So here's the thing: What if the only people who can fix "inequality" are those who fall into the "have not" category? What if they have less because of their own fault?
Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality
181–190 of 262 posts
Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
So this is a good example of how the 99% vs 1% meme falls short. It's a description of wealth inequality, which is a symptom of the larger conflict between workers and business owners (proletariat vs. bourgeoisie). The central issue isn't that we have wealth inequality, it's about power. Capitalists get to control our economic planning, have a closer ear of our governments, and have an advantageous negotiating positi…
"Often times it is in the interest of certain capitalists to get our government to engage in imperialism, or destabilize certain regions, which helps lead to the awful conditions for some people in the Middle East, and I think this helps pave the way to religious extremism." This is patently false. The US - and 'capitalists' do not want 'destabilization' - over and above all they want 'stability'. Case and point: Sau…
I'm not saying all capitalists, I'm saying it is in the interests of certain capitalists. I'm sure McDonald's would love to have a stable region to begin building franchises in. On the other hand, a military contractor's profit is in part tied to conflict ridden regions.
I don't really see what your example of Saudi Arabia proves. We sell them arms and purchase much of their oil, it's in a lot of people interests to keep them stable. I'm saying in some cases it is in business interests to keep a region in conflict, and sometimes imperialism leads to instability or a lack of material wealth, promoting extremist thought.
Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality
#183He seems to be talking about rapid changes to inequality. But inequality has been in steady decline for centuries (the last few decades in the US are a blip in comparison to the overall downward trend). These general downward trends that occur at the pace of decades or centuries can't be directly attributed to warfare, can it?
We have certainly had no shortage of wars in the past couple of centuries. Just in the past two hundred years, in order of largest death tolls[1], I see: * World War II * Taiping Rebellion * Second Sino-Japanese War * World War I/Great War * Dungan Revolt * Chinese Civil War * Russian Civil War and Foreign Intervention * Napoleonic Wars * Second Congo War/Great War of Africa * Shaka's conquests * Vietnam War/Second I…
But the trend is generally downward, not a bunch of sharp decreases that would indicate being caused by a specific short-term event. Also many of these wars were pretty localized, so we should see the drops and inequality in the immediate area and a reduced effect elsewhere.
Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
+1 on explaing why would you consider it favorable to be outside of the EU, assuming you don't want to keep free access to the EU common market ala norway.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-17/daniel-hannan-right...
so you value deregulation above 'fantasy peace'? come on. peace is a reality that hasn't happened in europe's history before but it's not a given. i agree that the EU regulates too much, but if that's the price for peaceful europe, i'm for it. you get better value for your money this way.
Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality
#185Louis Chauvel, a french sociology professor, made a similar argument using a Prey-Predatory model with trade union membership and income inequality over the last 100 years : "This article shows empirically how trade union membership and income inequality are mutually related in twelve countries over more than 100 years. While past research has shown that high income inequality occurs alongside low trade union members…
Here's another reason for unions to become defunct over time, as explained by Steve Bruce in his book Sociology: A Very Short Introduction. "Any kind of group activity requires organization. But as soon as one starts to organize one creates a division within the movement between the organized and the organizers, between ordinary members and officials. The latter quickly acquire knowledge and expertise that set them a…
Democracies are 'design by committee', and that's a feature not a bug.
Democracies are ugly, inefficient, buggy, and bloated. Most people don't get what they want, but they agree to form a union because they know that they'll get more than if they were ruled by an autocrat. Democracies are pragmatic.
However, some people naturally want to push their vision onto others. And, there are constant forces at play to do so.
I think the democracies that work best have some common culture. They seem to work better because the core differences are more tightly clustered.
Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality
#186Inequality is not inherently a bad thing. People should be compensated for the value they produce. Profits are a signal of how much people value what is produced. For example, people love iPhones, it no surprise that Apple is the most valuable company in the world. What causes resentment between classes is lack of mobility. This, IMO, is caused by government regulations and a banking system that hurts the middle clas…
The mobility discussion is distressingly absent from the inequality debates.
Agreed.
Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
Islamic-inspired terrorism draws a direct lineage from the writings of Sayyid Qutb ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb ), an Egyptian civil servant who studied in America and was aghast at how consumerism subversed communal and religious virtues, and even more shocked to see the same transformation occurring in the Arab world. He eventually drew the conclusion that consumerism sequestered people away from r…
Note that his thinking didn't turn militant until he was jailed and tortured by the Egyptian government. That at the time had backing of USA, and thus trained by the CIA.
His Wikipedia article disagrees with this, saying "Upset that Nasser would not enforce a government based on Islamic ideology, Qutb and other Brotherhood members orchestrated a plot to assassinate the Egyptian president in 1954. The attempt was foiled and Qutb was jailed soon afterwards;"
Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
So this is a good example of how the 99% vs 1% meme falls short. It's a description of wealth inequality, which is a symptom of the larger conflict between workers and business owners (proletariat vs. bourgeoisie). The central issue isn't that we have wealth inequality, it's about power. Capitalists get to control our economic planning, have a closer ear of our governments, and have an advantageous negotiating positi…
"Often times it is in the interest of certain capitalists to get our government to engage in imperialism, or destabilize certain regions, which helps lead to the awful conditions for some people in the Middle East, and I think this helps pave the way to religious extremism." This is patently false. The US - and 'capitalists' do not want 'destabilization' - over and above all they want 'stability'. Case and point: Sau…
This is a wildly revisionist view of US influence on the Middle East.
For starters, you're assuming that the US government and it's intelligence agencies always understand the actual consequences of their actions and are always successful, which is hilariously false. So instability is a frequently unintended result of meddling in foreign affairs, despite our intentions.
And the idea that all these nations would be "thriving" if only they'd "bootstrap" themselves is extremely naive. Iran is a great example of using "ample oil surpluses to found basic progress", when they attempted to nationalize the oil industry. But that would've hurt Western oil profits / consumer wallets, so we overthrew that administration.
I'm no ME expert but your understanding of the history of these nations is incredibly shallow. The powerless are not the cause of the world's problems.
Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. I'm recognizing that dangerous thoughts are not illegal in the United States of America and perpetuating violence is dangerous and ineffective. My wife and I both chose careers of service that are directly antithetical to the words and thoughts of this man. I sympathize with the desire to punch him - he is eminently punchable - but I believe that directing violence on him will serve to draw support to his cause,…
So what is the line? Neo-nazis don't respond to debate or rationality. What line do they have to cross for violence to become acceptable for you? Because, clearly, actively calling for and organizing a group centered around my death and the death of my community isn't enough
That's not what he did or said, and your inability or refusal to recognize that is why a lot of people are against you trying to create a moral justification for mob attacks.
You don't get to decide that for yourself because you live in a society where you gain benefits from designating sole authority to enact violence to the state. If you engage in violence, then the state will in turn give you what you deserve. Even if you understood him correctly, which you did not, he has a right to speak them and people like you get to go to jail if you go around assaulting people.
Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The value of the original building is lost forever." Of course, but if you are a building company, why would you care about that?. There is this idea, that, in a society with very little scarcity, would be almost impossible to make a profit. Your only chance would be to burn everything and start again. I really hope that theory is false.
Why? What is so great about profit? I would be very glad to give up profit for no scarcity.
The ferengi is weak in this one.