• aesthelete@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I said it before and I’ll say it again: The American mind can’t comprehend European social liberals.

    Oh so smug, and yet still “European social liberals” are constantly on the brink of having their own outbreak of fascism.

    I think that one of the few reasons the Nazi party hasn’t re-emerged in Germany is that it’s strictly forbidden by law.

    But you’re talking about the US, specifically. Complaining about regulation not working in the US is like complaining that rule of law is a non-starter in Somalia: The issue is not the idea of the rule of law, but Somalia being Somalia.

    Oh yes, it’s simply because the US is the US, and has nothing to do with the fact that we’ve had neoliberal politicians for approximately 50 years. All of that stuff I mentioned at the end of my last post was describing mid 20th century US politics.

    Also, comments like “rule of law doesn’t work in Somalia because it’s Somalia” show me you have exactly nothing to add to any conversation about geopolitics and borders on racism.

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Oh so smug, and yet still “European social liberals” are constantly on the brink of having their own outbreak of fascism.

      Our implementation isn’t flawless, either. Things generally started to go downhill in the 90s when the direct ideological competitor in the form of the soviet block vanished. The rise of New Labour, a flurry of completely mismanaged privatisations, etc. The system overall is annoyingly sluggish but there very much is consciousness that that fascist stuff and that we now have a precariat are connected. Acting on that consciousness is harder.

      In any case that’s not a fault of the theory itself: Things fall apart pretty precisely in those spots where it’s being ignored.

      Oh yes, it’s simply because the US is the US, and has nothing to do with the fact that we’ve had neoliberal politicians for approximately 50 years.

      I’m sorry yes you having that kind of politics in the past is exactly why the US is how the US is. Like, time and determinism exist. Longer than that, actually: While things went downhill in the US approximately with Nixon, you on top of that started that slide from a lower starting point. Random example: You never had a right to housing. Not just “well if Democrats are in power we might be lucky and get a social housing project” but “Can’t make rent? Can’t find an apartment? Push come to shove the state will have to pay for a hotel room and if they don’t courts will hold the mayor in contempt”. Those kinds of difference goes all the way back to rugged individualism and whatnot. Or, less detailed but not less accurate: Because the US is the US.

      Also, comments like “rule of law doesn’t work in Somalia because it’s Somalia” show me you have exactly nothing to add to any conversation about geopolitics and borders on racism.

      The fuck would race have to do with anything you really are American. Xeer does not have enforcement mechanisms that could deal with the current political and security situation, that’s all that I’m saying. Somalian judges can make the justest judgements the earth has ever seen, ultimately Mao is still right about gun barrels.

      • aesthelete@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Those kinds of difference goes all the way back to rugged individualism and whatnot. Or, less detailed but not less accurate: Because the US is the US.

        “I heard a phrase once about Americans, so that must be why they’re sliding towards fascism. It definitely can’t be for the same reasons people have pointed to for a hundred years.”

        The fuck would race have to do with anything you really are American.

        Right, right, it’s not that Somalia is Somalia, it’s something in their “culture”? Right?

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          It definitely can’t be for the same reasons people have pointed to for a hundred years.”

          What are the reasons those pointed-at reasons persist? Why does is that persistence more pronounced is some places, but not others? Can there be a symptom without underlying causes?

          How come e.g. the death penalty is still accepted as a topic of polite conversation in America? I maybe shouldn’t have led with rugged individualism, e.g. Australians have a similar streak in that regard, the real core of the issue is that the Enlightenment never truly arrived in the US. Jingoism, understood as the general notion of “we’re already the best it’s impossible for us to get better by learning from others” also plays a large role, I guess it’s half your isolationist streak, and half strategy by the powers that be to avoid questioning of the status quo. There’s definitely policy in place to reinforce it through the education system – from limited and navel-gazing curriculum to the pledge of allegiance which btw is fascist AF.

          Right, right, it’s not that Somalia is Somalia, it’s something in their “culture”? Right?

          I specifically mentioned Xeer, no need on your part to speculate, or pretend I wasn’t being clear.

          • aesthelete@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            What are the reasons those pointed-at reasons persist? Why does is that persistence more pronounced is some places, but not others? Can there be a symptom without underlying causes?

            Read theory if you’re actually curious and not just posting to post. Personally, I’ve come to think of inequality as being at the center of it all.

            But the reason is certainly not “because <<country>> is <<country>>”.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Read theory if you’re actually curious and not just posting to post. Personally, I’ve come to think of inequality as being at the center of it all.

              Inequality doesn’t just turn up out of nowhere.

              But the reason is certainly not “because <<country>> is <<country>>”.

              I never claimed “because country is country” is a deep and meaningful analysis of the material factors in a given country and its history. What it is, and what I expect people with a modicum of knowledge of the English language to understand it as, is vaguely gesturing at the overall situation and saying “this thing here that be the way it do”. You know, pizza is tasty because it’s pizza does one always have to be more specific than that.

              • aesthelete@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Inequality doesn’t just turn up out of nowhere.

                Why would anyone post this? Of course it didn’t just turn up out of nowhere.

                What it is, and what I expect people with a modicum of knowledge of the English language to understand it as, is vaguely gesturing at the overall situation and saying “this thing here that be the way it do”.

                That quoted phrase you have there is pure hot nonsense.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Why would anyone post this? Of course it didn’t just turn up out of nowhere.

                  Good. Then you agree that it’s valuable to look at the reasons for inequality, I presume, and not stop at “inequality is the centre of it all”. Both material and immaterial ones. Or to put in classic Marxist terms (a bit reductive but it’s close enough): What’s the economic and cultural obstacles to class consciousness.

                  That quoted phrase you have there is pure hot nonsense.

                  It’s using habitual/continuative aspect. “This thing here that is habitually that way because it habitually is that way”.

                  • aesthelete@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    I know you think you’re the smartest person on Earth giving unthinking Americans lessons or something but you haven’t taught me a damned thing here at all except what the German word for neoliberal is.

                    (But, I know, don’t dare call them that!!! 😡🤬 😤)

                    😆

                    Separately, even frequent users of the habitual be wouldn’t write a sentence like that.