as a "white" people.. and in the beginning, in the beginning we all came from Africa.. every single human being on planet earth comes from Africa... the Germans and their very proud Aryan heritage has some serious cracks in it.. as Germany was run over time after time after time by tribes from as far away as Persia and Mongolia... there is no such thing as pure Aryan heritage... mix mongrels at best..... you are taking pride in something that doesn't exist..... G: 1stly, white music is more than popular music, it's also folk and classical music. 2ndly, white popular music is more than rock, it's also country, pop and electronic music. 3rdly, white artists like Bill Haley, Elvis Presley and Jerry Lee Lewis were arguably just as pivotal to rock's formation as black artists like Chuck Berry. 4thly, black artists used instruments and technology like drum kits, electric guitars, pianos, amps , mics and recorded it on, records, instruments and technology invented by whites. 5thly, black artists were just as influenced by white music in general with its emphasis on chord progressions and harmony as they were by their own music with its emphasis on rhythm. Finally, rock has evolved way beyond Chuck Berry e.g. prog rock, heavy metal, new wave, etcetera. Rock is mostly a white thing. K: Rock is mostly a white thing and what is "white"? you are simply wrong on the facts.. popular music like the Beatles who incorporated music from India like the Sitar and Peter Gabriel and Paul Simon who has incorporated African music into their songs.... the basis of Rock music is the blues and that is descends from African slave music... the very basis of Rock music is African music... as for Elvis and Jerry lee Lewis and bill Haley.. really, they were raised on black music and gospels.. read a biography of them... about Elvis for example, Sam Phillips, the owner of Sun records where Elvis did his first recordings, said "If I could find a white man who had the negro sound and the negro feel, I could make a billion dollars" no black influence there the very first hit of Elvis was a 1946 blues remake....you are trying very hard to separate out something that cannot be separated.... music is based upon very diverse styles and part of that diverse nature is the mixing of different styles..... G: Whites have their own music, just as we have our own everything, our own art, architecture, cinema, literature, fashion, cuisine, our own philosophy, religion and science (for me, science is partly cultural, I don't see it as being this wholly objective, universal enterprise, for instance there're scientific theories widely accepted by western scientists that're widely rejected by Chinese and Indian scientists, but I digress), our own customs, history and values. Of course we've been influenced by others, but in the last several centuries, who's been doing the lion's share of the influencing? Whites invented the modern world, both materially, and culturally.[/quote] K: you are so wrong, I am not sure where to begin?... ok, how about this, the beginning of the modern age came about when the various text and manuscripts of the ancient Greeks and Romans came back to the west from the Arabic world in the 11, 12 and 13 century... we have a rebirth, a Renaissance of knowledge based upon these formerly lost texts....from the Arabic world.... the building of the modern age comes from sources beyond some magical thinking... much of the modern thinking comes from the travels and adventures of those who travel the world... for example, much philosophical thinking in the 16th and 17th century was about the "noble savages" of the new world.. which is found in much of Rousseau's work in the 18th century...the very existence of the American Indian created a major rethinking into what it means to be human.... much of Darwin's work involved the understanding of cultures outside of the European world...much of science and philosophy and archeology and history come from a understanding of the vast breath and width of ancient societies like China and India and southeast Asia...but you do not take into effect the existence of people like the greatest poet in Russian history.. Alexander Pushkin.. what does an Russian writer like Pushkin have to do with your thesis Kropotkin? Pushkin great grandfather came from Africa... Pushkin was part African... this is the type of influence that rarely gets into the history books.... you cannot any type of case for white society or white culture because it comes from somewhere else.... I would dig deeper into this but dinner calls my name... Kropotkin "Those who sacrifice liberty for security wind up with neither." "Ben Franklin" Peter Kropotkin ILP Legend Posts: 7493 Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am Location: blue state ### Re: Neoliberalism explained Hey Peter, does black people and black culture exist? Yes, or no? "I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$$

Zero_Sum
Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire.

Posts: 2624
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America.

### Re: Neoliberalism explained

Zero_Sum wrote:
Gloominary wrote:Kropotkin claims whites have no culture, cites rock and roll as an example.

1stly, white music is more than popular music, it's also folk and classical music.
2ndly, white popular music is more than rock, it's also country, pop and electronic music.
3rdly, white artists like Bill Haley, Elvis Presley and Jerry Lee Lewis were arguably just as pivotal to rock's formation as black artists like Chuck Berry.
4thly, black artists used instruments and technology like drum kits, electric guitars, pianos, amps , mics and recorded it on, records, instruments and technology invented by whites.
5thly, black artists were just as influenced by white music in general with its emphasis on chord progressions and harmony as they were by their own music with its emphasis on rhythm.
Finally, rock has evolved way beyond Chuck Berry e.g. prog rock, heavy metal, new wave, etcetera.

Rock is mostly a white thing.

Whites have their own music, just as we have our own everything, our own art, architecture, cinema, literature, fashion, cuisine, our own philosophy, religion and science (for me, science is partly cultural, I don't see it as being this wholly objective, universal enterprise, for instance there're scientific theories widely accepted by western scientists that're widely rejected by Chinese and Indian scientists, but I digress), our own customs, history and values.
Of course we've been influenced by others, but in the last several centuries, who's been doing the lion's share of the influencing?
Whites invented the modern world, both materially, and culturally.

Ignore this one Gloominary, he's far too gone. Save your energy and don't waste it on him.

He's clearly a white self hating anti-white reject.

K: and I was wondering who would bring this old foolishness up first.... just because
I dismiss your thesis, suddenly I am a "white self hating anti-white reject"
if any disagrees with you "white" types, that person is always a "self hating white"
you simply dismiss anyone who disagrees with you as "self hating"....I am clearly
not "self hating" (but I find it interesting that you always turn to hate first)
anyway, I am above such nonsense as nationalism and "white culture" it means
absolutely nothing....

nationalism and "white culture" has nothing to say about what it means to
be human.. it is complete and udder nonsense to think we are simply separate
and distinct tribes.... nationalism and "white culture" isn't science and it isn't
culture and it isn't philosophical and it isn't thinking....it is fear based emotions....

I am old and I have passed by your empty, shallow, narrow thinking decades ago.....

I exist in the 21st century.. your thinking is in the 19th century with its talk of
whites and nationalism and being fear base....you are dinosaurs...and the world
has already passed you by...you just don't know it yet....I freely admit, I kinda feel
sorry for you.... and off to bed...

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend

Posts: 7493
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

^^^
"I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$Zero_Sum Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire. Posts: 2624 Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America. ### Re: Neoliberalism explained Zero_Sum wrote:Hey Peter, does black people and black culture exist? Yes, or no? Of course they do. Afro-Americans invented their culture ex nihilo, in vacuum or void, like God, whereas those soulless white devils had to appropriate theirs from everyone else. Same with DNA. White people aren't a race, we're just albino Dravidians, or at least that's what some unthinking, uneducated Afro-supremacists told me. Gloominary Philosopher Posts: 1792 Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am Location: Canada ### Re: Neoliberalism explained but dinner calls my name... Meatloaf: 'ohhh peee-ete. I've got ketchup on me this time. You won't regret it.' Brussel sprouts: 'shove off, meatloaf. Last time he completely ignored me because of you.' Salad: 'no, he ignored you because you're BRUSSEL SPROUTS, dude. Nobody likes you... but keep blaming meatloaf if it makes you feel better.' Meatloaf: 'thanks, salad. He always does that when we're together. Dude's even got more issues than asparagus.' promethean75 Philosopher Posts: 1780 Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm ### Re: Neoliberalism explained Gloominary wrote: Zero_Sum wrote:Hey Peter, does black people and black culture exist? Yes, or no? Of course they do. Afro-Americans invented their culture ex nihilo, in vacuum or void, like God, whereas those soulless white devils had to appropriate theirs from everyone else. Same with DNA. White people aren't a race, we're just albino Dravidians, or at least that's what some unthinking, uneducated Afro-supremacists told me. Nice. "I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$$$Zero_Sum Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire. Posts: 2624 Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America. ### Re: Neoliberalism explained Y'all ain't ready for the troof. promethean75 Philosopher Posts: 1780 Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm ### Re: Neoliberalism explained promethean75 wrote:Y'all ain't ready for the troof. Personal favorites and highlights of mine. "I'm sorry, but the lifestyle you've ordered that you've grown accustomed to is completely out of stock. Have a nice day! "-$

Zero_Sum
Evil Neo-Nazi Extraordinaire.

Posts: 2624
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: U.S.S.A- Newly lead Bolshevik Soviet block. Also known as Weimar America.

### Re: Neoliberalism explained

Peter Kropotkin wrote:K: yep and the reason is quite simple, that there is no such thing as a "white" culture, society or science or technology.....I am white and yet my mom who did one of those ancestry DNA test came up with some surprises.. we have a bit of Ashkenazi Jew in us as well as two separate African hits and some native American.. but we are mostly Irish-English...take a DNA test and you will find that you are not white.. you are a mixture of a vast number of people... there is no such thing as a "white" culture because there is no such thing as a "white" people..

I took a DNA test from Ancestry, it came back 100% white, 50% Italian, 31% English and Welsh, 13% Irish and Scottish and 6% German.
I'm sure I'm not an anomaly.

and in the beginning, in the beginning we all
came from Africa.. every single human being on planet earth comes from Africa...

That was tens if not hundreds of thousands of years ago.
We didn't stop evolving after we left Africa.
Africans didn't stop evolving either.
Modern Africans don't have much, if anything more in common with paleolithic Africans than we do.

the Germans and their very proud Aryan heritage has some serious cracks in it..
as Germany was run over time after time after time by tribes from as far away
as Persia and Mongolia... there is no such thing as pure Aryan heritage... mix mongrels
at best.....

If it's not absolutely white, it's black right?
There's specs of yellow, green and brown on red apples, does that make red apples not red?
You can find many genes all over the world, but some genes are much more common among the native populations of some regions of the world than others.
Some genes cooccur much more frequently with some genes than with others.

you are taking pride in something that doesn't exist.....

Tell that to the police officer when he asks you for the race of the man who robbed you.

K: Rock is mostly a white thing and what is "white"? you are simply wrong on the facts..
popular music like the Beatles who incorporated music from India like the Sitar
and Peter Gabriel and Paul Simon who has incorporated African music into their
songs....

The vast majority of rock doesn't incorporate music directly from Africa or directly or indirectly from the rest of the 3rd world.
But the vast majority of modern 3rd world music incorporates 1st world music.

the basis of Rock music is the blues and that is descends from African
slave music...

The basis of rock music is as much country as it is blues.

the very basis of Rock music is African music...

Did Africans develop blues in Africa some time in the 14th century, or was blues developed only after Africans came into contact with European instruments and compositions?

as for Elvis and Jerry lee Lewis and bill Haley.. really, they were raised on
black music and gospels.. read a biography of them... about Elvis for example,
Sam Phillips, the owner of Sun records where Elvis did his first recordings, said
"If I could find a white man who had the negro sound and the negro feel,
I could make a billion dollars" no black influence there the very first hit of
Elvis was a 1946 blues remake....you are trying very hard to separate out
something that cannot be separated.... music is based upon very diverse
styles and part of that diverse nature is the mixing of different styles.....

Elvis, Haley and Lewis were as influenced by country as they were by blues.

Rock began as a hybrid of black and white music, not wholly black as you maintain, but evolved into something mostly white.
There's been few, if any black artists of note since Jimi Hendrix, and he wasn't even black, he was part native.
Moreover, blacks aren't even black, most blacks are mulattos, half black, half white, so really at most rock is 50% black, if not 75%, 87.5% or 93.75% white.

K: you are so wrong, I am not sure where to begin?...

ok, how about this, the beginning of the modern age came about when
the various text and manuscripts of the ancient Greeks and Romans
came back to the west from the Arabic world in the 11, 12 and 13 century...

we have a rebirth, a Renaissance of knowledge based upon these formerly
lost texts....from the Arabic world....

Greeks and Romans, again white.

the building of the modern age comes from sources beyond some magical
thinking... much of the modern thinking comes from the travels
and adventures of those who travel the world... for example, much
philosophical thinking in the 16th and 17th century was about the
"noble savages" of the new world.. which is found in much of Rousseau's work
in the 18th century...the very existence of the American Indian created a
major rethinking into what it means to be human....

Almost every artist, musician, thinker and inventor of note since the renaissance has been white.
Nearly every cultural, social, political, economic and technological revolution...

Savages had little to teach us, they inadvertently helped Rousseau and a few others to come up with some interesting thought experiments.
If observing criminals helps me better understand human nature, does that mean my insights were a product of their genius?
If observing apes helps me better understand primate nature, does that mean my insights were a product of ape genius?
No, they were a product of mine.
The savages, criminals and apes played a passive role in the philosophers' insights, the philosophers' played the active role.
To the philosophers belong the credit.

In any case, the vast majority of our revolutionary insights didn't come from observing savages, they came from rediscovering European antiquity, turning inward, thinking about ourselves, our beliefs, thoughts, feelings and perceptions, our relationship with our fellow countrymen and the natural world, the civilization we lived in and imagining how it could be improved.

much of Darwin's work involved the understanding of cultures outside of the
European world...much of science and philosophy and archeology and history
come from a understanding of the vast breath and width of ancient societies
like China and India and southeast Asia...but you do not take into effect the
existence of people like the greatest poet in Russian history.. Alexander Pushkin..
what does an Russian writer like Pushkin have to do with your thesis Kropotkin?

Did Asians invent constitutional monarchy, the republic and democracy?
Did they end serfdom and slavery?

And who's idea was it to explore the entire globe, for that matter to explore the deep sea and outer space?
To examine all these cultures for insight, use what made sense and discard the rest?

But if anything the 3rd world, with all its barbarism and savagery, set a negative example
We learned how not to do things.
So much of European society came out of who we were, and what we dreamt of becoming, not aping Africans, native Americans or Asians.
The founding fathers of Canada, the US and Australia looked primarily to Athens, Rome and the UK for inspiration, not to Africa, the Americas or Asia.
Last edited by Gloominary on Sun Dec 01, 2019 4:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Gloominary
Philosopher

Posts: 1792
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Next

Return to Society, Government, and Economics

### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot]