I am sure Putin and Elon Musk would find they had a lot in common if they chatted for long enough. — universeness

Hmm... not sure how did you come to such conclusion. :D
Again, it's not that people don't detest Gates or Soros, but people just understand that any attempts to install socialism would end up with Stalin/Chavez/PolPot/Mao/kimjonun, etc. so of course they prefer to stick with the devils they know.
Of course, any excuses of "no, no, this time we are smarter, we won't let it happen again, this time I promise we would bring in the utopia!" are just delusional.

In general I sympathize with that principle. Imagine a progressive professor who starts referring to all her students as 'she.' Would you have a right complain? — igjugarjuk

I would prefer to stick with the language the way it is. So men as addressed as a "he", women as "she".

Many of us do not want your help. A moral busybody is never a welcome addition to politics, and one who believes he can solve the world’s problems through political tinkering and is mad. — NOS4A2

Pretty much sums it up. Nobody likes oligarchs, bet replacing Soros with Stalin certainly won't be a step in the right direction. :)

I am Scottish, we have a bloody history just like most nations. I would fight against any invader of my country just like the Ukrainians are doing. — universeness

Yes, Scots certainly are brave people. As I remember Uberboyo is also Scottish, his interpretation of Jung and Nietzche seem very beneficial. https://youtu.be/0Vb2wPkuX_A

There are tough resilient humans everywhere, it’s got very little to do with nationality. — universeness

It has to do with culture and experience. So a 20 year old kid attending gender studies in UCLA has a slightly different experience from his Ukrainian counterpart, firing Javelins into Russian tanks.

Really? That’s your projection of what I typed. Such projection borders on the irrational! — universeness

Not every understandable what you mean.

Yes I can but not on this thread. I would reserve that for a PM exchange between us if you wish.
Unless you want to start a new thread on the doctrine of true socialism. There is a political category on TPF but I think the idea is to discuss the philosophical aspects of politics. A PM exchange would probably be preferred by those here who prefer ‘philosophic discourse,’ to be the mainstay on TPF. — universeness

I think this thread went off-topic a long time ago, so adding some discussion of socialism here won't be a problem.

From my point of view, you seem as a good person, who wants the best for people, unfortunately you are so blinded by this wish that you completely ignore any limitations imposed by reality.

So again, I have no doubt that you can describe socialism in a very attractive way in philosophical terms on paper, problem start when one tries to implement it in reality. ;)

If a liberal believes that there is a good reason to lobby companies to fire its neo-Nazi employees then lobbying companies to fire its neo-Nazi employees is consistent with with their liberal views. — Michael

Especially when they can call anybody they want a neonazi. :D

Interpreting anybody you don't like as Goebbels contributes you being unable to think outside of the given echo-chamber. ;)

Socialists can learn and are born into each new generation. We will learn the lessons of history.
The methodologies employed by the nefarious are becoming more and more familiar over the era’s.
They can and will be stopped or be diluted towards mere itches. — universeness

Ok, can you explain how you see it in practice?

Is that because you live there or nearby? — universeness

I live nearby, in Latvia, so of course I have a steak in the game. :) I think people in both Poland and Ukraine are very tough and self-reliant, so once the west crumbles, they might pick up the torch.

Have you listened to the Bezmenov interview?

https://bezmenov.net/
Unlike in the present United States, there will be no place for dissent in future Marxist–Leninist America. Here you can you can get popular like Daniel Ellsberg and filthy rich like Jane Fonda for being dissident, for criticizing your Pentagon. In the future, these people will be simply squashed like cockroaches. Nobody is going to pay them nothing for their beautiful, noble ideas of equality. This they don’t understand and it will be a great shock for them, of course.

A rather misanthropic, defeatist viewpoint imo.
You can surrender to the dictates of the oligarchs if you want to. Meantime, we socialists will try to save you from your despondent hellish vision of ‘real life.’ — universeness

Again, the problem is that when socialism is tried in real life, the 'good' socialists are used as pawns and than eliminated by very nasty people. So you believe that you will bring good to humanity, but in reality you just pave the way for the likes of Stalin, who will immediately kill you, once you have done your job.

I love the progression of this thread. — Streetlight

The thread is progressing, yet your rubbish is still being ignored. :cry:

It will succeed or the human race is doomed. — universeness

I think the west is pretty much doomed in the long run. A new civilization might come out of Poland/Ukraine. Of course it won't be socialist, yet very hard to imagine how exactly would it be formed.

No choice as many many more die due to the whims of the nefarious rich and powerful few. This has been true since we left the wilds and became infected by the abuses of such systems as the divine rule of Kings or the demands and whims of those who claimed to represent or speak for the divine.
The existence of the rich few and poor majority is a residue from our ‘survival of the fittest,’ Darwinian beginnings. We only acted like that as we were trying to make a transition from uncivilised to civilised behaviour.
Socialists keep insisting that we can become civilised.
Nefarious capitalist’s seem to prefer the jungle rules.
Time for the human race to unite globally and drag the rich into a civilised socialist/humanist future. — universeness

Sounds nice in theory, but assuming it would work in practice, or at least not end in a disaster, is way too optimistic.

You demonstrate your misunderstanding of socialism.
Under socialism you cannot get an all powerful government. They would need control over the military and the checks and balances established under true socialism would make that as impossible as possible, — universeness

In not an all-powerful government, who will ensure the oligarchs don't get to power? I mean socialism without such government would fall apart in a month, with such government it would turn into a gulag. So, nice idea in theory, but won't work in real life.

Introducing dishonesty and more censorship would not strengthen a system. It would weaken it. Didn't we agree earlier that censorship is a sign of weakness, that a set of ideas need to be protected from criticism to avoid falling apart?
I suggest we base our views on ideas that do not need protection from criticism through censorship. — Tzeentch

I had read lots of materials on how people can be brainwashed. And if one has certain control over the mass media he can make people believe in complete lunacies, like that there are Nazis in Ukraine or that the world will end if it becomes 1 degree hotter. So how do we account for that if not by censorship? For example in my country all Russian tv channels and social media are blocked, which I certainly perceive as a good thing.

ou don’t surrender to vile systems that maintain inequality and leave main power in the hands of the very few. — universeness

Well, that's how attempts to install socialism always end up.

I agree that all attempts at a global socialist/humanist system has failed but If at first you don’t succeed you try try again. — universeness

If each attempts costs the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent people than maybe you should not try and try again. ;)

Perhaps. But censorship would only facilitate a movement to the opposite extreme. — Tzeentch

The best I could come up with is that the censorship should be covert, pretty much like social media algorithms are censoring the people on the right. Of course, it takes a powerful politician, who could ask those companies to reverse their algorithms, which might of course lead to other problems. )

All authority must be removable by a majority of those it represents at any time the majority so chooses to remove them. — universeness

And how is it supposed to work in real life? Why do we assume that the all-powerful government would be ok with being removed by the people, instead of just shooting a few unhappy ones and intimidating the rest?

Lenin was as much of a nefarious narcissist as Stalin.
Lenin had hundreds of thousands of innocent people killed as well. He was no socialist! — universeness

Well socialism don't seem to work without killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people.
All kinds of communes were tried in late 1800s, all failed and got dissolved within a few month. So when done on the country-wide scale the government would have to either admit its failures and return to capitalism or use force against the unhappy people.

True socialists are normally the first to die when popular revolutions are usurped by nefarious individuals and groups. — universeness

Then maybe there is something wrong, if in real world "good" socialist start a revolution, but immediately are overthrown and killed by nefarious individuals. Such as all Lenin's 'old guard' was pretty much wiped out by Stalin.

From each according to their ability to each according to their needs. — universeness

The only question is who determines what are your abilities and your needs. Pretty soon you might find out that you are able to survive on a few rotten potatoes and can dig the Belamor channel for 16 hours a day.

Open discourse has been under pressure for decades — Tzeentch

And it caved in. So at least it needs some way of strengthening to come back to the mainstream and stay there.

↪M777
In my opinion, all ideas should be able to be expressed. No matter how bad or repulsive. Of course such ideas will be annihilated, but in open, civilized debate, with reasoned arguments.

Bad ideas that have emotional appeal may hold some sway, but they won't hold up to scrutiny and open discourse will prevent these ideas from ever becoming too extreme.

The idea that people are too stupid to handle free discourse is a dark world view that is pretty much incompatible with free, open society. I would avoid such ideas. — Tzeentch

Well, but current leftist ideas somehow got hold by exploiting the 'marketplace of ideas'. Same way Nazis came to power, etc.

I guess this discussion about totalitarianism cut a little too close to home for the folks that run the show on this forum. — Tzeentch

I'm surprised it isn't banned yet. :)

What is a game? Read some Wittgenstein. — Michael

No, I haven't got that deep into philosophy as to read Wittgenstein. :) so far reading more public philosopher.

To me, your words ‘bad ideas (like socialism),’ makes you easy to deal with.
Us lefties can see you clearly as a nefarious righty! — universeness

ok... well yes, in my opinion socialism is a very bad idea. it has been tried multiple times, failed miserably, often forcing the government to use force to sustain it. what's wrong in such understanding?

The way to get rid of problematic ideas is to discuss them openly. Thereby its flaws will become apparent. That's the whole point of freedom of speech. — Tzeentch

After thinking about it, I couldn't come to a conclusion - should bad ideas ( like socialism, etc. ) also have free speech? Libertarians would say sure, people would filter out bad ideas. I would say - why do we assume people would be able to do so, instead of being taken over by the emotional appeal of such ideas and ignoring that they don't work in reality.

I couldn't agree more with that, many would be surprised at how many people are racists simply because it's censored and therefore thought to be effective. — Varde

Seems that the concept of 'racist' is something the left appropriated and slaps onto anybody they don't like, same as transphobe, bigot, nazi, etc.

ok. not that you contributed anything very valuable to the discussion anyways.

Now, the discussion has veered into transphobia there's nothing else to say imo. — Baden

I'd add that it is very amusing to watch people being unable to think outside of the concepts that have been installed into their heads.

don't like kids chemically castrated = transophobic = bad = * run in circles, yelling: Nazi! Nazi! *

and than those lefties wonder why people call them NPCs. :D

Isn't a healthy state of affairs if people are afraid to be racist, for example, or do you envision the ideal state where you can go up to someone, spout your racism, and expect appreciation for your openness? — Hanover

Originally I was talking about being open to thinking.
As for calling other people names, sane people seem to be very reserved here, yet lefties have totally no problem spewing their bigotry and labeling everybody they disagree with as a Nazi.

"Veritaphobia is a collection of ideas and phenomena that encompass a range of negative attitudes, feelings, or actions towards people stating objective truth or reality in general. Veritaphobia can include fear, aversion, hatred, violence, anger, or discomfort felt or expressed towards people who do not conform to politically correct expectations."

yes, that's pretty much how those transactivists operate.

Ah, so you are a transphobe. — Baden

Maybe you are veritaphobic - afraid of reality? Or you might be just bigoted towards people with traditional believes, so you try to smear them so that your bigotry would feel justified?

Most of the normal, sane people I know sympathize with trans people who on the whole suffer far more serious bullying than anything 'a minority of blue haired nutjobs' ever inflicted on anyone. — Baden

One thing is to feel compassion towards a schizophrenic, who believes aliens are hiding under his bed, quite another is to 'affirm' is delusions or, more over, try to force others to 'affirm' them.

So again, most people don't have a problem if a dude walks around in a dress, problems start when they are forced to perceive him as a woman.

A person can really not mind radical transformations in gender expression...or even puberty blockers... — igjugarjuk

I think a person not minding kids being put on puberty blockers is already deep into the crazy narrative.

For me, the rule of thumb would be "live as you like, but don't force it on others", such as if you want to wear a dress, that's up to you, but don't force others to pretend you are a woman, and, moreover, don't try grooming children into such nonsense.

Just want to add, I'm not suggesting equivalence of all anti-PC crusades; some are more justified than others. What I am suggesting though is that there is nothing to be afraid of. PC ideas that stand the test of time do so because they're good ideas. And the anti-PC crowd have failed throughout history to stem the tide of 'political correctness' not because totalitarianism won but because they have consistently been on the wrong side of progress. Whether or not the 'PC' multi-faceted/nuanced definition of 'woman' will stand the test of time is yet to be seen. But if it does, it will become normalised because it is a good idea; or to put it in libertarian terms, it will flourish in the marketplace of ideas by outcompeting worse ideas. This process is not totalitarianism but its opposite. And if that's what you're afraid of, then your actual bogeyman is freedom. — Baden

The problem here is that normal, sane people just want to live their lives. While people with nothing else to do become activists and try to validate themselves by bullying others. So normal people would rather cave in an inch to the activists, rather than try to oppose them on every stupidity they come up with. That way inch by inch and one day the whole society can't understand how it got bullied a mile by a tiny minority of blue haired nutjobs.

An adult human female, of course.

It's interesting how a philosophy forum can sometimes nourish low-brow, Right wing populism. — Tom Storm

How's about a left-wing extremism/populism?