6 ms·

This is akin to arguing "nothing ever changes or improves in Liberal democracies", when policy history doesn't reflect that. Large parties represent large coal

This is akin to arguing "nothing ever changes or improves in Liberal democracies", when policy history doesn't reflect that. Large parties represent large coalitions, so there are more compromises and things happen slower, but they still happen. Not always for the better, as we're seeing when populists are elected.

soulofmischief 22d ago
This take completely ignores the amount of money in politics and that both parties have funding from overlapping sources which in turn represent how similar the two parties are on certain key issues such as the Palestinian genocide.
- lanfeust6 22d ago
  Notwithstanding that this sum is smaller than people think, seeing bipartisan stances does not in itself reflect a failure; it can just as easily be a good thing. All this reveals is that you have a pet issue that isn't being serviced well currently by the 2 parties, but tides and voter sentiment change; within a few short years most people have soured on Israel, and this will be reflected in forthcoming elections.
  - soulofmischief 21d ago
    I don't have a single "pet issue", I care about a great deal of issues that neither party actually cares about addressing, and it's well-established that both parties push conservative, right-leaning neoliberal policy. I don't see these changes occurring overnight or fast enough to be acceptable.
    - lanfeust6 21d ago
      lol Trump's party has not been the least bit neoliberal, it is populist and protectionist. Brutal immigration crackdowns and tarrifs are the opposite of neoliberal. Even Biden was a departure, with tariffs and CHIPS act. None of that is neoliberal, which peaked in the Clinton era. Incidentally, among the most effective remedies for what ails us now, like zoning reform, would be derided as "neoliberal" by progressives, though the evidence speaks for itself, and YIMBYs are making in-roads. That doesn't mean that state capacity doesn't have it's place. We historically would spend more on innovation, on NASA, DARPA and the like, and that matters a great deal. But it doesn't preclude removing red tape that hinders govt and private sector efforts. > a great deal of issues Ok, name some. Realistically, there aren't many.
      - soulofmischief 21d ago
        I was speaking historically of the GOP, not "Trump's party". Yet, the Trump administration continues to support the repression of workers unions, environmental deregulation, foreign and domestic imperialism, state-sponsored terrorism, corporatocracy, mass incarceration, and other common tools of the neoliberal State. Yes, his economic policies are populist and nationalist, his immigration policies and other things, but his administration and the likes of Stephen Miller simply do not perceive these other issues as relevant to the new era they are ushering in. > Ok, name some. Realistically, there aren't many. Both previous presidential candidates were bought and paid for by the establishment. Both were prepared to serve the needs of the wealthy class and pander to the middle class. Everything else follows from there.
        lanfeust6 21d ago
        I threw you a softball, and you couldn't even name one. You're still confused about what neoliberalism is. It really is just "vibes" to progressives apparently.
        soulofmischief 21d ago
        I invite you to explain how the things I listed are not established tools of neoliberalism. Or you can keep pretending to misunderstand me.
swed420 22d ago
> This is akin to arguing "nothing ever changes or improves in Liberal democracies", when policy history doesn't reflect that. Ever-growing wealth disparities, eroded rights, mass enshitification in a race to the bottom, and widespread hatred of ones neighbor over fake outrage culture war propaganda disseminated from corporate media are not a trends of improvement. They are trends of decline, unless you're of the class who has their doomsday bunker on standby.
- lanfeust6 22d ago
  > Ever-growing wealth disparities Higher concentration of wealth is not new, it's happened many times and dissipated many times. Real-wages are still growing, which is what we care about qua improvements in our well being (and what attracts immigrants). The key risk though is regulatory capture from consolidation of tech companies (much of this "wealth" in question is stock valuation, which tends to get reinvested in companies), but anti-trust is still a thing, and has been wielded relatively recently. > enshitification This is about consumer products, not government policy. Buy an alternative, you have those choices. > widespread hatred of ones neighbor over fake outrage culture war propaganda disseminated from corporate media Based on polling, the most salient issues seem to reflect economic anxieties. Even stances on immigration are really about that. When the established parties and institutions fail, people lash out and elect populists. The populist fervor will wane once housing affordability is appropriately tackled for instance. > not a trends of improvement Yeah, not everything improved in the short-run, that isn't remarkable. Many things did. Look at real-wages, look at the extreme poverty rate globally as defined by the UN. I could go on.
  - swed420 21d ago
    > This is about consumer products, not government policy. You speak as if these things are unrelated. > Buy an alternative, you have those choices. Increasingly, we don't: "Modern Capitalism Is Weirder Than You Think: It also no longer works as advertised" https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/03/how-asset-managers-have-upended-how-modern-capitalism-works.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/03/how-asset-managers-h... (https://archive.is/wSmtd https://archive.is/wSmtd)

soulofmischief 22d ago

This take completely ignores the amount of money in politics and that both parties have funding from overlapping sources which in turn represent how similar the two parties are on certain key issues such as the Palestinian genocide.

lanfeust6 22d ago
Notwithstanding that this sum is smaller than people think, seeing bipartisan stances does not in itself reflect a failure; it can just as easily be a good thing. All this reveals is that you have a pet issue that isn't being serviced well currently by the 2 parties, but tides and voter sentiment change; within a few short years most people have soured on Israel, and this will be reflected in forthcoming elections.
- soulofmischief 21d ago
  I don't have a single "pet issue", I care about a great deal of issues that neither party actually cares about addressing, and it's well-established that both parties push conservative, right-leaning neoliberal policy. I don't see these changes occurring overnight or fast enough to be acceptable.
  - lanfeust6 21d ago
    lol Trump's party has not been the least bit neoliberal, it is populist and protectionist. Brutal immigration crackdowns and tarrifs are the opposite of neoliberal. Even Biden was a departure, with tariffs and CHIPS act. None of that is neoliberal, which peaked in the Clinton era. Incidentally, among the most effective remedies for what ails us now, like zoning reform, would be derided as "neoliberal" by progressives, though the evidence speaks for itself, and YIMBYs are making in-roads. That doesn't mean that state capacity doesn't have it's place. We historically would spend more on innovation, on NASA, DARPA and the like, and that matters a great deal. But it doesn't preclude removing red tape that hinders govt and private sector efforts. > a great deal of issues Ok, name some. Realistically, there aren't many.
    - soulofmischief 21d ago
      I was speaking historically of the GOP, not "Trump's party". Yet, the Trump administration continues to support the repression of workers unions, environmental deregulation, foreign and domestic imperialism, state-sponsored terrorism, corporatocracy, mass incarceration, and other common tools of the neoliberal State. Yes, his economic policies are populist and nationalist, his immigration policies and other things, but his administration and the likes of Stephen Miller simply do not perceive these other issues as relevant to the new era they are ushering in. > Ok, name some. Realistically, there aren't many. Both previous presidential candidates were bought and paid for by the establishment. Both were prepared to serve the needs of the wealthy class and pander to the middle class. Everything else follows from there.
      - lanfeust6 21d ago
        I threw you a softball, and you couldn't even name one. You're still confused about what neoliberalism is. It really is just "vibes" to progressives apparently.
        soulofmischief 21d ago
        I invite you to explain how the things I listed are not established tools of neoliberalism. Or you can keep pretending to misunderstand me.

swed420 22d ago

> This is akin to arguing "nothing ever changes or improves in Liberal democracies", when policy history doesn't reflect that. Ever-growing wealth disparities, eroded rights, mass enshitification in a race to the bottom, and widespread hatred of ones neighbor over fake outrage culture war propaganda disseminated from corporate media are not a trends of improvement. They are trends of decline, unless you're of the class who has their doomsday bunker on standby.

lanfeust6 22d ago
> Ever-growing wealth disparities Higher concentration of wealth is not new, it's happened many times and dissipated many times. Real-wages are still growing, which is what we care about qua improvements in our well being (and what attracts immigrants). The key risk though is regulatory capture from consolidation of tech companies (much of this "wealth" in question is stock valuation, which tends to get reinvested in companies), but anti-trust is still a thing, and has been wielded relatively recently. > enshitification This is about consumer products, not government policy. Buy an alternative, you have those choices. > widespread hatred of ones neighbor over fake outrage culture war propaganda disseminated from corporate media Based on polling, the most salient issues seem to reflect economic anxieties. Even stances on immigration are really about that. When the established parties and institutions fail, people lash out and elect populists. The populist fervor will wane once housing affordability is appropriately tackled for instance. > not a trends of improvement Yeah, not everything improved in the short-run, that isn't remarkable. Many things did. Look at real-wages, look at the extreme poverty rate globally as defined by the UN. I could go on.
- swed420 21d ago
  > This is about consumer products, not government policy. You speak as if these things are unrelated. > Buy an alternative, you have those choices. Increasingly, we don't: "Modern Capitalism Is Weirder Than You Think: It also no longer works as advertised" https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/03/how-asset-managers-have-upended-how-modern-capitalism-works.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/03/how-asset-managers-h... (https://archive.is/wSmtd https://archive.is/wSmtd)