Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Human history in the very long run (2021)

slowboring.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–115 of 115 posts

Re: Human history in the very long run (2021)

#111

Post by racional »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #110
racional wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, let's try curiosity then: "Didya really mean to say that there's literally no one walking this Earth with meaningful criticisms of Marx who has in fact also read what he's written? "Without being hyperbolic", no less?" 'Cause it sounds like an awfully weird and authoritarian thing to say." Inquiring minds want to know.

I didn't say walking the earth, I said that I've encountered. Can you please not reword what I've written and then dismiss it. It's not showing a good faith effort. I find it hard to believe you're more of an authority over who've I've encounter than I am. It's a really good example of the point I'm trying to make. Which is folks who dismiss Marx tend to conjure a fantasy and then dismiss that fantasy and then claim…

Folks who dismiss Marx tend to conjure a fantasy and then dismiss that fantasy and then claim victory.

That's what you're saying now; initially you said something much stronger.

You keep trying to pivot away from that initial (and rather untenable) formulation, for some reason.

Re: Human history in the very long run (2021)

#112

Post by tim333 »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #95
tim333 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it's true I haven't read much of Marx. Glancing at Amazon the combined capital 1-3 is 1392 pages and the Communist Manifesto 176 pages and god knows what else he's knocked out and I don't much like his stuff I have read so I can't be bothered to plow through that. But when you get statements like the capitalistic system will inevitably destroy itself that seem obviously rubbish it makes me ok disliking his stuff…

Reversing this, if I said to you, "I think Adam Smith was a shithead, so capitalism is wrong, and his ideas are directly responsible for wars of imperialism, and resource control," I'd expect you to not really see how that's relevant to the ideas contained in Wealth of Nations.

I get that but you can kind of go off a summary of their ideas. In Marx case you have stuff like (from Wikipedia):

>For Marx, class antagonisms under capitalism—owing in part to its instability and crisis-prone nature—would eventuate the working class's development of class consciousness, leading to their conquest of political power and eventually the establishment of a classless, communist society constituted by a free association of producers. Marx actively pressed for its implementation, arguing that the working class should carry out organised proletarian revolutionary action to topple capitalism and bring about socio-economic emancipation.

My problem with him is more those kind of ideas and the problems they have brought rather than him being a shithead or similar. I think you can probably have a more meaningful discussion of ideas that can be briefly stated so everyone knows what is being discussed than referencing 1500 page works where that is not so.

Even in a short paragraph like that you can see quite a lot of ideas, some of which have worked and some not. Like in the UK the 'working class' Labour party have just gained power so that bit's ok, but not much destroying capitalism going on because their voters don't want that. It's the revolution to topple capitalism and bring communism idea that hasn't tended to go very well.

Re: Human history in the very long run (2021)

#113

Post by darby_nine »

bsder wrote: post #56
somenameforme wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article is speaking of the distant past (and perhaps you are as well) but in relatively recent history, I think the losses can be clearly demonstrated. Near to every form of emotional and mental disorder is at record highs in most Western countries, including the US. [1] IQ levels, after increasing ever since it began being measured, have started declining. [2] Testosterone levels are plummeting, obesity is skyr…

> but in relatively recent history, I think the losses can be clearly demonstrated. Maybe within the last 30 years but certainly not if you count even just prior to 1970 when heavy manufacturing still provided the primary jobs. Mill and mine jobs sucked worse than agriculture. Women had zero choice other than homemaker, teacher and secretary. Many Rust Belt men were basically functional alcoholics because life was so…

> I'm not happy about IQ starting to trend down. However, IQ continuously increasing indicates that groups of people were still systematically malnourished up into the early 1990s.

Eh with access to information IQ has become much less useful. We need a test much less bound to culture than what is currently offered—which includes at least a rework of verbal intelligence, which is literally just knowledge of culture. Knowledge without context is basically useless and certainly has little to do with intelligence.

Post reply on HN