/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.7293293]

Was liberalism (in the classical sense) a mistake?

[Anonymous No.7293303]

Adam Smith was a genius. I'm not as fond of most of his followers.

[Anonymous No.7293304]

It has left the world ecologically depleted and probably destroyed forever, so yes

[Anonymous No.7293306]

liberalism was ruined by m______________m

[Anonymous No.7293310]

Aye, read The Great Transformation

[Anonymous No.7293313]

>>7293306
mormonism?

[Anonymous No.7293314]

>>7293306
I've been watching your posting patterns and I know who you are. Be warned—if you EVER let slip a single piece of personally identifying information I will find out who you are and destroy your life. You fucking nazi monster.

[Anonymous No.7293318]

>>7293314
:O

[Anonymous No.7293321]

>>7293318
j/k. but we all know what you were talking about: multiculturalism

[Anonymous No.7293325]

>>7293314
I'm from Lexington, Kentucky, and my name is James. Come at me, bro.

[Anonymous No.7293331]

>>7293293
The industrial revolution could have/should have happened more gradually, more methodically. But some people are greedy nasty fucks, while others are stupid and slow witted.
The mistake was liberal-capitalism, but also the reaction to it.
Which continues to this day.

[Anonymous No.7293335]

>>7293321
'Modernism' makes the most sense to me.

[Anonymous No.7293336]

>>7293293
It was a dangerous path to tread and lead us to some really interesting places that we may not be able to get out of, but I wouldn't have it any other way because I'm a lunatic who craves novelty.

[Anonymous No.7293357]

>>7293336


>but I wouldn't have it any other way because I'm a lunatic who craves novelty.

That's actually a problem I've been considering myself, that the animating root of arguments like multiculturalism is a facile aesthetic sense unable to appreciate 'in depth', so to speak, and so desires an endless procession of superficial differences.

Its also an issue where, people having no outlet for their imagination, desire to use reality itself as a playpen for their intellectual chimaeras, 'just to see what happens'.

My solution is mandatory tabletop/traditional roleplaying game clubs.

[Anonymous No.7293367]

>>7293357
This appears to be the case with a few radicals I know. They're more proud of their ability to conceptualize something new than the results, and I think they try to bring their ideas into the world to show how serious of an intellect they are mote than because they think it will work well for people.

[Anonymous No.7293377]

>>7293357
I've played tabletop games since I was in high-school, and am the biggest advocate of multiculturalism you're likely to find. I want folks trying new things, and expressing themselves in different ways, and ultimately competing in all that in as meritocratic system as can be managed. Only then will the best rise to the top.

[Anonymous No.7293379]

>>7293367
>They're more proud of their ability to conceptualize something new than the results,
the praxis since the scholastic has disappeared. at best there remains the production of concepts or theorie always more detached form the reality, or the leisure for the rest, that is to say the majority of the people.

[Anonymous No.7293385]

>>7293379

[Anonymous No.7293476]

>>7293377


Like I said, play-pen tier thinking.

[Anonymous No.7293481]

>>7293476
Like I said: Ignatius Reilly. It's okay, though, I'm sure only most women and blacks will out-compete you.

[Anonymous No.7293492]

>>7293481


Women and blacks can't outcompete me because they are inferior. But enough pointless asides that betray your assumptions.

[Anonymous No.7293504]

>>7293492
Enough! Total meritocracy ftw, though. The only unfortunate bit is it's impossible to achieve. There's some glory in the striving, though.

[Anonymous No.7293509]

>>7293504
Well, meritocracy w/ a Rawlsian consideration of the least able, I should say. Either way.

[Anonymous No.7293519]

>>7293504


M80 we've already seen who rises and who doesn't, the evidence of history is all around you.

The masturbation over some abstract 'proving ground' is either, not true elitism, but rather a disingenuous smokescreen to acquire goodies and validation by those who have already failed the test of history (usually involving phrases like 'disparate impact', until 'equal opportunity' inevitably turns into 'equal outcomes', turns into 'gibsmedat').

Or, it is the unfortunately sincere intellectual play-pen masturbation of autists, to whom such political geometry is much more intelligible than the actual contours of being, which to him appears like a slideshow of isolated and unrelated accidents.

[Anonymous No.7293530]

>>7293504
meritocracy as a system in and of itself is a spook tbh
meritocracy has always existed and always will exist

[Anonymous No.7293538]

>>7293519
We've seen a lot of nepotism and tribalism. When more meritocratic systems than the such are put in place (e.g. by Ghengis Khan) great things are achieved.

[Anonymous No.7293542]

>>7293530
In some sense, but people are often blind and petty, and favor their kin, and those like them. Those who don't, and can see through it all, succeed. As should society with them.

[Anonymous No.7293550]

>>7293542
As a follow-up, why do you think the most powerful corporations in the world tend to be so almost absurdly PC? Every customer's money is just as good, and an employee is as good as their particular skills. Even while certain prejudices remain.

[Anonymous No.7293564]

>>7293306
mTHE KIKESm?

[Anonymous No.7293611]

>>7293538


Its interesting you bring up ghengis khan.

When people try to give examples of 'functional egalitarianism', it is always things in extreme contexts. Frontiersmen, wartime economies, barbarian tribes, et cetera et cetera.

What all of these things have in common is that they are all *intimately grappled with being*. They are in contexts where A. Praxis is in many ways simplified, the direction obvious. And more importantly B. *the consequences of failure* are both swift, and often final.

In other words, they could *afford* not to consider such things, get away in spite of it, because when they didn't, *reality took care of it for them*.

Civilization, however, insulates man from reality. And so man must step in to consciously apply the rules of nature, in natures stead.

Man often fails in this endeavor though; people make bad choices if they can afford them, and civilization provides much surplus capital. When man is not in fear of his life, he is usually next in fear of his reputation. Man is a social animal, he desires validation. One of the easiest sources of validation is the appearance of holiness, and one of the easiest ways to appear holy is to mouth reprobrate platitudes of 'universal love', and appear concerned with garbage in human guise.

The kind of life that defies entropy on a local level is so often offensive to modernized sensibilities. In truth, it was often offensive to man sensibilities in past times too, but in past times they had the benefit of reality taking more of the choice out of their hands. That hoary phrase, 'Nature, red in tooth and claw,' was coined by the poet alfred lord tennyson, it was not a term of endearment.

The old law of gnon: 'the penalty for stupidity is death.' It is actually a very neat trap, man evolves only just enough intellect inorder to start civilization in the environment he finds himself in. After that, the selection pressures change, he thinks himself the master of his world, the old laws over-turned forever. He who would be devoured by red toothed nature now finds himself subsidised; "When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins." Indeed, it is his very defiance of nature that sets the stage for its riotous return; civilization eats that which makes civilization possible.

In time the house of cards topples, the great empire defeated not by war, but by peace. Prolonging the end through clever artifice, raising the malthusian limits ever higher, oft means the eventual fall is that much more spectacular. So as always the universe tends towards the more stable point, and the cycle continues; from the cradle of the old law a new nobility emerges, and thinks to themselves: 'this time is different.'

[Anonymous No.7293672]

>>7293304
this tbh fam

[Anonymous No.7293682]

>>7293304
It woulda happened anyway, liberalism just made it happen more quickly.

[Anonymous No.7294357]

Pope Francis sort of makes this point in "Laudato Si."

[Anonymous No.7294380]

>>7293538

Non-institutionalization meritocracy truly is the best

It's a shame its so bloody

[Anonymous No.7294403]

>>7293306
>liberalism was ruined by Marxism-Leninism

if only brother

[Anonymous No.7294404]

>>7293293
No, but it's outlived its usefulness.

[Anonymous No.7294408]

Capitalism was a mistake so yes.

[Anonymous No.7294435]

All of you read Ludwig Von Mises, Adam Smith, F.A. Hayek, Friedrich Bastíat, Milton Friedman, among others to be cured of your leftist economic beliefs

[Anonymous No.7294440]

>>7294435
Milton Friedman also has great talks on YouTube and has a 10 part series about his free market private enterprise beliefs

[Anonymous No.7294441]

>>7294435
>leftist

lol, no. We're talking about times before left-right meant anything. We're off the map.

[Anonymous No.7294450]

>>7294441
My use of "leftist" is synonymous of whatever term you'd use to describe your anti capitalist/classical liberalism beliefs, I realize what is meant here I just didn't know what else term would be preferred as a label

[Anonymous No.7294453]

>>7293304
>implying native americans werent clearcutting and causing huge damage to their environment
>implying medieval europeans didnt ruin their environment
>implying the topsoil of italy wasnt ruined by the fall of the roman empire

liberalism has no connection to environmental destruction. thats a human thing

[Anonymous No.7294456]

>>7294450
I like to be called a medievalist, personally.

[Anonymous No.7294467]

>>7294453
This, also governments worldwide are the biggest polluters on the Earth, not private enterprise

[Anonymous No.7294475]

>>7294435
Holy fuck, you're retarded. I've read all of them except Smith. Austrian school is the most brain dead, transparent psyops ever.

[Anonymous No.7294482]

>>7294475
Ok, you've flung your insults, can you now say why or what in specific about Austrian school of economics make you feel that way to have a productive conservation
>PsyOp
Yeah, anti governments beliefs are a total psyops, right

[Anonymous No.7294502]

>>7293293
Of course.

[Anonymous No.7294504]

>>7294482
>anti government beliefs
>implying "government" isn't just an arm of capital


I'm not really going to bother arguing economics on a Cambodian claymation forum, but you really need to educate yourself if you think any of that shit is realistic. I mean hell, Austrians unironically believe that growth can happen through the trading of commodities without any labor input.

"Praxeology" can be used to justify anything, you just have to start with the right assumptions. The economy doesn't work like Crusoe's island because it's way more complicated than simple transactions between two people (and even then Austrian thought experiments fail, capitalism doesn't arise in small groups without industrial means of production). There's tons of reasons it's complete bullshit.

[Anonymous No.7294796]

>>7294504
The wealthy are only a dangerous and immoral influence if they have a large government to use as a vehicle to pursue irrationally selfish objectives by lobbying it or even holding positions in government (like Monsanto Ex-CEO being head of the FDA) if there is a small restricted government that is kept completely separate from private enterprise literally the only power private enterprise gets is from fulfilling consumers wants and needs by sale and workers working for them (if competition is encouraged and not hindered by the State those who oppress workers will be squeezed out of the market), I can see in theory leftist philosophy but if you look at the historical evidence and how people have voted with their feet the more relatively laizzes Faire a nation is the more people that want to go there and the more it sustains happiness and productivity for people, the poor in the US (still relatively pretty capitalist) live much better than the middle class or wealthy in other nations where capitalism never got a hold

[Anonymous No.7294802]

>>7294504
>>implying "government" isn't just an arm of capital
Ooooh, we've got a live one over here.

[Anonymous No.7294844]

>>7294504
Also the more regulations the State has placed on private enterprise the more wealthy corporations have gotten crony with the State and the more war and corruption and ridiculous bureaucratic agenies the US has had

[Anonymous No.7294858]

>>7293304
b-but consumer electronics and Elon Musk will save us

[Anonymous No.7294864]

>>7293304
*Major governments have done this , not private enterprise

[Anonymous No.7294873]

>>7293331
Doesn't sound like a mistake at all.

[Anonymous No.7294896]

>>7293304
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c
>waiting for a meteor to do it instead of partying down
I shiggy diggy

[Anonymous No.7294897]

>>7293304
Oxygen was a poisonous waste product expelled by plants that killed off a large chunk of the ecosphere.

We're just another life form, shitting things up, and we'll have our time then be replaced by something else--either something we create, or something nature makes.

[Anonymous No.7294966]

>>7293314
I am Spartacus.

[Anonymous No.7294975]

>>7293293
that's my favorite book too OP

[Anonymous No.7295173]