The Myth of the Benevolent Left

originally posted by: humanityrising
I am an American currently traveling through India. I can 100% confirm that people are in fact born into circumstances under which no amount of 'trying', 'hard work', and 'pulling their own weight' will ever get them a decent life.

I find American-contemporary-Christian-conservative culture repulsive. It's the epitome of hypocrisy, shallowness, materialism. It's denial. And it's the LITERAL opposite of Jesus' teachings. Disgusting.

Yea this thread might be well written but its basically another misguided, small minded, opinion full of contradiction and few facts. Right-wing propaganda in other words.

Get some numbers in and I might listen. Without it really isnt much better than the next politician.

Ow yea also would anyone supporting his opinion explain the next fallacies in right wing thinking to me? Been waiting a few threads for that, but it seems you rather ignore it, I wonder why:

Right wing claims that socialist policies would make everyone lazy, while simultaneously saying it would force communist-styled slave labor on citizens.
Right wing say socialists just want free things while admitting we'll all pay more in taxes.
Right wing say socialism will bankrupt your country, while ignoring the crushing debt your country already has and the constant financial collapses caused by excessive capitalism (like the 1987 Savings & Loans collapse, the 2000 Dotcom crash, and the 2008 financial crisis).

Ok so some numbers and an explanation how these contradictions all fit neatly into your views would be nice.

a reply to: humanityrising
a reply to: whatsup86
a reply to: stargatetravels

I am an American currently traveling through India. I can 100% confirm that people are in fact born into circumstances under which no amount of 'trying', 'hard work', and 'pulling their own weight' will ever get them a decent life.

I find American-contemporary-Christian-conservative culture repulsive. It's the epitome of hypocrisy, shallowness, materialism. It's denial. And it's the LITERAL opposite of Jesus' teachings. Disgusting.

Right wing claims that socialist policies would make everyone lazy, while simultaneously saying it would force communist-styled slave labor on citizens.
Right wing say socialists just want free things while admitting we'll all pay more in taxes.
Right wing say socialism will bankrupt your country, while ignoring the crushing debt your country already has and the constant financial collapses caused by excessive capitalism (like the 1987 Savings & Loans collapse, the 2000 Dotcom crash, and the 2008 financial crisis).

The irony is, India (the country he is talking about) only started to grow economically since it abandoned protectionist policies attributed to its socialism, in favor of capitalist policies. So while he opines "American-contemporary-Christian-conservative culture" as repulsive, he neglects the very policies that refused the Indians prosperity in the first place. Bad socialist economic planning greatly contributed to its poverty rate:

India's economic policies
In 1947, the average annual income in India was M$619, compared with M$439 for China, M$770 for South Korea, and M$936 for Taiwan (M$[89] being Maddison's estimate of inflation adjusted to 1990 international dollar). About 50 years later, by 1999, the numbers were US$1,818 India; US$3,259 China; US$13,317 South Korea ; and US$15,720 Taiwan, respectively.[89] In other words, the average income in India was not much different from South Korea in 1947, but South Korea became a developed country by the 2000s. For the first 40 years, India followed the Soviet-style economic planning, nationalization programs and government ownership of industry. Its economic growth averaged about 3.5%, while Asian economies such as South Korea grew on average more than twice that rate annually.[90][91] Adjusted for population growth in India, its per capita income grew at 1.49% annually, while incomes of South Koreans - rich and poor - rose rapidly.

India's Soviet-style economy included License Raj, which refers to the elaborate licenses, regulations and the accompanying red tape that were required to set up and run a business in India between 1947 and 1990.[92][93] The License Raj was a result of India's decision to have a planned economy, where all aspects of the economy are controlled by the state and licenses were given to a select few. Corruption flourished under this system.[94][95] Under this economic system, the country created few jobs and little wealth to systematically and sustainably address widespread poverty.[96]

The labyrinthine bureaucracy often led to absurd restrictions – up to 80 agencies had to be satisfied before a firm could be granted a licence to produce and the state would decide what was produced, how much, at what price and what sources of capital were used.

— BBC[97]

Poverty in India

Thankfully they have adopted Capitalist principles, and the economy over time will slowly rise as it has always done.

You might notice that only since adopting capitalist economic principles did any "socialist" countries and their citizens begin to flourish.

In other words, that poster's blame is misguided and false. At the same time he avoids the facts, he refers to his heartfelt imagination in order to address or otherwise disguise his own lack of charity.

a reply to: whatsup86

Yea this thread might be well written but its basically another misguided, small minded, opinion full of contradiction and few facts. Right-wing propaganda in other words.

1.) There are no "new" facts. Facts, IF they are facts are neither old nor new. Facts have no attributes.

2.) This thread is not "right-wing propaganda" at all. Project much lately?

3.) Contradictions being merely INSIDE of some text, isn't a problem IF the overall message is non-contradictional. Envy a good writing style much lately?

You want me to go on? Then...star me. I think that is considered the right means to give some respect to someone who is not some mere talking-head around here.

Right wing/left wing/progressive, liberal, neocon, conservative, Democrat/Republican....All pretty much the same when you consider that these labels do nothing but keep the 99% fighting with each other while the same criminals laugh from their private jets and mansions....

a reply to: whatsup86

Get some numbers in and I might listen. Without it really isnt much better than the next politician.

How comes you assume LesMis is a politican?

Ow yea also would anyone supporting his opinion explain the next fallacies in right wing thinking to me?

LesMis, to me does not seem to be a "right-wing" supporter at all. I read all his theads and I don't have the impression he's a righ-winger. Also not a lefitst. Just someone who can express skeptizism of both agendas like a boss.

Right wing claims that socialist policies would make everyone lazy, while simultaneously saying it would force communist-styled slave labor on citizens. Right wing say socialists just want free things while admitting we'll all pay more in taxes. Right wing say socialism will bankrupt your country, while ignoring the crushing debt your country already has and the constant financial collapses caused by excessive capitalism (like the 1987 Savings & Loans collapse, the 2000 Dotcom crash, and the 2008 financial crisis).

Here, to me, you sound like a five year old, complaining about something he does not even have an idea of what it realy is, he is complaining about.

Ok so some numbers and an explanation how these contradictions all fit neatly into your views would be nice.

There are no contradictions in the overall text IF it would be understood properly. Having a personal agenda, other than pointing to what is false, seem to not allow one to see what realy is been pointed at.

originally posted by: Willingly
a reply to: whatsup86

Yea this thread might be well written but its basically another misguided, small minded, opinion full of contradiction and few facts. Right-wing propaganda in other words.

1.) There are no "new" facts. Facts, IF they are facts are neither old nor new. Facts have no attributes.

2.) This thread is not "right-wing propaganda" at all. Project much lately?

3.) Contradictions being merely INSIDE of some text, isn't a problem IF the overall message is non-contradictional. Envy a good writing style much lately?

You want me to go on? Then...star me. I think that is considered the right means to give some respect to someone who is not some mere talking-head around here.

I said few facts not new..
Ofcourse it is propaganda.
Did you read the contradictions I mentioned in particular? How is that merely inside of the text if its being spewed everywhere on ATS?
'Lately'? K..
Well i envy it as such that English isnt my first language and wouldnt mind speaking it even better although i think im decent at it. Thank you for caring.

originally posted by: Willingly
a reply to: whatsup86

Get some numbers in and I might listen. Without it really isnt much better than the next politician.

How comes you assume LesMis is a politican?

Ow yea also would anyone supporting his opinion explain the next fallacies in right wing thinking to me?

LesMis, to me does not seem to be a "right-wing" supporter at all. I read all his theads and I don't have the impression he's a righ-winger. Also not a lefitst. Just someone who can express skeptizism of both agendas like a boss.

Right wing claims that socialist policies would make everyone lazy, while simultaneously saying it would force communist-styled slave labor on citizens. Right wing say socialists just want free things while admitting we'll all pay more in taxes. Right wing say socialism will bankrupt your country, while ignoring the crushing debt your country already has and the constant financial collapses caused by excessive capitalism (like the 1987 Savings & Loans collapse, the 2000 Dotcom crash, and the 2008 financial crisis).

Here, to me, you sound like a five year old, complaining about something he does not even have an idea of what it realy is, he is complaining about.

Ok so some numbers and an explanation how these contradictions all fit neatly into your views would be nice.

There are no contradictions in the overall text IF it would be understood properly. Having a personal agenda, other than pointing to what is false, seem to not allow one to see what realy is been pointed at.

I see reading comprehension isnt your strongest point.. im not calling him a politician anywhere and you dont have to be right wing to feed propaganda for that side either.

Still waiting for answers.

a reply to: whatsup86

Thank you for caring.

De nada. It's my pleasure and my duty.

But why opposing LesMis' text so feverishly? That's what I wanna know.

And furthermore, I strongly recommend to read at least half of the threads one has delivered here, to be considered as a valid critique of someone whom's writing-skills are far beyond the average guys or gal's ability to say something of some value in a non offensive way, that nevertheless seem to offend a lot of people, for reasons I better not talk about right here, right now.

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: humanityrising
a reply to: whatsup86
a reply to: stargatetravels

I am an American currently traveling through India. I can 100% confirm that people are in fact born into circumstances under which no amount of 'trying', 'hard work', and 'pulling their own weight' will ever get them a decent life.

I find American-contemporary-Christian-conservative culture repulsive. It's the epitome of hypocrisy, shallowness, materialism. It's denial. And it's the LITERAL opposite of Jesus' teachings. Disgusting.

Right wing claims that socialist policies would make everyone lazy, while simultaneously saying it would force communist-styled slave labor on citizens.
Right wing say socialists just want free things while admitting we'll all pay more in taxes.
Right wing say socialism will bankrupt your country, while ignoring the crushing debt your country already has and the constant financial collapses caused by excessive capitalism (like the 1987 Savings & Loans collapse, the 2000 Dotcom crash, and the 2008 financial crisis).

The irony is, India (the country he is talking about) only started to grow economically since it abandoned protectionist policies attributed to its socialism, in favor of capitalist policies. So while he opines "American-contemporary-Christian-conservative culture" as repulsive, he neglects the very policies that refused the Indians prosperity in the first place. Bad socialist economic planning greatly contributed to its poverty rate:

India's economic policies
In 1947, the average annual income in India was M$619, compared with M$439 for China, M$770 for South Korea, and M$936 for Taiwan (M$[89] being Maddison's estimate of inflation adjusted to 1990 international dollar). About 50 years later, by 1999, the numbers were US$1,818 India; US$3,259 China; US$13,317 South Korea ; and US$15,720 Taiwan, respectively.[89] In other words, the average income in India was not much different from South Korea in 1947, but South Korea became a developed country by the 2000s. For the first 40 years, India followed the Soviet-style economic planning, nationalization programs and government ownership of industry. Its economic growth averaged about 3.5%, while Asian economies such as South Korea grew on average more than twice that rate annually.[90][91] Adjusted for population growth in India, its per capita income grew at 1.49% annually, while incomes of South Koreans - rich and poor - rose rapidly.

India's Soviet-style economy included License Raj, which refers to the elaborate licenses, regulations and the accompanying red tape that were required to set up and run a business in India between 1947 and 1990.[92][93] The License Raj was a result of India's decision to have a planned economy, where all aspects of the economy are controlled by the state and licenses were given to a select few. Corruption flourished under this system.[94][95] Under this economic system, the country created few jobs and little wealth to systematically and sustainably address widespread poverty.[96]

The labyrinthine bureaucracy often led to absurd restrictions – up to 80 agencies had to be satisfied before a firm could be granted a licence to produce and the state would decide what was produced, how much, at what price and what sources of capital were used.

— BBC[97]

Poverty in India

Thankfully they have adopted Capitalist principles, and the economy over time will slowly rise as it has always done.

You might notice that only since adopting capitalist economic principles did any "socialist" countries and their citizens begin to flourish.

In other words, that poster's blame is misguided and false. At the same time he avoids the facts, he refers to his heartfelt imagination in order to address or otherwise disguise his own lack of charity.

Seeing socialism in quotes makes me want to clear some things up for you: Socialism doesnt rule out capitalism at all and left people want capitalism and dont want free stuff.

And what you say about India doesnt go against his point of inequality and the influence we as individuals have on it, so Im not sure what your point is.

Wrong thread, sorry.

a reply to: whatsup86

Seeing socialism in quotes makes me want to clear some things up for you: Socialism doesnt rule out capitalism at all and left people want capitalism and dont want free stuff.

Socialism didn't "rule out" capitalism because it realized it needed it for its people to survive, as was proven by Eduard Bernstein when he notice the conditions of the working class were actually getting better instead of worse. Marx was wrong. But thanks for clearing that up.

And what you say about India doesnt go against his point of inequality and the influence we as individuals have on it, so Im not sure what your point is.

He never made a point about inequality. He mentioned the poor in India, how they cannot "pull up their bootstraps", then he said he was disgusted by American Christian Conservatives. Then you started going on a tirade regarding socialism, which is one of the direct causes of poverty there. It was ironic. That was my point

a reply to: whatsup86

Seeing socialism in quotes makes me want to clear some things up for you: Socialism doesnt rule out capitalism at all and left people want capitalism and dont want free stuff.

Socialism, as a term to describe some ecconomical and political goverment system can not be used any longer for several reasons:

1.) It's too abused by so called socialist countrys and nations who sell their brand of being a totalitarian system as being socialistic. Now and in the past. I don't engage in naming names right now.

2.) What so called national-socialism was all about in Germany in the 20. century we all know, who participate in this thread and that's enough said about abusing a term for making it into some orwellian phase like "love is war."

And what you say about India doesnt go against his point of inequality and the influence we as individuals have on it, so Im not sure what your point is.

India, IMHO, still deals in a cast-system that seem to be justified by religious texts. And the Buddha denied it, as an iconoclast, who can not be called as someone who acted out of "ressentiment", because he was a prince and therefore was raised in the so called upper-class.

What country/nation does already completely seperates state and church properly? That's what I wanna know.


Ressentiment, explaination:

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Is that like the myth of the financially responsible GOP? Or, the myth 'Trickle-Down' economics? Or the myth that Ronald Reagan was a good President?

a reply to: whatsup86

I see reading comprehension isnt your strongest point.

And I see that is the case for you too. So? What are we gonna do now?

a reply to: Willingly

Arange a gym and some gloves and lets see?

a reply to: whatsup86

Arange a gym and some gloves and lets see?

Don't even think about it, you're not gonna survive it. At least your teeth don't.

Muhammad Ali showing the Ali Shuffle:

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: toolgal462
Right wing/left wing/progressive, liberal, neocon, conservative, Democrat/Republican....All pretty much the same when you consider that these labels do nothing but keep the 99% fighting with each other while the same criminals laugh from their private jets and mansions....

Could be.

But this is all nice and all and when i have time tomorrow i will go into why the OP is contradicting himself according to me.

But in the meantime im still waiting for the answer on the question i proposed above. Anyone wanna give it a try?

a reply to: whatsup86

I will if you don't mind repeating the question for me? I cannot find it. Thanks.

a reply to: TheTory

I will if you don't mind repeating the question for me? I cannot find it. Thanks.

The question, LesMis asked is:

"What are the poor anyway?"

And I would add to that question: How comes that there are some people who are poor anyway?

Digg it, TheTory, but I pretty much think you already know it. Isn't "nomen est omen" anymore?