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

There is no 'right' vs. 'left': it is the oligarchs against the rest

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 89 posts

Re: There is no 'right' vs. 'left': it is the oligarchs against the rest

#51

Post by gwm83 »

arkades wrote: post #9
Ididntdothis wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This Chomsky quote comes to mind “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....”. The sad part is that a lot of people seem to be addicted to the right vs left thinking. A while ago I listened to a radio interview with an author whose thesis was that modern philanthropists allow change only in a way that…

Why limit the comment to modern philanthropy? I doubt anyone, in meaningful numbers, has ever sought to undermine their own position in society. That would include anyone nominally seeking to “change things for the better.”

Anyone, or in meaningful numbers? I'm not sure you can specify both. I "earn" around $400k USD per year and give away nearly all of it other than my housing and food.

Re: There is no 'right' vs. 'left': it is the oligarchs against the rest

#52

Post by luckylion »

raarts wrote: post #39

The central question of this article: > So why do we continue to hear and use the same old “right” and “left” labels? > I suspect it’s because the emerging oligarchy feels safer if Americans are split along the old political battle lines. That way, Americans won’t notice they’re being shafted. Wouldn't this imply the oligarchs control the media? Or at least the public discourse? But that's not the impression I get fr…

> I wrestle with understanding why most media are anti-Trump and anti-oligarchy, and the oligarchs are still able to control those media's use of 'left' and 'right'.

Wrestling is a good point here as in it's a show put on for the audience, and Donald Trump was playing a role in it. The idea is that the public left-vs-right in the media etc is a show put on so the people are distracted and don't realize what's going on behind the scenes. The louder the conflict, the better. If I want to relieve you of your wallet, you won't notice the slight touch while I bump into you and create a much stronger sensation by stepping on your toes.

Re: There is no 'right' vs. 'left': it is the oligarchs against the rest

#53

Post by makomk »

Sharlin wrote: post #42
nightwing wrote: post #28

Rich vs poor is even less meaningful divide than right vs left. For instance i am not rich but my goals are much better aligned with goals of rich people like Elon Musk and Aubrey de Grey, than with any of poor people. The solution is not to take money from the rich, but to make the government more transparent and more inclusive. Now we only can vote for unknown bundles of policies in the form of people, and rich peo…

> Rich vs poor is even less meaningful divide than right vs left. Which is why the author is careful to not use those words to describe the situation. Someone like Aubrey de Grey (who isn't even "rich" in this context) is as far from the oligarchy as can be.

If you look at the author's other writings, Aubrey de Grey is precisely the kind of wealthy person he thinks is looting the country at the expense of everyone else by not paying much higher taxes, though. Framing the discussion in terms of "the oligarchy" and "puppet masters" just makes for better rhetoric than telling us that he wants to turn the rest of the populace against the top few percent whilst leaving the handful of ultra-wealthy people relatively untouched (which is what his actual policies seem to do).

Re: There is no 'right' vs. 'left': it is the oligarchs against the rest

#54

Post by gwm83 »

PaulAJ wrote: post #47
Ididntdothis wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This Chomsky quote comes to mind “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....”. The sad part is that a lot of people seem to be addicted to the right vs left thinking. A while ago I listened to a radio interview with an author whose thesis was that modern philanthropists allow change only in a way that…

The Chomsky quote is something you hear from the Left from time to time: a political theory which implies some kind of deliberate coordination between capitalists as a class. Is there a Protocols of the Elders of Capitalism which includes this as a principle, or some Omniscient Council of Capitalist Vagueness who are defining the spectrum of currently acceptable opinion? (Not that the Left has a monopoly on conspirac…

Deliberate implies documented in your comment. Of course it's implicit in this scenario. I suppose not much of the conversation in 100k/plate dinner fundraisers is about the weather.

Re: There is no 'right' vs. 'left': it is the oligarchs against the rest

#55

Post by zokier »

> That means creating a multi-racial, multi-ethnic coalition of working-class, poor and middle-class Americans who will fight for democracy and oppose oligarchy.

Arise, ye workers from your slumber,

Arise, ye prisoners of want.

For reason in revolt now thunders,

and at last ends the age of cant!

There might not be right vs left, but the article definitely hits some familiar notes

Re: There is no 'right' vs. 'left': it is the oligarchs against the rest

#56

Post by PaulAJ »

davesmith1983 wrote: post #26
Ididntdothis wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This Chomsky quote comes to mind “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....”. The sad part is that a lot of people seem to be addicted to the right vs left thinking. A while ago I listened to a radio interview with an author whose thesis was that modern philanthropists allow change only in a way that…

> This Chomsky quote comes to mind “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....”. The sad part is that a lot of people seem to be addicted to the right vs left thinking. What this is more broadly is the Overton Window. There is "acceptable" topics that can be broached. As for Right versus Left, well th…

I just tried that 8 Values thing. Interesting, but it depended too much on existing buzzwords and quotes, and contained a number of false dichotomies. E.g.

"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs". If you didn't know the quote then it might sound like a good description of a modern welfare state, so only people with strongly libertarian views would reject it. However most people who recognise it as a quote from Marx will reject it because they are not Marxists.

"It is more important to have a balanced budget than to look after everyone" (quote from memory). False dichotomy: if a country fails to have a balanced budget over the long term then it won't be able to look after anyone.

Re: There is no 'right' vs. 'left': it is the oligarchs against the rest

#57

Post by agumonkey »

Sharlin wrote: post #42
nightwing wrote: post #28

Rich vs poor is even less meaningful divide than right vs left. For instance i am not rich but my goals are much better aligned with goals of rich people like Elon Musk and Aubrey de Grey, than with any of poor people. The solution is not to take money from the rich, but to make the government more transparent and more inclusive. Now we only can vote for unknown bundles of policies in the form of people, and rich peo…

> Rich vs poor is even less meaningful divide than right vs left. Which is why the author is careful to not use those words to describe the situation. Someone like Aubrey de Grey (who isn't even "rich" in this context) is as far from the oligarchy as can be.

Does Aubrey talk about this topic ? I only read on his work and SENS.

Re: There is no 'right' vs. 'left': it is the oligarchs against the rest

#58

Post by gwm83 »

raarts wrote: post #39

The central question of this article: > So why do we continue to hear and use the same old “right” and “left” labels? > I suspect it’s because the emerging oligarchy feels safer if Americans are split along the old political battle lines. That way, Americans won’t notice they’re being shafted. Wouldn't this imply the oligarchs control the media? Or at least the public discourse? But that's not the impression I get fr…

Trump is embarrassing, but he has dramatically improved the ability for the wealthy to abuse the poor via policy and regulatory changes.

The very wealthy (and even those of moderate means) genuinely believe they pulled themselves up by their bootstraps and made their own success, completely blind to the fact their incredibly wealthy or successful parents put them there.

Re: There is no 'right' vs. 'left': it is the oligarchs against the rest

#59

Post by tome »

quickthrower2 wrote: post #50
tome wrote: post #34

Ugh. What's this doing on Hacker News? Flagged.

“On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.” - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

That rule can be used to justify a lot of content that doesn't belong here. Reading the discussion here is like reading a forum for political scientists discussing the tradeoffs between strong and weak typing.

Re: There is no 'right' vs. 'left': it is the oligarchs against the rest

#60

Post by nightwing »

PaulAJ wrote: post #41
nightwing wrote: post #28

Rich vs poor is even less meaningful divide than right vs left. For instance i am not rich but my goals are much better aligned with goals of rich people like Elon Musk and Aubrey de Grey, than with any of poor people. The solution is not to take money from the rich, but to make the government more transparent and more inclusive. Now we only can vote for unknown bundles of policies in the form of people, and rich peo…

Elon Musk's goal is to persuade you to give as much money as possible to him while paying as little as possible in taxes. If your goals are aligned then I expect you to be writing a cheque to him now. Thought not. On your second paragraph, the fundamental problem with democracy is that voters cannot have informed opinions about everything: there are simply not enough hours in the day. Without informed voters any vote…

The method Elon uses for the persuasion is building rockets and taking money in exchange of services, i'll happily buy starlink internet when it is available. I have donated money to SENS foundation https://www.sens.org/.

> there are simply not enough hours in the day

Sure, that's why i do not propose to take referendums for everything, people give their votes to representatives who work hard to have informed opinions. The difference is that the vote can be changed anytime, and that on specific issues about which voter cares, the representatives vote can be overruled. Even if this overruling doesn't happen very often, the possibility of that will help the elected individual to keep voters interests at heart.

Post reply on HN