Three Poems, Irony and Apology to Elephants

November 9, 2024
Written by: Jon Chesterson
149 Replies

by Jon Chesterson

‘Pity a nation that despises a passion in
its dream, yet submits in its awakening’.
‘Pity the nation whose breath is money
and sleeps the sleep of the too well fed’.

I think we all need a rest and break from being bombarded every day with Trump’s negative, bullying, hate-raking, scowling, arrogant face and voice, his crowd poking fingers, lies, false news, disinformation, extreme hyperbole, grandiose delusions, egocentric temper, revenge, racism, misogyny, hostility, authoritarianism, and propaganda. I for one am sick of his intrusion into my life in all our public spaces in Australia on a daily basis for goddam years, and frankly, I think that this is primarily why he is back again – because the mere mention of his name in mainstream and social media puts him constantly in the limelight, normalising and fanning his diatribe, his abusive pathology and narcissism. He is irrelevant to the world of humanity, the arts, science, reason, culture, grace, progress, fairness, genuine democracy, freedom, leadership and integrity. He is utterly unfit to govern, taking our modern world perilously down to new lows in our global struggle for survival at an equitable, economic, ecological, human and existential level.

That said, I have heard many explanations for this resurgence, but no-one has stated what to me seems obvious, well that is apart from Bernie Saunders, but no-one listens to him, least of all mainstream and social media, and in part there’s the tragedy. You will remember while Joe Biden was latterly fiddling around in the White House, Kamala Harris was on the campaign trail declaring her roots with ‘middle-class’ America, and she made that very clear, reinforced by her education, career and background. She did a fine job in the 100 days she was given, but who on either side represented the lower social economic diaspora, hard-working, vulnerable, middle to poorer communities, first during COVID, and then the greedy unspoken corporate-driven inflationary cost of living crisis? While billionaire America was throwing money at their own kind in an ever-increasing social-economic divide, a vast swathe of American people found themselves unrepresented, and the angry or disillusioned ‘mob’ found themselves an angry vengeful leader they believe, heaven knows why or how, who’d deliver the promised land. Yes, the pompous wart on the American landscape had split the vote and sailed into harbour to hold another rampant tea party, and the masses have fallen for it with a few million dollar lotto packages up for grabs from another pompous wart, Elon Musk. And he has bought his way into the White House where he will expect his dues paid back ten-fold (like any billionaire or corporate empire) at Congress’ pleasure and the American People’s expense. Those of us on the other side of the wall, the rest of the world can see there will likely be a reckoning, as the promised land is simply not within Trump’s motive, means or grasp – just what’s in it for him and his chosen mates. Beware Australia, there is a lesson gathering in the dream, do not submit on wakening or pander to the too well fed.

But it’s time for a break from the curse of this insufferable and prolonged intrusion – My apologies to elephants who are indomitably an inspiration to life on Earth, there’s room enough. Now let the poems speak.

The Irony of Three Poems and Our Times

Founding fathers while mothers look on ~ We might be forgiven for what the founding fathers of America intended, not really that long ago. In 1776, Philadelphia, the 2nd Continental Congress declared independence of the colonies as the ‘United States of America’. Under General George Washington, it won the Revolutionary War in 1783, the Treaty of Paris established the borders of the new Republic. The Articles of Confederation established a central government, but not stability, and a convention wrote a new Constitution adopted in 1789 the same year George Washington became the first president, and a Bill of Rights followed in 1791. But there was no place or recognition for the Indigenous peoples, the Indian tribes and nations of North America, who were displaced, pillaged and murdered for over a century as colonisation continued across the continent.

233 years hence, and on the eve of the 47th president (elect), and for all its pomp, ceremony and stature we can see how rigid, vague and vulnerable the Constitution is for all its concrete, and clarity, rights and freedoms, and how easy it can be overthrown in the modern era – the Capitol Hill riots insurrection of 6 January 2020, notwithstanding the American Civil War 1861-1865 (not very civil), and in 2024/5 the legitimisation and return to power of a convicted felon and the most corrupt and corruptible, liable and libellous, salacious, misogynist, treasonable and grandiose president in US history, whom a popular majority deem to elect as their leader. One who appears to paint himself as messianic, ordained by god for dodging a bullet, not merely a humble or privileged (as the case may be) founding father, though the land of these colonies and territories had been occupied, governed and protected for thousands of years, and once again not a whisper to its roots. There was no place for black American Africans not even after the abolition of slavery in the 13th Amendment of 1865, and no right or access to vote after the 15th Amendment in 1870. There was no place for women to vote until the 19th Amendment in 1920, and it took a further 81 years before Obama was elected president, but still no woman has reached the top office in the Oval Office, not even where merit and justice would have served the nation. No migrant, even if a citizen is eligible for such office, excluded by the Natural-born citizen clause. Native Americans were excluded from voting and standing for office until as late as the the Voting Rights Act 1965, and only recognised as citizens in the Indian Citizenship Act 1924. In the State and National museums, grand halls and institutions much of the history and struggle has been suppressed even up to present day, while a white man can incite insurrection and find himself immune to the law according to the highest court in the land, if he is or has been president of the USA.

More the irony, that for more than 2 centuries the US was a crucible for migrants upon which the backbone of present day North America has been built – and now the mission is to deport millions of them back to ‘where they belong’, Mexico and Latin America under the import and insult of ‘illegals’, ‘criminals’, ‘murderers’, ‘dog eaters’ and ‘rapists’. The truth is, the vast majority are seeking asylum from poverty, political oppression, safety, drug wars and foreign wars waged and abetted by the US overseas for more than a century, eking out an existence as best they can, a life no more than what any ordinary migrant or person might seek.

Back in 1883, the Statue of Liberty was being conceived and constructed, a gift from France, soon to be inscribed at her feet ‘Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore’.

Emma Lazarus (1849-1887) was an American-Jewish poet and activist born in New York. Inspired by the construction of the Statue of Liberty and ‘Lady of the Harbour’, she wrote a poem to welcome those who travelled from far off lands and all, to forge a new life, as they set their eyes and hopes for the first time on the new world from their Atlantic crossing. From there she would look on perpetually across the waters to welcome them.

The New Colossus, Emma Lazarus, 1883

Head of Liberty, Paris World Fair 1878

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
with conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
a mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
the air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
with silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
the wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

From Lebanon to America and back ~ Israel in Gaza and Palestine. Khalil Gibran (1883-1931) was a Lebanese-American poet and philosopher born in Bsharri, northern Lebanon, a mountain village which itself was a refuge for Maronite Christians (Native and Arab Lebanese, and descendants of the Phoenicians) fleeing Byzantine persecution as early as the 7th Century AD.

He migrated to America at the age of 12yrs with his mother and siblings, where she worked as a seamstress and he was enrolled in a school in Boston. 3 years later he returned to his native land to complete his schooling at the Collège de la Sagesse in Beirut, returning to America in 1902 upon his younger sister’s death, and his mother’s the following year. Gibran did not consider himself to be a member of any particular country, saying “the whole earth is my homeland and all men are my fellow countrymen”. His poem ‘Pity the Nation’ was published posthumously several years after his death, and now considered unlikely to be a lament of his native or adopted country, rather a warning to any nation, if not prophetic.

Khalil Gibran and his family would have been greeted on entry to his new world in 1895 by the ‘Lady of the Harbour’ in New York, she being only 9 years old herself and his junior, and perhaps even Emma’s poem if not a few years later. He may also have at some later date made his acquaintance with ‘Our Lady of Lebanon’ on later journeys back and forth before or after the Great War (WW1).

Pity the Nation, Khalil Gibran, (‘The Garden of the Prophet’, 1933)

‘Our Lady of Lebanon’, bronze statue forged in France 1907, Harissa (North of Beirut)

Pity the nation that is full of beliefs and empty of religion.

Pity the nation that acclaims the bully as hero,
and that deems the glittering conqueror bountiful.

Pity a nation that despises a passion in its dream,
yet submits in its awakening.

Pity the nation that raises not its voice
save when it walks in a funeral,
boasts not except among its ruins,
and will rebel not save when its neck is laid
between the sword and the block.

Pity the nation whose statesman is a fox,
whose philosopher is a juggler,
and whose art is the art of patching and mimicking.

Pity the nation that welcomes its new ruler with trumpeting,
and farewells him with hooting,
only to welcome another with trumpeting again.

Pity the nation whose sages are dumb with years,
and whose strong men are yet in the cradle.

Pity the nation divided into fragments,
each fragment deeming itself a nation.

ارحم على الامة

ارحم على الأمة المليئة بالمعتقدات والخالية من الدين.

ارحم على الأمة التي تلبس ثوبا لا يحاك.

وتأكل خبزا لا تحصد.

أشفق على الأمة التي تعتبر المتنمر بطلاً ،

ويعتبر منتصرها رائعا.

ارحم أمة تحتقر الشغف في أحلامها

لكنه يخضع لها عندما تستيقظ.

ارحم على الأمة التي لا ترفع صوتها

إلا عندما تمشي في جنازة ،

وتفتخر فقط بين أطلالها ،

ولن تنقذ نفسها عندما توضع رقبتها

بين السيف والكتلة.

ارحم على الأمة التي فيها رجل الدولة وهو ثعلب ،

والفيلسوف مشعوذ

فنه من الترقيع والتقليد

ارحم على الأمة التي تستقبل حاكمها الجديد بصوت عالٍ ،

ويقول وداعا له بسخرية ،

فقط للترحيب بآخر من خلال الاحتفال الصاخب مرة أخرى

ارحم على أمة حكماؤها أغبياء السنين ،

وأولئك الذين لا يزال رجالهم الأقوياء في المهد.

ارحموا الأمة منقسمة ،

وكل قطعة تعتبر نفسها أمة.

خليل جبرا

Gift from France, enlightening the world ~ Twist of fate. Lawrence Ferlinghetti (1919-2021) was an American-Italian poet, painter and social activist born in New York, his mother of Portuguese Sephandic (Iberian) Jewish descent. Ferlinghetti met his wife-to-be, Selden Kirby-Smith, granddaughter of Edmund Kirby-Smith, in 1946 aboard a ship enroute to France, to study in Paris at the Sorbonne. Her father was a Confederate States Army general who oversaw the Trans-Mississippi Department (comprising Arkansas, Missouri, Texas, western Louisiana, Arizona Territory and the Indian Territory) during the American Civil War.

Lawrence Ferlinghetti served in the US Navy throughout World War 2, as the captain of a submarine chaser in the Normandy invasion, 1944. He moved to San Francisco in 1951 and founded City Lights, an independent bookstore and publisher and went on to publish many of the ‘Beat’ poets, a literary subculture movement and group of authors whose work explored and influenced American culture and politics in the post-World War 2 era. He was named San Francisco’s Poet Laureate in August 1998. On 24 March 2019, on his 100th birthday, the city of San Francisco declared it Lawrence Ferlinghetti Day.

‘If you would be a poet, create works capable of answering the challenge of apocalyptic times, even if this meaning sounds apocalyptic… You are an American or a non-American, you can conquer the conquerors with words’ [Poetry an Insurgent Art – I am signaling you through the flames].

Pity the Nation, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, 2007 (after Khalil Gibran)

Unveiling of the Statue of Liberty – Enlightening the World (1886), Edward Moran (oil on canvas)

Pity the nation whose people are sheep
and whose shepherds mislead them

Pity the nation whose leaders are liars
whose sages are silenced
and whose bigots haunt the airwaves

Pity the nation that raises not its voice
except to praise conquerors
and acclaim the bully as hero
and aims to rule the world
with force and by torture

Pity the nation that knows
no other language but its own
and no other culture but its own

Pity the nation whose breath is money
and sleeps the sleep of the too well fed

Pity the nation oh pity the people
who allow their rights to erode
and their freedoms to be washed away

My country, tears of thee
Sweet land of liberty!

And now I do wonder what all three of our American and non-American poets would say today if they could witness the Trump MAGA insurgence – twist of fate. What would the founding fathers say having opened the doors to those who came and enlightened her shores, migrants whose descendants acclaim the bully? What about the legacy stolen from Native Americans, is their voice reflected on either side of the governing parties, did anyone ever mention them?

What will Liberty say tomorrow, will she lift her cape and be deported back to France or will she make her own way back across the Atlantic Ocean in search of enlightenment and democracy?

That said, I think we all need a break from the curse of this intrusion, with or without America, and soon I guess we will know which direction they are heading, no apologies expected. We will all live long and prosper in hope and not expect it any time too soon.

‘I lift my lamp beside the golden door’,
‘sweet land of liberty’, with less to go
around than ever there was before
and Earth had room enough.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Post Views: 3,998

149 comments

Login here

Register here

KimNovember 10, 2024 at 12:24 am

Well said…

wamNovember 10, 2024 at 2:03 am

liberty as a statue is hardly worth anything when trump showed the world what he and the majority of americans think of women. Oops middle east with another woman?
ps
Wonder when the witches will be exposed and burned???

Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 5:56 am

“I think we all need a break from the curse of this intrusion,…”

Let’s stop pretending that this is an intrusion.
Or that it’s an unfortunate accident of history.
A nightmare that will be over in four years.
What we are seeing is the inevitable decline in standards that we should expect of a system that has based itself on the adoration of the individual, and what is worse, an adoration of the whims of the individual.

This is liberal democracy destroying itself, and was so foreseeable that the rise of a Trump type was predicted almost a century ago.
H L Mencken — “All the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre — the man who can most adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum. The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”

And let’s not pretend that this could only happen in the US.
All the liberal democracies have become clown shows, including ours. Worse still, we are moving beyond the laughs we get from a clown show.

As their clown world disintegrates, the authoritarianism that lies at the heart of liberalism comes to the fore with a crackdown on dissent. As we see in Craig Murray’s summary of the UK Terrorism Act.
“You have no right to remain silent, you have no right to a lawyer, you must hand over all devices and passwords, if you refuse to answer a question you can be imprisoned for 2 years, if you express an opinion that could be interpreted as support for a proscribed organisation, there is a 14 year prison sentence, ( plenty of room for interpretation ), this act includes the phrase ” without cause ” so police can pick up anyone without having to show any reason.”
So ordinary decent folk who are disgusted with the Gaza genocide being facilitated by their own governments, will be swept up as supporters of terrorism when they protest.

This is not an intrusion.
This is us, laid bare for the world to see.

JimNovember 10, 2024 at 6:47 am

If the Democraps had ruled the nation on behalf of all Americans, Trump and his Repub mates would playing golf everyday and out of our hair. So why didn’t the media hold Democraps to account all those years? The answer is MSM are in lockstep with a plan aimed at zero middle class. To achieve that, a country needs one a Uni-party supported by a propaganda unit, the MSM. Same here, the ABC being a shining example of how far an organization can fall in a decade. Kerry O’Brien and Emma Alberici were the last of the real journos and the ABC these days is a woke waste of space, imo. 1984, are we there yet?

CanguroNovember 10, 2024 at 8:54 am

A koala stamp for Steve Davis for his clear-eyed analysis.

On authoritarianism… “[in] the list of the world’s most-watched countries ranked by the number of CCTV cameras, the UK comes in at number four, after China, USA, and Germany.”

It’s a pity that with the overwhelming torrent, nay, tsunami of information & misinformation that pours ceaselessly into the receptive arenas of the human experience, visual, aural etc., that there’s little space or opportunity for a modern-day Mencken to have his observations get the traction that they would otherwise deserve. He died in 1956, well after the advent of radio, but when TV was still in its infancy and yet to capture the zeitgeist in the ways we now comprehend.

A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 10:36 am

I’m inclined to agree with Winston Churchill on this occasion –
‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’

Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 12:47 pm

AC continues to defend the democracy that threw up a Donald Trump not once, but twice.

Democracy has many virtues but also serious potential weaknesses.

Our current form, favoured throughout the West, has two serious weaknesses.

We have opted for representative democracy, where elected representatives are too easily diverted from their declared purpose of serving their constituents, to instead serving vested interests who buy influence and ultimately, buy votes. So institutionalized has this become, so accepted as part of the democratic process, that these influencers now write the legislation that they want enacted.

So we now have a sham democracy, a democracy in name only.
You would think that it could not get any worse that that, but you would be wrong. The sham democracy at the local or national level is only a problem at the local or national level. But another development has ensured that this sickness can operate across national boundaries. Can exert global influence.

By exploiting the weakness in representative democracy, a healthy diversity of views that should be a feature of a robust system have been replaced by an ideology; liberalism.

So successful has this takeover been, that the western democracies are known as liberal democracies. And woe betide any country that strays from the liberal formula in establishing a form of governance suitable to it’s unique circumstances. Any deviation from the liberal norm is immediately branded as totalitarian, fascist, communist, (take your pick) oppressive, illegitimate, illiberal, unfree.

Anyone paying attention will have noticed that the world has become more chaotic since the fall of the Soviet Union. The Soviets were the only check on liberalism following its own natural development path. That being the path of colonialism and exploitation. A path that necessarily involved chaos and misery.

Why was this development path inevitable? Because the financial/economic system the West developed, first creates chaos and misery, then becomes dependent on chaos and misery. One of the early and still most prominent “philosophers” of liberalism, J S Mill, was quite open about the course that the new industrial powers should follow — “Colonization … is the best affair of business in which the capital of an old and wealthy country can engage … the same rules of international morality do not apply … between civilized nations and barbarians.”

So there’s a stark reminder of the weakness of representative democracy and the danger of liberal democracy — the rules of international morality do not apply.

Gaza, anyone?

Terence MillsNovember 10, 2024 at 1:42 pm

Trump may not be our choice but then again we are looking at the prospect of electing someone like Peter Dutton so, ‘go figure’.

It is clear that the majority of the American people saw something in Trump that eludes many of us in Australia (he has not only won the presidency but also the senate and probably the House). With his blunt one-eyed approach it is more than likely that the wars in Ukraine and Gaza will be resolved by Trump policies not that the Ukranians or the Palestinians will necessarily like the final solution.
As Trump has noted, both wars are dependant on the supply of US arms and it is only when this supply dries up that a ceasefire will be possible.

As regards Gaza, it is a poor reflection on the Biden administration that they continue to arm Netanyahu while making weak pleas for a ceasefire.

A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 2:57 pm

Tony Abbott made his career out of a relentless, single minded focus on criticism, rarely bothering with options, proposals and working examples of success
We observe that tactic being applied here.
No proposal, no working examples of success.
I’ll add- I wonder whether Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, etc would prefer to remain a bulwak against liberal democracy
############
The Democrats almost handed the presidency to Trump.
° Biden was only ever going to be a one term president, he should have made this clear a year ago and allowed Harris to contest the nomination against a range of very capable alternative candidates
° Harris is intelligent and capable, but doesn’t always persuade that she is a heavyweight on the international scene
° Many in the US are frustrated and have seen their traditional manufacturing jobs disappear, Trump is able to plug into this sentiment
° Trump (correctly) isn’t seen as a conventional politician. People are frustrated with the political system and many seem to want anything other than a conventional politician.

Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 3:51 pm

“People are frustrated with the political system …”

I never thought I’d see the day when AC supported a comment of mine.

Ok, Ok, no more sarcasm.

In his first comment AC quoted an authority.
There’s nothing wrong with that, it’s a legitimate tool, but only when context is provided.

It would be useful in arguing the superiority of liberal democracy if AC could relate that superiority to the ongoing horror story in Gaza.

A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 4:13 pm

Rather than endlessly whinging about what you see as the problems with western democracy (while also providing context and rationale for brutal autocratic regimes), how about you describe the system you propose?
Also the working examples, so that we can observe you are offering legitimate plans for improvement in the lives of the population.
If you’re incapable of doing this, it is proof of your comfort in hot air and whinging

Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 5:16 pm

Will AC learn from his error in providing a quote that he is unable to relate to liberal democracy as we see it in action right now, in all its brutality?
I doubt it.

He describes my criticism of a system that is totally out of control, that ignores the wishes of its citizens, that enacts legislation designed to jail those who protest against genocide, as whinging.

I wonder if he would have the courage to tell a Palestinian father holding the shredded remains of his dead child in his arms, that his complaints about liberal democracy are no more than whinging?

A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 5:31 pm

Just describe the system you propose to replace liberal democracy with.
Hot air, whining, endlessly complaining, without being capable of articulating or detailing a proposal to improve the lives of people… AIMN’s own version of Tony Abbott

Harry LimeNovember 10, 2024 at 7:13 pm

Churchill, as Lord of the Admiralty,really cut his chops at Gallipoli, didn’t he? He gave Ratso Howard an excellent example of what makes “mates”,”Unaustralian”,”not our types”,xenophobic bullshit and lies,and turned it into a few election wins,with the help of of a rubbish media and a weak opposition.And a fortuitous mining boom,whereby, (sorry Albo), pea heart Costellot could purchase consecutive elections. We are, by and large, a bunch of disengaged, easily led jerks.Bad news is too uncomfortable..let’s not get too exercised…and then ,one day it all went to shit.
Steve Davis…enjoying your eviscerations enormously.

Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 7:15 pm

In demanding that I give details of an alternative to liberal democracy, AC is looking desperate.

He has clearly given up on defending liberalism and is looking for an off-ramp, a diversion.
But in doing so he has given me the opportunity to indulge my favourite pastime — exposing the evils of liberal democracy. So I thank him for that.

And in his blindness it escaped his notice that the answer has already been given.

All the advanced liberal democracies became powerful through colonialism, robbing those who were unable to resist military power.
And this did not end with the demise of the colonial era. Poor nations today who seek aid to develop their economies are forced to surrender economic sovereignty and open themselves to the tender mercies of transnational corporations.
The advice given by JS Mill all those years ago is still faithfully followed — “ the same rules of international morality do not apply … between civilized nations and barbarians.”
The plunder continues.

So the answer to the question is that any democracy that operates on the principles of morality, fair dealing, cooperation, non-interference, mutual development and mutual prosperity would be an advance on the present dog-eat-dog, winner takes all system that prevails.

A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 7:37 pm

You’ve retreated from strident to meek. But that’s understandable, you’re incapable of positively contributing to political discourse.
#”All the advanced liberal democracies became powerful through colonialism, robbing those who were unable to resist military power. And this did not end with the demise of the colonial era.”
Can you detail the colonial past of Switzerland , Austria, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Japan, Ireland and even Greece, Poland, Latvia , Lithuania, Estonia, Czechia, Slovakia (all which have a better quality of life than the regimes you excuse)
A number of them even recognise Palestine.
Your blame of “liberal democracy” for so many of the ills of the world is simply cr@p, without a rationale, without evidence.
You’re unable to articulate the system you propose.

Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 8:23 pm

Since when did Switzerland , Austria, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Japan, Ireland and even Greece, Poland, Latvia , Lithuania, Estonia, Czechia, Slovakia become powerful?

Please stay focused.

A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 9:01 pm

Hilarious!
Your original comment was against liberal democracy, can you show an asterisk or a proviso or where you say -“conditions apply”
This is as entertaining as your claim that economic statistics, facts and data are meaningless in a discussion about economics.
Your original trenchant criticism was of liberal democracy, now you have retreated to criticism of some policies of some liberal democracies.
Keep adding provisos, qualifications and retreating from the strident to the meek.

Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 9:28 pm

Harry, my pleasure.

In regard to the liberal democracies listed by AC, they are not the setters of the liberal agenda, as AC well knows. They are mere pawns in a system. The movers and shakers of liberal democracy drew their power from colonial exploitation.

I’ve pointed out the failings of liberal democracy not only from the past, but also from the present day.
As in the neo-colonialism that is perpetrated today through the liberal financial system.
The neo-colonialism that is the source of much suffering that AC, as a true liberal, dismisses as mere whinging.

But instead of defending liberal democracy, which is the point he started from and now finds impossible to justify, AC pretends that those problems I’ve outlined do not exist.
To divert attention from his failure he demands that I propose an alternative.

This is a further example of his not having a grasp of the issue at hand. I have given a general description of a better system but as usual, AC is fixated on details and seems reluctant to engage with the bigger picture.

The bigger picture in this case is that for a true democracy to flourish it must be whatever its members want it to be. That is true freedom, but true freedom does not figure in the schemes of liberals. AC has demonstrated that point nicely.
In fact, AC’s performance here, with his dismissal of the freedom to pursue independent economic development and governance, finding it unworthy of comment, his indifference to the crackdown on dissent, and his indifference to suffering, has made himself a case in point for the failings of liberalism as a concept.
Liberalism personified.

A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 9:52 pm

Here’s a selection of Steve’s unqualified criticism of “liberal democracy”
Now he retrospectively tries to qualify his comments.
That’s a retreat.
#/.All the liberal democracies have become clown shows, including ours.
#/.As their clown world disintegrates, the authoritarianism that lies at the heart of liberalism comes to the fore with a crackdown on dissent.
#/. By exploiting the weakness in representative democracy, a healthy diversity of views that should be a feature of a robust system have been replaced by an ideology; liberalism.
#/.Anyone paying attention will have noticed that the world has become more chaotic since the fall of the Soviet Union. The Soviets were the only check on liberalism following its own natural development path. That being the path of colonialism and exploitation. A path that necessarily involved chaos and misery.
#/. So there’s a stark reminder of the weakness of representative democracy and the danger of liberal democracy — the rules of international morality do not apply.

Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 4:24 am

AC has kindly repeated some of the significant points I’ve made, so I thank him for that.
It must be tough trying to continue an argument when all you can come up with is a repeat of your opponent’s points.

But one of his dot points is worth further comment as it proves my point about the Soviet Union being a check on US aggression, and proves my overall position, in rather dramatic fashion.

From the Congressional Research Service — The US engaged in 218 military interventions from 1798 to 1990, (1.1 per year) then dramatically increased that rate to 251 (7.8 per year) up to the present.
Why the sudden increase in 1991? That’s the very year that the US became the sole military superpower, with no other power capable of keeping it in check.

The Military Intervention Project at Tufts University’s Center for Strategic Studies states — “With the end of the Cold War era, we would expect the US to decrease its military interventions abroad, assuming lower threats and interests at stake. But these patterns reveal the opposite – the US has increased its military involvements abroad.”

Well well. 7.8 military interventions per year.
That’s a snapshot of the morality behind liberal democracy right there.
The morality of predation.

A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 8:38 am

You didn’t say “some liberal democracies” or “liberal democracies that are former colonial powers” or “the US, UK and France, that claim to be liberal democracies” or “hypocritical liberal democracies that sit of the Security Council “…
You characterised all liberal democracies the same way and the system of liberal democracy. It is typical of your deliberate provocation and hyperbole.
Disingenuous exaggeration is the standard you continually observe.
And you’re unable to articulate the system that you propose in place of liberal democracy.
You should grow up Steve.

leefeNovember 11, 2024 at 9:07 am

“Why was this development path inevitable? Because the financial/economic system the West developed, first creates chaos and misery, then becomes dependent on chaos and misery.”

Unbridled capitalism is the root of so much evil. Yes.
And yet AC’s point remains: Just describe the system you propose to replace liberal democracy with.
Because, Steve, you never do. It’s all very well to continually point out the faults and flaws with our political and economic systems, but you never actually give solutions or explain exactly how you think those systems should operate. And I don’t mean endless references to Marx or Mills or other political and economic philosophising. How exactly, in your opinion, and in your words, do you want our economic and political structures to operate?

Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 9:26 am

Has anyone else noticed that AC is doing everything he can to avoid defending or justifying liberal democracy?

Not only was he reduced to repeating my arguments in the absence of anything positive that could be said about liberal democracy, now he wants to lecture me on how I should present my arguments.

The serious failings of liberal democracy have been outlined.
AC should refute them or walk away.

Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 9:28 am

“Because Steve, you never do.”
Except leefe, I did.

Furthermore, I explained why such a description must be in general terms.
A truly free democracy should be and must be anything its members want it to be.

But because I’m a lovely fella, I’ll put my view in a single sentence.

An alternative democratic system should be one that operates on the principles of fair dealing, cooperation, mutual development and mutual prosperity.

The difference between such a system and the prevailing system should be obvious.

A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 9:49 am

You chose to reply to (and contest) my comment, where quoted- “No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’ I’m entirely comfortable with that characterisation of democracy. You chose to contest it, and have dug yourself into a huge hole, yet again. You’ve tried to retrospectively qualify your comments , but not withdraw them.
As I said, disingenuous exaggeration and hyperbole are your standard tactics.
And I’m happy to continue to demonstrate that.
As for – “An alternative democratic system should be one that operates on the principles of fair dealing, cooperation, mutual development and mutual prosperity.”
Can you explain how the systems of government in (say) Norway, Finland, Sweden and Switzerland are incapable of meeting these objectives?
Can you provide an example of a successful country that applies a system of government you support?

ClakkaNovember 11, 2024 at 10:01 am

Yes, Steve Davis, thanks for your wit and persistence.

‘Capitalism’, by and large is a system of distributing the proceeds of effort. And in that regard it is very efficient. But as Marx warned, it needs strong regulation lest it be corrupted by ‘class’. ‘Capitalism’ is not a political form – it is a system today used by almost all forms of politics – with varying degrees of success (or not) depending on the wiles of corruption within each polity.

Try ABC RN’s Big Ideas with Natasha Mitchell 3 podcasts SOS Democracy. I find particular interest in Niall Ferguson’s take on the history Is democracy doomed?.

Humanity seems to be really good at regurgitating primordial BS and abdicating responsibility.

Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 10:17 am

Clakka, you make a very good point — capitalism “needs strong regulation lest it be corrupted by class.”

And there is no reason that such a system cannot flourish, with one condition. Non-interference from outside forces.
In other words, such a system is economically practical, quite possibly economically superior, but in the present climate will have to contend with external forces.

BertNovember 11, 2024 at 10:29 am

On democracy.

We in this country have seen several elections conducted this year at state and territory level and have seen two changes of government.

We are preparing for a Federal election within the next seven months and a state election in WA in March.

The people will decide who will govern us.

The same will happen in all democratic countries over their election cycles.

There is inevitably a swing left or right in democracies, so governments will change over time, and following a change of government, I am willing to bet that the sun will continue to rise every morning and set every evening.

Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 10:54 am

Finally, a sensible point from AC — “Can you explain how the systems of government in (say) Norway, Finland, Sweden and Switzerland are incapable of meeting these objectives?”

They are not incapable.

History shows that these nations have in the past made a genuine and successful effort to provide for the welfare of their citizens.
The result was possibly the highest living standards in the world.
They achieved this by putting in place considerable govt intervention in the economy — high personal taxation rates that were used to fund a welfare state.
But high tax rates and a welfare state are not part of the liberal model. High taxes and welfare for example, are regarded as socialism in the US.

Norway is perhaps the stand-out here due to its wealth from North Sea oil, but even Norway with its impressive GDP figures is coming under pressure to conform to the liberal model.

From the OECD — “Norway’s public spending as a share of GDP is the highest in the OECD and rising fast. Managing this trend would require making regional policy more cost-conscious, reinforcing coordination and cooperation in health and education, improving incentives to limit sickness and disability outlays, and revisiting agricultural subsidies.”
“Managing this trend” in public spending is shorthand for reducing public spending.
“reinforcing coordination and cooperation in health and education” is shorthand for concentration of services, aka reduced services. As in “limits to sickness and disability outlays.”

This is the OECD interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation.

So just as I indicated to Clakka, the external forces are already at work.

A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 11:22 am

All accept that as withdrawal of your unqualified criticism of liberal democracy.
You only concede under pressure.
Perhaps try using more precise language.

Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 11:54 am

Withdrawal ??

More like a confirmation of my position.

“Perhaps try using more precise language.”

Perhaps try to mount a defense of liberal democracy.

A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 12:23 pm

My point is that liberal democracy is flawed, and there are various shades of grey.
I made this clear with the comment you chose to reply to.
You launched into an unqualified, trenchant criticism of liberal democracy as a system.
You now accept that there are examples of success in liberal democracy, and you can’t provide examples of success in another system.
That’s fine with me.

Terence MillsNovember 11, 2024 at 12:33 pm

At the end of the day it’s the economy that drives democratic results. In the US, the year-on-year inflation rate was 7.0% at the end of 2021 and 6.5% at the end of 2022. At the end of 2023, it was 3.4%. The rate was 2.4% for September 2024.

Jobs and growth were both positive yet the election seems to have been fought on a perception of individual finances going backwards – Trump asked the question ‘are you better off now than four years ago’ and the inevitable answer was NO !

Dutton yesterday posed the same question in a speech and of course nobody is prepared to say that they are better off under Labor despite inflation having come down from 6.2% to 2.8%.

The problem Labor have going into the 2025 election is that, if the RBA continue to maintain interest rates at current levels, Labor will lose based on the perception that incomes are going backwards and cost of living is increasing.

leefeNovember 11, 2024 at 12:39 pm

An alternative democratic system should be one that operates on the principles of fair dealing, cooperation, mutual development and mutual prosperity.

And still no nuts and bolts, just general principles. Like Trump, you seem to have nothing more than “the concept of a plan”.

Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 1:08 pm

Exactly what do you want from me leefe?

Do you want me to write the Constitution of a hypothetical true democracy?

Get real.

Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 1:13 pm

AC’s quote from Churchill clearly implies that democracy is a superior from of governance.
I agree with the sentiment.
My criticism was directed at liberal democracy, for the reasons given.

AC was happy to “contribute” to a discussion of liberal democracy.
While admitting that liberal democracy is flawed, AC is not happy with my “unqualified, trenchant criticism of liberal democracy as a system.”
If he’s not happy with my criticism he has an obligation to refute it. It appears that he cannot do that.

AC seems to have no appreciation of the value of developing a logical argument.
It escaped his notice that my reply to his query about the Nordic countries flowed seamlessly from the discussion I had with Clakka about the need to regulate capitalism. The Nordic countries are a great example of that, but AC, with his understanding being stunted by a predilection for dot-point brevity, has mistaken the nuance involved as a backdown on my part.

The Nordic countries are regarded as liberal democracies because they have many features in common with liberalism on the political front, but their economic model is not liberal, and so is coming under pressure to conform as confirmed by the OECD report.

Here’s how the benefit of a logical argument played out.
After replying to Clakka, I had to do a search on the Nordics as I had only a very limited knowledge of their economic circumstances.
It only took 5 minutes to come up with data that supported my position.
There is no great skill involved in developing a logical argument.
The important aspect is to not assume. To ensure that points made can be backed by evidence.
Because I had been dealing in generalities, I had to establish details to answer AC’s query properly. And because I had made no assumptions in establishing my criticism of liberal democracy, details in support came quickly.

AC cannot simply declare that my criticism of liberal democracy is not acceptable.
He must refute the arguments.

A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 1:37 pm

You’re all over the shop.
It’s hilarious!
I’m happy to promote change for the better and accept liberal democracy is imperfect. I advocate continuous systemic review and improvement.
I haven’t suggested anything to the contrary. On the other hand, you engaged in unqualified, trenchant criticism of liberal democracy, you didn’t differentiate.
You condemned the system.
Now, under pressure, you provide qualification and moderate your comments, that’s good progress.
There is nothing I need to demonstrate beyond that.
But here’s a suggestion- there are 193 countries.
It is a vast spectrum, such a diversity of choice, which country has a system of government you advocate?

CanguroNovember 11, 2024 at 1:59 pm

Language, to state the bleeding obvious, is a governing feature of humanity and the major differentiating factor between us and the rest of the animal kingdom, not to discount those other creatures’ capacity to communicate in their own unique ways.

Nonetheless, just as consciousness has its ups and downs in terms of quality of perceptiveness and awareness, so does language quality vary on individual bases, clearly there is a gradation allied to intelligence, sensitivity and perception.

It’s often observed that humanity has a herd-like quality, that there is such a thing as a crowd mentality. It’s not that difficult to understand. Fitting in is seen as desirable, rather than being on the edge, the outer. People agree to the current norms, often without any element of discriminatory reflection. Millennials overuse the word ‘like’; it pads out their sentences when in conversation by a significant amount, yet the word itself is mostly meaningless in the overall transmission of information. A century ago many working-class Australians commonly used rhyming slang in their everyday conversations, a pattern adopted from the Cockneys of London.

Herd consciousness implies beliefs in things that may or may not be true. I noticed a comment in the above thread that suggested a willingness “to bet that the sun will continue to rise every morning and set every evening.” We do say that, and I’m willing to bet almost everybody accepts that notion, sun rises, sun sets. Easy peasy. Except it doesn’t. The sun stays in its position at the center of our solar system. It doesn’t rise and set. It only appears to rise and set because of the Earth’s rotation on its axis, once every 24 hours.

Why didn’t we change the way we spoke when this physical phenomenon become the orthodox explanation of the sun ‘rising’ & ‘setting?’ The manner of speaking about this is hardly the most important thing in our lives, but it does point to a significant feature of language use, that for the sake of being in communication with others, we’re willing to tolerate a degree of slippage away, as it were, from the utter truth of the matter.

Trump’s election is a very good example of this human aspect. At individual levels, person by person, any rational appraisal of that man would have him discounted as a contender in a flash. One would say, with the firmest of conviction, ‘no bloody way, mate, am I going to vote for a man like that.’ The same would apply the GOP who if on the same basis selected their candidate for the presidency; he would never have been selected, and more likely marched off to prison.

Herd behaviour… scary, indeed, and likely responsible for much of this planet’s woes.

Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 2:05 pm

“You condemned the system.”
Indeed I did. And I will continue to condemn a system based on exploitation and plunder.
The very system you want to defend but are unable to defend.

“you provide qualifications and moderate your comments.”
There’s no qualifications or moderation from me.
Why do you keep repeating a falsehood?
The Nordics are the perfect example of independent economic development coming under pressure to conform to the liberal model. Are you incapable of understanding the difference? Can you not distinguish between economic liberalism and political liberalism? If you believe that serious govt intervention in the economy is part of the liberal model then your understanding of liberalism is zero.

“There is a vast spectrum, which has a system of government you advocate?”
The old strawman argument.
A sign of an argument struggling for life.
Did I advocate a particular system?

You can begin your defense of liberal democracy whenever you’re ready.

A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 3:23 pm

Keep digging
I’m an advocate of liberal democracy, even with its known deficiencies.
I support a systemic cycle of analysis , review, definitive proposals and implementation of improvement.
You’ve decided to keep up your trenchant criticism of liberal democracy, but you are unable to articulate the system you seek to replace it with. You can’t even identify one of 193 countries that has a better model.
Negativity is pointless (and intellectually lazy), unless it is accompanied by a proposal and details of a specific, guaranteed, better future.

Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 3:50 pm

“You can’t even identify one of 193 countries that has a better model.”
Still going with the straw-man option I see.

“I support a systemic cycle of analysis , review, definitive proposals and implementation of improvement.”

Empty words.

You’ve had ample opportunity to expound on “a systemic cycle of analysis , review, definitive proposals and implementation of improvement” in regard to liberal democracy, but you choose to not do so.
Let’s have it.
Why have we not seen it?

You’ve had ample opportunity to refute my criticisms of liberal democracy but you choose to not do so.

But it’s not all bad news.
Escape from Plato’s Cave is always an option.

A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 6:36 pm

Didn’t I mention that vacuous criticism without providing any counter proposal (or solution) is intellectually lazy?
If you are unequivocally disdainful of liberal democracy, what do you propose to replace it with? And what guarantees can you provide that your preferred system of government will result in widespread prosperity, improved health and greater happiness/satisfaction for the population?

Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 8:12 pm

“what do you propose to replace it with?”
Have you not been paying attention? A true democracy will be anything its members want it to be.
My preferences are therefore irrelevant.

But your insistence on me laying out a structure in black and white is evidence for the authoritarian mindset that lies at the heart of liberalism.

Liberalism is supported by two personality types — those who enjoy laying down the law, and those who are so weak of character that they need others to do their thinking for them.
They actually feel safe and secure by not having to think. And it’s clear from your inability to mount a defense of liberalism which group you belong to.

“And what guarantees can you provide that your preferred system of government will result in widespread prosperity, improved health and greater happiness/satisfaction for the population?”

Since when has a liberal been concerned with the social good?
Oh yes, when election time rolls around.

The whole intent of liberal economics is to service the needs of the individual.
Here’s the manifesto of the UK liberal Party — “The Liberal Party exists to create a liberal society, in which every citizen shall possess liberty, property and security, and none shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity. Its chief care is for the rights and opportunities of the individual, and in all spheres it sets freedom first.”
Do you detect the weasel words there?
A professed regard for the social good, but a clear statement that its chief care is the individual.

Or there’s this from the Oz Libs — “we work towards a lean government that … maximises individual and private sector initiative…where the role of law and justice is maintained… equal opportunity for all Australians; and the encouragement and facilitation of wealth so that all may enjoy the highest possible standards of living, health, education and social justice… and that businesses and individuals – not government – are the true creators of wealth and employment. In short, we simply believe in individual freedom and free enterprise; and if you share this belief, then ours is the Party for you.”
Again we see a professed care for the social good that takes second place to the individual.

So don’t try claiming a regard for the social good and a regard for liberal democracy.
The two concepts are in conflict.

A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 8:43 pm

“A true democracy will be anything its members want it to be.”
Finally we’re making some progress.
Given that there are no widespread demands for fundamental change in our system of government, I believe it’s reasonable that you agree the members of society have decided that this is the model they support.
Thank you.

CanguroNovember 11, 2024 at 9:09 pm

SD, weasel words notwithstanding, the UK Liberal Party ceased to be in early 1988. Relevance please?

Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 9:21 pm

Canguro.

It’s still in existence.
They have a Constitution written 2021.

But it would not have mattered if it was 1821.

I was demonstrating the consistency of the anti-social nature of liberal priorities across the board.

Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 10:04 pm

“Finally we’re making some progress” says AC.

I suspected that AC was not paying attention.
I stated yesterday at 9.28pm that a true democracy must be anything its members want it to be.
That was repeated at 9.28 am today.
AC needs to focus.

But it gets worse.
“Given that there are no widespread demands for fundamental change in our system of government, I believe it’s reasonable that you agree the members of society have decided that this is the model they support.”
Now we really are in la-la land.

AC has introduced the Australian situation to divert attention from the attempt at global control that the liberal democracies engage in.
The Australian situation is not relevant because there is no major movement for change.
But we all know what the reaction would be if such a movement did develop.

The military interventions carried out regularly by the US and its allies, including us, are not about giving the troops an overseas holiday.
They are carried out to prevent the establishment of independent systems of governance.

That’s the true face of liberal democracy.
A system that is prepared to murder and destroy just to preserve an ideology.

I thank AC again for giving me the opportunity to draw attention to this horror story once more.

A CommentatorNovember 12, 2024 at 8:41 am

Just explain which liberal democracy has mass protests against liberal democracy.
Where are there examples of widespread disaffection with liberal democracy?
Only the US. Unfortunately.

Steve DavisNovember 12, 2024 at 8:53 am

Not only the US.

Keep your eye on Europe.

ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 11:57 am

AC:

Where are there examples of widespread disaffection with liberal democracy?

AC, you have heard of Les Gilets Jaunes in France, the Alternative für Deutschland in Germany, the Partij voor de Vrijheid in the Netherlands, Sverigedemokraterna in Sweden, the Fratelli d’Italia in Italy, or Prawo i Sprawiedliwość in Poland?

They are around, you know. The politics of using the liberties provided for by liberal democracy to challenge and constrain liberal democracy itself.

ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 12:10 pm

AC (November 10, 2024 at 4:13 pm)

… how about you describe the system you propose?

There is no “one system” that will rid us of all problems, in one fell swoop, once and for all eternity. The human condition is a moving target, and developing and implementing constructive public policy initiatives necessitates continuous incremental improvement, in a “We build our road as we travel” sort of a manner. Robert Nozick famously hit upon this very problem in his acclaimed 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia:

The preface of Anarchy, State, and Utopia contains a passage about “the usual manner of presenting philosophical work”—i.e., its presentation as though it were the absolute final word on its subject. Nozick believes that philosophers are really more modest than that and aware of their works’ weaknesses. Yet a form of philosophical activity persists which “feels like pushing and shoving things to fit into some fixed perimeter of specified shape.” The bulges are masked or the cause of the bulge is thrown far away so that no one will notice. Then “Quickly, you find an angle from which everything appears to fit perfectly and take a snapshot, at a fast shutter speed before something else bulges out too noticeably.” After a trip to the darkroom for touching up, “[a]ll that remains is to publish the photograph as a representation of exactly how things are, and to note how nothing fits properly into any other shape.”

Of course, Karl Marx beat Nozick to this insight by some 125 years, stating in the Communist Manifesto that:

The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionising the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society.

And that, consequently:

All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real conditions of life, and his relations with his kind.

(Emphasis mine)

I can’t, therefore, provide a complete and exhaustive description of how we should go about governing ourselves from hereon in.

Nobody can!

And anybody who says s/he can, is having you on. Wether due to ignorance or deceitful intent. Or perhaps a mix of both.

ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 1:13 pm

Over the last three days, I’ve repeatedly tried to post a reply to AC’s quest for alternative politics, only to receive “•Access Denied – GoDaddy Website Firewall”.

It’s just this one comment. Other comments, on other threads and on this one, post without problem.

Does GoDaddy have a problem with anarchist content? And the post in question doesn’t even mention the a-word.

CanguroNovember 12, 2024 at 1:31 pm

Arnd, the workaround is to write your post, cut and paste it into a vanilla file space (e.g. Notepad), then copy the first couple of sentences into the AIMN comment field and post.

Then click the edit link within the 20 minute timeframe, and copy the rest of your post into the AIMN field, adjusting for paragraph separation etc.

This gets around the GoDaddy blocking PITA (pain in the arse), and is endorsed by MT.

ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 2:26 pm

Thanks, Canguro. The resident “AIMN Whisperer”.

ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 2:33 pm

Let’s try this:

Given the reservations about “finite” or “ultimate* political schemes as indicated in my previous post, a broad direction for future policy development in western (post-)industrial societies in particular would include the following:

Firstly, we need to find ways of backing and complementing our liberal democratic POLITICAL order with a commensurate liberal democratic ECONOMIC order. Contrary to ubiquitous assumption and assertion, our contemporary Global Corporate Consumer Capitalism operates in violation of basic principles of liberty. It is not a FREE market economy!

ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 2:54 pm

Secondly, we do need fundamentally to review the basic operating principles of our contemporary liberal, representative, constitutional democracy. Most importantly, we need to (re-)define and clarify the actual rightful constitutional LIMITS of limited government.

ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 3:04 pm

Ok, so I chopped up my post into individual bits, and they seem to go up alright.

Except GoDaddy really doesn’t like my third point, about re-orienting our legal system. Is GoDaddy a bloody lawyer?

A CommentatorNovember 12, 2024 at 5:27 pm

“Not only the US.
Keep your eye on Europe”

Congratulations.
The main rallying points for the US and European opponents of liberal democracy are-
° immigration, particularly by those of non European descent
° the rights of minority groups, particularly the most sexually marginalised
° the role of women, including abortion
You must be delighted with your cohort of opponents of liberal democracy

Steve DavisNovember 12, 2024 at 5:48 pm

For a few deluded hours I had convinced myself that AC had adopted a more reasonable persona.

“You must be delighted with your cohort of opponents of liberal democracy”

What delights me is that many who were promised so much by liberal democracy propaganda are waking up to the con.

A CommentatorNovember 12, 2024 at 6:04 pm

Yes, in Europe and the US, extreme intolerance, ignorance, bigotry, sexism and racism are the key characteristics of the opponents of liberal democracy. Congratulations on your cohort.

Steve DavisNovember 12, 2024 at 7:05 pm

Repetition?
That’s all AC has?

He must be really kicking himself for posting a comment that made him look reasonable.

He must learn to guard against such weakness.

A CommentatorNovember 12, 2024 at 7:32 pm

Hardly
You retreated from your trenchant criticism of liberal democracy, to a more moderate view.
When I identified this, your dug yourself deeper into the extreme position.
It was reminiscent of you claim that economic facts, data and statistics are meaningless in a discussion about economics.
That was so hilarious, I see no reason to stop reminding you of your ridiculous statement.
Now, we’ve established that you think democracy is whatever people think democracy is.
That’s ok as long as you accept that overwhelmingly people in democratic nations prefer the system to its options.
And I’ll again point out that the major opponents of the democratic system are ignorant, homophobic, sexist, racists.
Keep cheering them on.

Steve DavisNovember 12, 2024 at 9:01 pm

“You retreated from your trenchant criticism of liberal democracy, to a more moderate view.”
This is not looking good for AC, he’s fantasizing.

“we’ve established that you think democracy is whatever people think democracy is.”

Oh no. He’s reverted to his serial fabricator mode. This is worse than I thought.
My actual statement was “A true democracy will be anything its members want it to be.”

AC on the other hand, even though supporting liberal democracy without actually outlining the reasons for his support, clearly prefers a democracy to be whatever the 1% want it to be.
And that throws some light on what has gone on here for a day or two.
AC has refused to argue a case for liberal democracy because he knows that path will expose the manipulation of democracy by elite interests.
He’s all for the 1%.

“And I’ll again point out…”
AC just cannot stop repeating himself.
Before we know it he’ll be repeating my arguments again, as he did earlier.
I’ll make it easy for him — he has my permission to repeat my arguments in dot form.

Now, if only I could teach him to join the dots.

CanguroNovember 12, 2024 at 10:55 pm

AC, given that you have a track record of strongly defending your points of view, understandably and admirably, I’m curious how you arrived at the position where you assert that “the major opponents of the democratic system are ignorant, homophobic, sexist, racists.”

Can you please provide examples or supporting evidence for this trenchant position. Who are these ‘major opponents’, and why have you labelled them as you have?

It would seem that you possess an uncommon depth of insight or insider knowledge to allege such egregious failings as ignorance, homophobia, sexism & racism.

To be fair to your argument, you ought to be able to cite who these opponents are. Otherwise, it would seem to be merely a wild rant, a shout into the breeze.

A CommentatorNovember 13, 2024 at 11:51 am

Are the increasingly popular movements supportive of immigration? Acceptance of asylum seekers? Do they seek greater diversity? Were they on board with marriage equality? Do they wish to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation and identity? Are they tolerant of others?
Brexit, EU, French, Italian, Hungarian, Austrian, Dutch, US (and more) elections are serious indicators.
The right are the disruptors and the trenchant critics of liberal democracy give comfort to these neo fascists.
Mindless verbose critics, that cannot offer a better, or even an alternative system of government resonate with the right wing, who are largely ignorant, disaffected white men.

ArndNovember 13, 2024 at 2:52 pm

AC,

… who are largely ignorant, disaffected white men.

Firstly, there’s mounting evidence that Trump, for example, did rather well with Latino and Black men, and women, including White women.

Secondly, you make it sound as if White men have nothing rightfully to be disaffected about! I am an able-bodied White cis male, and I can certainly see plenty to be disaffected about.

Others? Maybe not so much. I did, on these pages, reproach Bert Hetebry for his insouciant optimism, bordering on pollyannaish naïvité. I don’t think he sees any need fundamentally to question the precepts of so-called “liberal democracy”, and doesn’t understand, let alone feel any urge to look for alternatives to our present arrangements. You, AC, might be possessed of a similar “relaxed and comfortable” attitude. An attitude which some others – myself included – tend to discount as “smug and complacent”. I have held for some time now that this liberal middle-class self-approbation is one of the major forces driving increasing numbers of disaffected punters into the welcoming arms of reactionary populists.

Steve DavisNovember 13, 2024 at 3:36 pm

AC has refused to answer Canguro’s simple and precise question.
The question was — Who are the “major opponents of the democratic system” that are so disturbing to AC.

It cannot be the countries AC mentioned because they are all liberal democracies.

It cannot be those who swung to the right in recent EU elections because they were simply exercising their democratic right, and many will undoubtedly swing back next time.
It is impossible to tell what motivates individual voters. But AC knows.

A vote for the right is no indicator of opposition to democracy. Yet AC has declared the results of exercising voting rights to be a “serious indicator.” When they exercise their democratic right they are “disruptors”.
The true face of liberalism is revealed right there.

AC sees neo-fascism in protests from the right but cannot see it in the Gaza genocide. He sees neo-fascism in election results that are at odds with the liberal agenda because liberals, for all their fine words, actually fear democracy.

The problem we are seeing here with AC’s view of the world is the very serious problem that arises from the urge to condense the data, the information, and the facts that flow into our consciousness at a rate that we’ve not had to deal with in our entire evolutionary history.
Many people struggle to handle this onslaught, so in understandable desperation they engage in reductionism.
In order to deal with just the small chunk of reality that they are comfortable with, they compartmentalise.
They separate.
In doing so they remove the links between events that give clarity and understanding.

Those who are affected this way deal with it in different ways, and as we’ve seen over many months, AC uses the dot-point format as his escape mechanism.
The brevity of the dot-point format has its uses, but is also prone to excessive reductionism, the exclusion of context, and a false appearance of coherence and order.
It leads to complex matters that developed over decades or centuries being reduced to a few dot points. As we saw at Who Are the Narcissists where the referenda over control of Crimea, with a history covering decades, was reduced to a few dot points.

Simple logic tells us that isolating aspects of reality will result in a warped perception of reality.
Because unless a conscious effort is made to look for connections between compartments, the totality of reality will be missed.

We see no effort from AC to connect. Quite the opposite.
We saw that at Who Are the Narcissists where he was fixated on a memorandum signed in 1994 as though this single item was all that was significant in a complex relationship that developed over centuries and resulted in conflict.
We saw it at Pallywood Tactics, Al-Shifa Hospital and Israel’s Propaganda Effort where he used isolated details from the Hamas Charter to obscure the crimes occurring in the big picture. And for his noble attempt “to provide perspective” as he put it, he copped a hammering from all and sundry.

We see no effort from AC to connect in this current discussion.
For reasons that he will not disclose, he minimises by omission the very real suffering on a massive scale that has been the history of liberal democracy. And which continues today as we look on in disbelief at the brazen contempt that liberal democracy has for ordinary decent values and international law.

At Pallywood AC stated “I think too many people seek out opinions to reinforce their own, rather than specifically seeking to have their views dissected and debated. Opinions are more informed and sharper if they are available for critical examination.”
So why the reluctance to have his views and opinions of liberal democracy dissected and debated here?
Surely he would like to see his views more informed and sharper?
I’m here to help.
He can begin whenever he’s ready.

Steve DavisNovember 13, 2024 at 4:46 pm

Slight correction, the leader of Hungary refers to it as an illiberal democracy, but a democracy nonetheless.

Steve DavisNovember 14, 2024 at 5:28 am

It’s no wonder AC is in a tizz.
The iron grip of the liberal system on international finance and trade appears to be crumbling.

From ledgerinsights.com, 31 Oct 2024 — The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) has been involved with the mBridge cross border CBDC payment system for four years. Today the General Manager of the BIS, Agustín Carstens, said the project has been handed over to the central banks. They are the central banks of China, Hong Kong, Saudi Arabia, Thailand and the UAE. (Basically a BRICS takeover. SD)
mBridge uses blockchain to enable commercial banks to make cross border payments using wholesale central bank digital currencies (wCBDCs). The design supports local currency payments. The G20 has goals of making cross border payments faster, cheaper and more transparent. mBridge is one of the potential solutions to make that happen.
China was responsible for the technology working group and recently shared plans to open source the blockchain-based software. (WOW !!!)
During the recent BRICS summit, discussion of a BRICS Bridge payment system continued. Given China and the UAE are BRICS members, alongside sanctioned countries Iran and Russia, the perception that mBridge could in any way overlap with BRICS Bridge put the BIS in a tricky position.
Talking today at the Santander International Banking Conference, Mr Carstens addressed the issue head on. “Whatever projects we put together should not be a conduit to violate sanctions,” he said. “mBridge is not the BRICS Bridge and I have to say that categorically. mBridge was not created to cater (to) the needs of BRICS. It was put together to satisfy broad central bank necessities.”
According to Bloomberg, the issue was discussed during last week’s IMF meetings. The potential for the BIS to withdraw was considered.
However, Mr Carstens stated that politics was not the driver of the BIS handover. (Yeah, right.)
“I would say that the project has been so successful that we can declare that we’ve graduated out of that project. The BIS is leaving that project. Not because it was a failure and not because of political considerations, but mostly because we have been involved for four years and it is at a level where the partners can carry it on by themselves,” said Mr Carstens.
The mBridge project progressed to the minimum viable project (MVP) stage in June, although Mr Carstens said is still needs many years of work. “mBridge is not mature enough to start operating,” he added. (He hopes. SD)
In a statement, the mBridge Steering Committee expressed its appreciation to the BIS, saying the handover would allow the BIS to redirect resources to other innovation projects at earlier stages.
“The project team remains fully committed to unlocking the full potential of the mBridge platform and will continue to explore the potential for advancing the platform from the MVP to the full production stage,” the Committee stated.
Meanwhile, earlier this week the Bank of China (Hong Kong) announced it is the first fully operational Hong Kong bank that has integrated with mBridge. It will use the platform for select corporate customer payments.

So while claiming that the BIS is not political, Carstens stated that BIS could not be involved in sanctions avoidance. The only sanctions that have legal standing are those imposed by the UN. But it appears from this that the BIS has been assisting US imposed sanctions.

Fear in the West is palpable. From Reuters — Josh Lipsky at the Atlantic Council think-tank said the BRICS debate showed payment systems have become a geopolitical issue. The BRICS summit hosted by Russia earlier this month had raised more concerns among Western powers about cross-border digital currency ambitions, he said.
“If there’s even a possibility that mBridge could be helpful to those ambitions the West wants no part of it,” Lipsky said.
“But it’s fair to ask what the consequences of this decision are. China will surely continue the work, and now the Fed, which is a member of the BIS, will have even less visibility into the project.”

The question now is — Will the Empire strike back? Its history says Yes.

Steve DavisNovember 15, 2024 at 1:20 pm

The activities of the Bank for International Settlements are worth a deeper look.

I have referred in the past to the liberal democratic order as having criminal intent.
That was not merely hyperbole.
The admitted action from the bank CEO seen in my previous comment, can be seen as criminal activity.
The CEO of BIS made it clear that BIS could not be associated with projects that become “a conduit to violate sanctions.”
In other words, the bank assists sanctions.
It sees the facilitating of sanctions as such a crucial part of its activities that it cannot tolerate even an off-shoot organisation such as mBridge working its way around sanctions. This shows how thoroughly politicized the BIS has become.

The legal situation can be seen from the following — From cambridge.org — “In addition to being a major attack on the principle of self-determination, unilateral measures not only adversely affect the rights to international trade and to navigation but also the basic human rights of innocent civilians.”
And from the UN — “On 26 September 2014, the Human Rights Council adopted resolution 27/21 and Corr.1 on human rights and unilateral coercive measures, establishing the mandate. The most recent renewal of the resolution was on October 2023, HRC resolution 54/15. These resolutions stress that unilateral coercive measures and practices are contrary to international law, international humanitarian law, the UN Charter and the norms and principles governing peaceful relations among States …”

The impact of sanctions on developing countries such as Venezuela are immense. The equivalent in fact, to the effects of weapons of mass destruction.

From The Lancet, June 2019 — Since 2014, 43 unilateral, coercive measures have been applied against Venezuela by the US Administration. These have effectively paralysed the economy, blocked oil exportation globally, and frozen Venezuelan financial assets abroad while denying access to international financial systems. This loss in oil revenue and assets has amounted to a shortfall worth billions of US dollars, prohibiting the importation of essential, lifesaving products.
The impact of the US sanctions on the Venezuelan population cannot be overstated. More than 300 000 Venezuelans are at risk due to a lack of lifesaving medications and treatment. An estimated 80 000 HIV-positive patients have had no antiretroviral therapy since 2017. Access to medication such as insulin has been curtailed because US banks refuse to handle Venezuelan payments for this. Thousands to millions of people have been without access to dialysis, cancer treatment, or therapy for hypertension and diabetes. Particular to children has been the delay of vaccination campaigns or lack of access to antirejection medications after solid organ transplants in Argentina. Children with leukaemia awaiting bone marrow transplants abroad are now dying. Funds for such health-assistance programmes come from the PDVSA state oil company. Those funds are now frozen. Food imports dropped by 78% in 2018 compared to 2013. The very serious threat to health and harm to human life caused by these US sanctions are thought to have contributed to an excess of 40 000 deaths in 2017–18 alone.
The UN Human Rights Council reported that “the use of economic sanctions for political purposes violates human rights and the norms of international behavior. Such actions may precipitate man-made humanitarian catastrophes of unprecedented proportions. Regime change through economic measures likely to lead to the denial of basic human rights and indeed possibly to starvation, has never been an accepted practice of international relations.” These sanctions fit the definition of collective punishment of the civilian population, as described by the Geneva (Article 33) and Hague conventions, to which the USA is a signatory. These sanctions are also illegal under international and federal US law. Given the intentional action to destroy a people, in part or in whole, the US economic sanctions and their effect on the preventable mortality of Venezuelans fit the UN definition of genocide.
Furthermore, the US State Department recently boasted about the economic hardship that they have caused through their now expunged communiqué, released on April 24, 2019. They assert that “US policy has and continues to prevent the Venezuelan Government from participating in the international market and has led to the freezing of its overseas assets”. US National Security Advisor John Bolton stated that they are backing the illegal coup in Venezuela, as “it will make a big difference to the United States economically if we could have American oil companies invest in and produce the oil capabilities in Venezuela”.

So, straight from the mouth of Jon Bolton, the US uses sanctions to exploit and plunder. The BIS supports this.

And that is the history of liberal democracy.

CanguroNovember 15, 2024 at 1:48 pm

Lest we forget: I am reminded, on the back of Steve Davis’s latest post, of the comments made in 1966 by Clinton’s Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, on the human cost of American sanctions against Iraq.

When asked to comment on the reported deaths of close to half a million Iraqi children; she responded by saying that “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price — we think the price is worth it.”

I don’t think this is out of character with regard to American foreign policy. Examples of such brutal indifference to the sufferings of others (as in, not Americans) are legion. The political instabilities that characterise most of the South American countries are by & large legacies of American interference; ditto SE Asia, the Middle East and Central Asia, Caribbean countries too. The melding of commercial interests with the willingness of American governments to impose military interventions in support of American corporations is well established, as is, as Steve Davis has pointed out, the continued use of sanctions to throttle and weaken foreign regimes whether duly elected or otherwise, for their own – American – benefit.

What we are witnessing, and have been witnessing for well over a century, is a country exercising its considerable power over lesser nations by virtue of promulgation of policies of deliberate cruelty & inhumanity, in order to harvest benefits for itself. The savagery of the United States of America ought, I would argue, be something that is forced to the front of planetary consciousness and the planet’s peoples ought, as much as they are able, to do everything in their power to disenfranchise that criminal nation and weaken it by whatever means available.

On a side note of decreasing relevance, I see the commentator AC has clearly fallen down a rabbit hole and found himself incapacitated and unable to respond to direct questioning.

ArndNovember 15, 2024 at 4:37 pm

Thanks for the reminder, Canguro.

Maddy A. may well already be be roasting in a special place in hell reserved for women who don’t help the children of other women.

Jon ChestersonNovember 15, 2024 at 5:07 pm

Canguro – ‘Lest we forget: I am reminded, on the back of Steve Davis’s latest post, of the comments made in 1966 by Clinton’s Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, on the human cost of American sanctions against Iraq. When asked to comment on the reported deaths of close to half a million Iraqi children; she responded by saying that “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price — we think the price is worth it.”’

Heavens did she say that! Plain sight and still we are friends with the USA – Unconscionable. 1966, Clinton, surely later? Yet I have never doubted the horror of American foreign policy nor how they seek to justify it.

Liberty should be screaming, sinking in the mud with condemnation and disgust.

Steve DavisNovember 15, 2024 at 5:51 pm

All true Jon.

Available on youtube.

Would have had a gazillion hits by now.

ArndNovember 15, 2024 at 6:15 pm

That quote is from 1996, not 1966!

60 Minutes (5/12/96)

CanguroNovember 15, 2024 at 6:17 pm

Yea, Arnd… must have had one eye closed as I hit the keyboard. 🙁

paul walterNovember 15, 2024 at 7:05 pm

Enjoyed Steve Davis Mencken quote early.

Elephants?

The worlds first mobile organic vaccum-cleaner.

ArndNovember 15, 2024 at 8:13 pm

Hey, paul, Mencken has made many more pithy observations, including a definition of democracy as “the belief that the people know what they want, and deserve to get it, good and hard!”

By the way, Steve Davis is wrong!

What we are seeing is the inevitable decline in standards that we should expect of a system [liberal democracy] that has based itself on the adoration of the individual, and what is worse, an adoration of the whims of the individual.

Steve, please take note: liberal democracy in its conventional (bourgeois) definition is based, not just on the adoration, but on the outright deification of money, and consequently on the glorification of the whims of, not all individuals, but only those individuals who control money.

Go back through your lengthy and closely reasoned posts: do they not all point to the same single problem: the distortion and subversion of political liberty by vested commercial interests?

Hence the need to back up liberal democracy in the political sphere with commensurate democratic principles and processes in the commercial sphere.

Steve DavisNovember 15, 2024 at 8:55 pm

” and consequently on the glorification of the whims of, not all individuals, but only those individuals who control money.”

Not so Arnd.

If that was indeed the case they would be un-electable.
People would eventually see through it.

They curry favour with the masses by telling them their differences are adorable, that their whims are significant and important.
And the masses lap it up because liberalism has given them nothing of real substance to give their lives meaning.

But back to Mencken.
This from Rossleigh just now, just for AC — “For every complex problem, there’s a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” H.L. Mencken

paul walterNovember 15, 2024 at 11:57 pm

With Meckhen the first quote I read of his was,

“Puritanism- the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy”.

You can spend hours reading Mencken quotes and get to revel in your own inner curmugeon.

As to the other, not getting involved. But little doubt much revolves around selfish individualism and its bastard children, victimhood and entitlement. Selfish individualism has been pushed to the max by those who want the consumerist treadmill kept running, but it is only commodiication, if only the poor schmucks ever got a chance to think on it.

ArndNovember 16, 2024 at 1:19 am

Hi Steve,

If that was indeed the case they would be un-electable.
People would eventually see through it.

There’s another Mencken quote about that:

No-one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people!

Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 6:07 am

Arnd, yes indeed, that’s one of my favourites.

And they keep us dumbed down by continually stirring immigration issues and the like.

They keep us focused on difference to keep us isolated, and unaware of the potential for positive change that exists in unity and solidarity.
They want people to see themselves as different.

ArndNovember 16, 2024 at 6:36 am

Good morning, Steve:

They want people to see themselves as different.

Or as Brian insisted:

“You are all individuals!”

And the crowd replied, in unison:

“Yes! We are all individuals!”

A profound insight about humans that Brian hit on there and wanted to communicate. Especially if you consider that, at least according to his mother, Brian was not actually The Saviour.

Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 7:42 am

Thanks for that one Arnd.

I’m gunna borrow that !

Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 8:29 am

I just came across a youtube video from one month ago that covers the matters that came up in this discussion.

I’ve only watched the first nine minutes, so feel free to criticize or praise.

Imperialism, social democracy, and fascism – Garland Nixon & Joti Brar, ep 22

I know, I know, I’ve been dismissive of videos as a medium for political discussion, and still hold that view, but it seems to be evermore commonplace so I guess I’ll have to adjust.

A great improvement on the format would be to restrict the length to 10 mins or so, for those like me with the attention span of a goldfish.

ArndNovember 16, 2024 at 10:47 am

Cool. Except, and as you say: tl;dv (too long; didn’t view). I may get back to it, though. I try to keep an eye peeled for views I do not necessarily agree with.

I googled Yoti Brar. She’s the leader of the British Marxist-Leninists. And good on her – but I have long since concluded that state communism will invariably generate more problems than solutions.

I did some googling myself, and ran across Dr. John R. Ehrenfeld. He and his lot seem to provide quite a few reasonably interesting philosophical prompts, notwithstanding the distinct possibility that they are textbook examples of:

Conservative or Bourgeois Socialism

A part of the bourgeoisie is desirous of redressing social grievances in order to secure the continued existence of bourgeois society.

To this section belong economists, philanthropists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. This form of socialism has, moreover, been worked out into complete systems.

Communist Manifesto, Part III

Of course, Marx most expressly included the anarchists in this unflattering category. But with the philosophical insolence one might typically expect from anarchists, I dismiss that as his problem, not mine!

Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 12:33 pm

Good comment Arnd.
The vid is long, but it’s well worth a look. They jump straight into it.

From the little I know of the UK Marxist Leninists they seem to have the virtue of tolerance of other views.
You referred to the bourgeois socialists, and I’m with Marx on that. They end up stalling progress.
Joti Brar covers it a little also.

“I have long since concluded that state communism will invariably generate more problems than solutions.”

Ah yes, but keep in mind, that’s not the goal.
And Evolution never stops.

A CommentatorNovember 16, 2024 at 1:13 pm

I’ve been busy for a few days, but it seems there are no new insights on the issue under discussion.
In this context I’m willing to make the following observations-
° the system of liberal democracy is our status quo. It is known and well understood.
° no one pretends it is perfect and it’s deficiencies are widely discussed. Advocacy of careful, informed improvement is rational and reasonable
° liberal democracy has produced the vast majority of prosperous countries, with the highest life expectancy and generally the populations with the highest levels of satisfaction
° those proposing significant change to our systems of government and economic regulation remain unable to articulate an alternative
° inability to articulate a compelling case for change, with a clear rationale/guarantee of a better future, is only pointless whinging
° the onus of proof should always remain focused on the whingers who have no positive proposals to advance, particularly the verbose, self important ones

Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 1:53 pm

AC has his head so deep in the sand that he has not noticed that no-one has come to support him. He’s a lone voice in the wilderness trying to convince himself that he’s the voice of reason.
Liberal democracy “is known and well understood” he tells us. Yes, so well known that no-one sees fit to offer support.

“liberal democracy has produced the vast majority of prosperous countries, with the highest life expectancy and generally the populations with the highest levels of satisfaction” he tells us, but does not want to discuss where the prosperity came from and who paid a price for our smug level of satisfaction.

For AC the 500 thousand Iraqi children killed to preserve liberal democracy was worth it.
For AC the Palestinian father holding his shredded child in his arms is a whinger.

My disgust is beyond expression.

A CommentatorNovember 16, 2024 at 2:06 pm

“AC has his head so deep in the sand that he has not noticed that no-one has come to support him.”
Hilarious!!!
Unlike you, I don’t base my comments or views on popularity, or a yearning for cognitive reinforcement.
I’ll leave that to you.
But rather than try to articulate , propose or define a system of government, you (yet again) lapse into “look over there” tactics
Hopeless

ArndNovember 16, 2024 at 4:05 pm

AC, I don’t know whether you have expended any effort in trying to make sense of my previous posts indicating where I think we ought to take democracy from here – GoDaddy certainly did not approve of my elucidations.

Broadly speaking, I am with Steve Davis here: the liberal democratic project that developed in the political West over the last 250 years, commendable and successful as it presents itself, was underwritten by, and is simply unthinkable without, Eurocentric global colonialism and, since the end of WWII, US-centric corporate colonialism (aka “Coca-colonialism”).

Three broad subject areas need addressing.

Firstly, we need to find ways of containing and house-training capitalism.

Secondly, we need fundamentally to re-define and re-negotiate the social contract. Most significantly, the actual limits of “limited government” need to be defined.

Third, we need to embark on a course of sustained reform with the aim of changing the Rule of Law into a “Rule of Reason”.

Of course, these three subject areas are very closely related and interdependent, and consequently any change in one of them is contingent on corresponding changes in the others

A CommentatorNovember 16, 2024 at 4:53 pm

Here’s a little context about my participation here.
° I have a very high regard for the people that created this site. They have sought (successfully) to make it an intelligent, accessible and engaging blog.
° I have no wish to reply to every comment directed to me, or participate on every thread and every subject
° l have zero respect for verbose, opinionated, self important people that try to overwhelm opposing views with sheer volume and relentless whinging, but without offering solution. They appear to have succeeded in discouraging a few previous participants. It is therefore reasonable to push back on them, and that might as well be me from time to time
° I’ve previously identified that democracy has various shades of grey, but the verbose self important type here, didn’t differentiate between the grey of democracies
° If people want to talk about the policies of the USA, go ahead. But “USA” isn’t a universal synonym for “liberal democracy” . I’ve previously made that point. Bland, lazy, thoughtless characterisation should be called out.
° If you wish to delve into the historical consequences of colonialism, go ahead. But don’t ignore or
contextualise the contemporary colonists now disrupting generations of European peace.
° Have you ever seen such a puerile debating point as the one the suggests that a point of view has less credibility if people on this blog don’t chime in with support. That view is beyond pathetic
° But thank you for your informed perspective, I’ll think about it and reply at some point.

ArndNovember 16, 2024 at 6:19 pm

AC, thanks for your reply, and I am genuinely interested in your considered response at some later date.

I’d like to revise two of your points:

First, I agree that “‘USA’ isn’t a universal synonym for ‘liberal democracy’”. Otoh, the USA are almost universally accepted as the dominant exemplar of the political West. The US president is routinely referred to as “The leader of the free world”, and as many nations (NATO, Taiwan, Australia) are finally forced to realise, if the USA can’t or won’t fulfil the role of “Free World Hegemon”, those other nations need to start looking after themselves. That policy shift will have huge consequences and implications.

Second, I am not primarily interested in the historical injustices of Eurocentric colonialism and how the West might atone for them. I am interested in the political and economic implications of the (internally) democratic West now not being able anymore to capitalise on (read: exploit) less advanced nations.

The dynamics and complexities of this subject have attracted my attention way back in the 80s. I had moved to Stuttgart and was furnishing my flat. Unpacking my IKEA shelves, I was surprised to find plenty of “Made in GDR” stickers. Having been manufactured in East Germany made those budget furniture, as well as “Privileg” household appliances, etc., affordable for West German blue collar workers, and provided a source of income for East German industrial workers, even if at much lower wages. I recognised in this no less than a commercial version of commercial apartheid, if you will.

After reunification, this dynamic collapsed, and the net result is the rapid expansion of the German minimum wage sector, which is now the largest in the EU. And which arguably fuels the popularity of the right-wing AfD.

On the same note, during my more recent visits to Berlin I could not fail to notice the almost ubiquitous presence of Polish subcontractors on just about every construction site. Living in Poland, they can afford to undercut German trades, who actually need to charge enough to pay for their families’ living expenses in Germany.

Similar dynamics can be uncovered in many other national economies. Australia’s retail sector – The Good Guys, Harvey Norman, Bunnings – would be unthinkable without cheap consumer goods from South East Asia. And why do you think Australian politicians are so keen to attract Pacific Islanders for menial jobs like fruit picking or aged care?

The much commented hollowing out of the USA manufacturing sector over the last decades, and it shifting to China, clearly precipitated the rise of MAGA. Understandable … – except that Trump’s remedy, namely the imposition of punitive import duties, will price those consumer goods out of reach of many Americans, and really cannot be expected to remedy the fundamental problems inherent in capitalism.

In short, the so-called “Free Market Capitalism” that over the past centuries has generated the “fool’s paradise” wealth of western democracies simply IS NOT A SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS MODEL. It never has been, and it is now running up against its structural limits in a big way. As is the hallowed western notion of “liberal democracy” that has been riding on the back of capitalism since their combined inception.

Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 7:08 pm

The twists and turns of AC’s debating style are a revelation to behold.

Take this for example — “I’ve previously identified that democracy has various shades of grey, but the verbose self important type here, didn’t differentiate between the grey of democracies”
That is a falsehood.
Check my second comment — November 10, 2024 at 12:47 pm, where I stated “Democracy has many virtues but also serious potential weaknesses…By exploiting the weakness in representative democracy, a healthy diversity of views that should be a feature of a robust system have been replaced by an ideology; liberalism.
So successful has this takeover been, that the western democracies are known as liberal democracies. And woe betide any country that strays from the liberal formula in establishing a form of governance suitable to it’s unique circumstances.”

So I actually went to some trouble to differentiate between various forms of democracy and directed my criticism at liberal democracy.

This is not the first time that AC has been caught fabricating.
Check out Who Are The Narcissists where AC was not only caught fabricating, but insisted I discuss a conversation that took place in his head.

AC is a serial fabricator.

A CommentatorNovember 16, 2024 at 10:17 pm

“AC is a serial fabricator.”
Trying to win a point by-
° suggesting credibility is based on likes
° saying economic data, information and facts are “meaningless” in an economic discussion
° makes provocative comments and retreats/modifies when challenged
° stuck in permanent whinging mode, without the capacity or intellect to propose solutions or options
It’s beyond pathetic and hilariously embarrassing

Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 10:35 pm

Economic data are indeed meaningless when presented without context.

As for the retreats/modifies, AC should provide a reference for that or it’s just another porkie.

Michael TaylorNovember 16, 2024 at 11:01 pm

Thank you, AC. That was a huge compliment.

Carol and I are enjoying our first break in almost six years, travelling around the Scottish Highlands.

A CommentatorNovember 16, 2024 at 11:09 pm

You don’t qualify your comments, you retreat under pressure, so let just repeat a few of the comments you’ve made-
#/.All the liberal democracies have become clown shows, including ours (note – “All liberal democracies”
#/.As their clown world disintegrates, the authoritarianism that lies at the heart of liberalism comes to the fore with a crackdown on dissent.
#/. By exploiting the weakness in representative democracy, a healthy diversity of views that should be a feature of a robust system have been replaced by an ideology; liberalism.
#/.Anyone paying attention will have noticed that the world has become more chaotic since the fall of the Soviet Union.
#/. So there’s a stark reminder of the weakness of representative democracy and the danger of liberal democracy — the rules of international morality do not apply.
Then, when challenged, Steve either sooks or qualifies/moderates his comments.
++++++
Now, with regards to economics, can you advise of the context that is required for… 20% interest rates, double digit inflation, a 40% fall in the value of a currency, devoting more of the economy to the military than any NATO country.
They’re the facts (and more) you claimed are meaningless.
Pathetic, self important and verbose.

A CommentatorNovember 16, 2024 at 11:15 pm

Hi Michael, I think you do a great job here with the most difficult group of consumers in the blogosphere!
Scotland in winter is a delight!
My first experience of snow in a city was in Edinburgh, many years ago. It was spectacular
Friendly, funny and self deprecating Scots, with breathtaking scenery, cosy pubs and hearty food.
I’m sure you’ll have a sensational time, and please pass on my best wishes to Carol.

Jon ChestersonNovember 16, 2024 at 11:19 pm

A wee poem for you Michael and Carol while you are over there, slight chance you might have seen it before. Sharing in the spirit of your adventure and don’t drink the stills dry –

And so I look on –
the clan as ne’er it shall be,
mists scroll onto m’
highland seas; moon an’
tartan lay down o’ th’ Clyde,
shimmer an’ sheen
of m’ snare.

The rest of it is over here on AP: https://allpoetry.com/poem/15324132-Cloudy-Isle-by-Barddylbach

Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 11:46 pm

OK, let’s go through them.
And thanks to AC for giving me the opportunity to put my case again.

“All the liberal democracies have become clown shows, including ours”
True. AC can dispute that whenever he’s ready.

“As their clown world disintegrates, the authoritarianism that lies at the heart of liberalism comes to the fore with a crackdown on dissent.” True, with evidence given in support. AC can refute that whenever he’s ready.

“By exploiting the weakness in representative democracy, a healthy diversity of views that should be a feature of a robust system have been replaced by an ideology; liberalism.” True, with evidence given, AC can refute that whenever he’s ready.

“Anyone paying attention will have noticed that the world has become more chaotic since the fall of the Soviet Union.” True, with evidence given, he can refute that whenever he’s ready.

“So there’s a stark reminder of the weakness of representative democracy and the danger of liberal democracy — the rules of international morality do not apply.” True, with evidence given, he can refute that whenever he’s ready.

So where’s the “qualifies/moderates his comments” that it’s been stated I’m guilty of?
Yep, more fabrication from AC.

In regard to the economic data AC suddenly introduced to a discussion, it’s all meaningless if presented without context.
For example, a 20% interest rate is most likely from the central bank dampening a booming economy.

But the fact is that this is pointless anyway.
I could dig out economic data about Australia, or UK, or US, or China that on the surface looks bad, but ultimately it means nothing. None of the major economies are about to go down the gurgler.
It’s just pointless noise.

But fabrication?
Ah, yes. That has a quality all of its own.

Michael TaylorNovember 17, 2024 at 12:06 am

We do love it here, AC. We’ll be in our favourite village, Pitlochry for my 70th. Forecast for the day is -3° overnight and a top of 1° during the day. Snow is possible.

Jon, we will travel up to the Old Pulteney distillery at Wick and will buy every bottle of Stroma they have.

A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 12:19 am

In the past, I think I’ve mentioned my fondness for Scotland. But going for a birthday celebration, that makes it even better
There’s nothing better than a wee dram after being out in the bracing highland chill.
I love the conviviality of the Scots
I’ve just had a look at Pitlochry, beautiful!
And I’m envious!

Jon ChestersonNovember 17, 2024 at 12:43 am

Ah but y’ cannit take it with you Michael, and they’ll not let you back in the country with it all.

A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 9:16 am

Your standard tactic is to make an over the top, provocative comment without qualification.
Under pressure or challenge, you modify or retreat.
You then try to overwhelm opposing views with the volume of self important babble.
It appears to be a compulsive disorder about having the last word in every exchange.
It’s time for this to be (repeatedly) indentified.
° “clown shows” according to you- Norway, New Zealand, Iceland, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Ireland, Switzerland…
° credibility is related to need to have others chime in with support. How embarrassing for you.
° high inflation, punishing interest rates (that continue to increase), a currency that continues to fall, are “meaningless” when discussing economics (now retreating/qualifying)
° keep digging that hole for yourself

Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 10:29 am

“clown shows” indeed.

Who can forget the UK circus where the buffoon Bojo was Ringmaster until he wasn’t, and the lettuce that lasted longer than one of his replacements. As for the others on his list, they are beset by protests because they are clown shows. Liberal democracy is failing as a moral inspiration and failing in practical terms, hence the rise in protests across the board and the repressive quelling of dissent that follows, that has been referred to, and that AC will not discuss. No problem, his choice. But the quelling of dissent undermines all the alleged virtues of liberal democracy that are claimed to place it at the apex of political development.

But in regard to others chiming in with support, it’s great to see that at long last I’ve found a substantial point on which AC and I are in agreement.
AC has chimed in to support me.
He said “… don’t ignore or contextualise the contemporary colonists now disrupting generations of European peace.”

This is a great step forward for AC. He has now shown that he has the integrity to reverse a strongly held position, so full marks to him for that.

He refers of course to the colonization of Ukraine by the US, which has not only disrupted the peace of Europe but also has the very real possibility to progress to a 3rd world war.

And full marks also to AC for detecting the features of colonization that can be seen in Ukraine, but are never referred to as such by the despicable Western media.

Those features are — the setting up of a puppet government amenable to the policies of the colonizer, the privatization of national resources in which foreign corporations now have an interest, the presence of the colonizer’s military in the country, the off-shore training of the colony’s military where the ideals and aspirations of the colonizer can be instilled more effectively — it’s a text-book case of colonization.

And the result of course, that I hope AC will comment on further now that he has a firm foundation, is the ruin of the colonized country.
The ruin of colonized countries is the story of colonization in a nutshell.
And it is the story of the wealth behind the champions of liberal democracy.

A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 10:34 am

More symptoms of a compulsive obsessive disorder.
A craving for cognitive reinforcement and an overwhelming desire to misrepresent, combined with an over inflated sense of importance.
Keep digging

CanguroNovember 17, 2024 at 11:36 am

“The ruin of colonized countries is the story of colonization in a nutshell. And it is the story of the wealth behind the champions of liberal democracy.”

Clear-eyed, unprejudiced, it’s hard to disagree…

The destruction of South American societies began in the 15th century and continued for the next 500 years:
The destruction of African societies also began many centuries ago and continued into the modern era:
The destruction of South-East Asian societies began in the 16th century and continued into the modern era:
The destruction of Australian indigenous societies began in the 18th century and continues to these days:
The wholesale destruction of North American indigenous societies occurred from late 15th century onwards:

In all of these examples, white-skinned colonialists prospered whilst those colonised were exploited – murdered, enslaved, raped & pillaged, exterminated en masse. Monuments praising the debauchery of colonial butchers adorn cities across Europe and North America. Initial American wealth was built on the basis of the exploitation of African slaves. England, Spain, Portugal, Belgium & France all prospered by virtue of exploitation of colonised peoples.

The history of colonisation is ugly, brutal, tragic… there is nothing whatsoever to celebrate; Read (or watch) Jared Diamond’s Guns, Germs and Steel, same for Sven Lindqvist’s Exterminate all the Brutes.

Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 12:02 pm

“… an overwhelming desire to misrepresent”
But what have I misrepresented?

Surely I interpreted AC’s reference to “contemporary colonists” correctly 🙂

Ah, I see what’s happened.
I’ve been warning AC for months that brevity and vagueness are impediments to the development of a logical argument, but what would old mate Steve know? And so we saw brevity and vagueness in the one dot-point.

Did I hasten to exploit this vulnerability?
Everyone knows that’s just not me.

Come on buddy, surely this is good enough for a laugh.
At least a chuckle.

How about a wry grin?

Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 12:06 pm

Canguro, thank you.

A great summary, and much needed.

A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 12:34 pm

When did you decide “all liberal democracies” didn’t mean all of them?
Can you explain how Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Ireland, Switzerland New Zealand etc are “clown shows”?
Did you notice that when I listed those countries you tried to change the subject to the government of the UK, but 4 Prime Ministers ago?
Can you detail how getting support on this blog site adds to your credibility?
Are you able to explain why economic facts, data and statistics are meaningless in a discussion about economics?

CanguroNovember 17, 2024 at 1:02 pm

AC, your partiality is noted. On November 12, 2024 at 10:55 pm I wrote:

Can you please provide examples or supporting evidence for this trenchant position. Who are these ‘major opponents’, and why have you labelled them as you have?

It would seem that you possess an uncommon depth of insight or insider knowledge to allege such egregious failings as ignorance, homophobia, sexism & racism.

To be fair to your argument, you ought to be able to cite who these opponents are. Otherwise, it would seem to be merely a wild rant, a shout into the breeze.

You ignored my questions. Yet here you are, asking Steve Davis for detail to support his comments.

Seems like you like to play the game of cherry-picking; no doubt you will criticise SD for ignoring you or pointing out your hypocrisy.

Pot, kettle, black, would seem an appropriate descriptor of your presence in these pages.

Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 1:34 pm

Ok, Ok, there’ll be no laugh, no chuckle, not even a wry grin.

“Can you explain how Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Ireland, Switzerland New Zealand etc are “clown shows”?” Already done that, this is getting tiresome.

“Did you notice that when I listed those countries you tried to change the subject to the government of the UK, but 4 Prime Ministers ago?”
No change of subject, because the UK is a great example of the clown show. Your “4 Prime Ministers ago” adds to that. Can you not see it? Do I have to define what a clown show is now?

“Can you detail how getting support on this blog site adds to your credibility?”
You are doing that for me with every comment.
Your “4 Prime ministers” being but one example. I won’t even mention your reference to the US colonization of Ukraine.

A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 2:32 pm

Hilarious! You can’t help yourself.
Let’s make it direct.
How is Iceland (specifically ) a clown show?
Given that “all liberal democracies are clown shows” exactly what system of government do you propose?
How exactly does getting someone to agree with you, on this blog, make your comments more credible?

Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 3:57 pm

How is Iceland a clown show?

AC has forgotten already how Iceland fell for the lies of the free marketeers, aka liberal economists, and deregulated the banks. AC loves economic stats so I’ll leave it to him to fill in the details that led to Iceland having to be bailed out.
Iceland did to itself what the US did to Chile to “make the economy scream.” That’s a clown show.

“How exactly does getting someone to agree with you, on this blog, make your comments more credible?” By having them provide evidence for my points, as AC has done. And I thank him for that.

“exactly what system of government do you propose?” As stated previously, any system based on fairness, cooperation, mutual respect and development would be an advance on the present liberal system that is predatory and murderous. Does AC have a memory problem? Or does AC not have a problem with predation and murder?

A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 5:16 pm

I’ve already pointed out my rationale for participation here.
I’ve been exchanging direct and testing views with the founders of this site for the best part of 2 decades.
Their willingness to accommodate such diversity of opinions and characters is outstanding, and I don’t wish to take advantage of their hospitality.
I don’t reply to every question to me, I don’t participate on every thread, I don’t comment on every issue every day.
I think others might show respect to the founders and their objectives, rather than hounding some participants out.
I have also explained my recognition of the flaws in liberal democracy. I’ve said I’m entirely comfortable with proposals to review, recommend, improve and implement informed, considered change.
Changes to a well established system of government should never be a roll of the dice, or “here’s an (untested) option/idea, let’s try it”
The status quo, and its careful reform doesn’t need detailed explanation, by definition it is the known.
My view is that the onus is entirely on those advocating radical change to make a compelling case. To provide details of their proposed system or solution. They must provide evidence of success, guarantees that the population will be better off- prosperity, health, life expectancy, life satisfaction.
Without taking responsibility for detailing a solution, commentary amounts to nothing more than pointless whining.
This is generally acceptable.
My problem is with compulsive, self important, verbose, vacuous types who try to overwhelm those with an opposing views with sheer volume, rather than intellect.
Fortunately, there seems to be only one of them here.

Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 6:10 pm

AC asked for the reason that Iceland is a clown show, but now does not want to discuss it.
He walks away as though nothing happened.
He asks for a response, he gets a response, and he treats it with contempt.

He has diverted attention from that failure with a repeat of his pledge of loyalty and respect for this site, a pledge that is meaningless. And twice?? What’s going on here?
If he really respected the site he would not engage in fabrications, or insist that others discuss conversations that take place only in his head.
I could overlook an occasional lapse, but these are regularly trotted out.
It is AC who is disrespecting the site.

AC states “My view is that the onus is entirely on those advocating radical change to make a compelling case…They must provide evidence of success, guarantees that the population will be better off- prosperity, health, life expectancy, life satisfaction.’’

I need to make a compelling case to stop predation and murder? How about the world just cries “STOP!”

We are getting some insight now into AC’s thought processes. His character.
He is looking more and more like someone who wants the predation to continue.
Because his argument is that the predation and murder should only stop if there is a guarantee that his smug comfortable lifestyle can continue unchanged. That his comfort and “life satisfaction” is more important than predation and murder.
No discomfort, no bumps in the road for AC.
No thought at all for the millions suffering right now from the colonialism and neo-colonialism that was summarized so well by Canguro.

I cannot comprehend his thought processes.

A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 9:29 pm

You’re really not very good with actual information and facts, are you? Did you notice the following –
° Iceland booms after introducing 4 day working week
° Iceland wins WHO award for focus on “well being” economy
° unemployment rate of 3.1%
° inflation under control
° a stable exchange rate
… try harder to come.up with some justification for your claim that Iceland is a “clown show”
But I’ll admit you have an outstanding ability to inflate your own ego, misrepresent others (deliberately), ignore facts, engage in obfuscation and invent opinions/positions for others

Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 11:07 pm

Iceland did to itself what the US did to Chile to “make the economy scream.”
That’s a clown show. By any definition. And general mistrust in the political system in Iceland continues to this day.

But not only does AC want to forget the bail-out, he also wants to forget the Panama Papers, with revelations “which had major consequences for the Icelandic political context. The Icelandic business community appeared to have an unusually high proportion of ownership of firms and accounts in Tax Havens, such as in Tortola of the Virgin Islands, through at least one intermediary in Panama (many other intermediaries were of course also being used). And it was not just business people that were in the Panama Papers, but the Prime Minister – through his wife – also held assets with a sizable sum in offshore accounts. So were also the leader of the IP, the Minister of Finance, as well as the deputy leader of the IP, the Minister of the Interior.”
Yep. It’s a clown show.

And I thank AC for reminding me that making the economy scream is a great description of the business plan that sustains the neo-colonial operations of the financial institutions set up by the liberal democracies.
But AC does not have to worry himself with that.
He’s OK.
That’s all that matters.

ArndNovember 18, 2024 at 5:45 am

Steve Davis, November 17, 2024 at 6:10 pm

I need to make a compelling case to stop predation and murder? How about the world just cries “STOP!”

Well, the inescapable fact is that so far the world has not cried “Stop!” And it has been a long-standing insight of mine that to expect people to simply stop doing whatever it is they’re doing is not going to work.

What is required are some credible alternative instructions about how to do things differently.

Exploitation, violence, death and mayhem have always been throughout all of human history, and still now are such a constant and deeply ingrained part of the human condition, that most people seem plainly incapable of thinking outside of the violence/ domination/ oppression box.

Steve, take some time out and scroll though Quora or Reddit: you’ll find yourself only ever two or three links away from some “Thank you for your service” patriotic military glorification. And the armament industry is one of the major employers and super fund investment opportunity providers globally.

Deconstructing all of this, and more, WILL take some doing. It will require some “road-mapping”, and it will be more demanding than either Arnd having an exasperated go at Bert Hetebry, or Steve Davis impatiently scoring debating points off A Commenter.

Steve DavisNovember 18, 2024 at 6:57 am

Arnd, I’m surprised at your interpretation of what is happening here.

For starters I believe my patience is exemplary.

You stated “Exploitation, violence, death and mayhem have always been throughout all of human history, and still now are such a constant and deeply ingrained part of the human condition, that most people seem plainly incapable of thinking outside of the violence/ domination/ oppression box.”
That is not correct.

Warfare has not been a constant, there is archeological evidence to the contrary.
And even when it does occur, it is in most cases something of a sideshow because it is a minority that is so engaged. The rest just go about their business and hope it all goes away.

I’m surprised that one so well-read as you has fallen for capitalist propaganda. They want us all to see conflict and division as part of our make-up. The only reason that “most people seem plainly incapable of thinking outside of the violence/ domination/ oppression box” is down to a constant stream of propaganda telling us it’s so. The deliberate dumbing down of society.

And “how about the world just cries STOP!” was never intended as a comprehensive solution to the problems of the world, as you seem to assume.
It’s clear from the two sentences you quoted that it was only about predation and murder.
Think about it.
Do we need to make a compelling case against predation and murder before doing all that’s possible to stop it??

I think not, but go ahead. Convince me otherwise.

ArndNovember 18, 2024 at 8:20 am

Steve,

I believe my patience is exemplary.

Uhhmmm … – I think I can see why you say that. But I also could not fail to notice that in your exchange with AC, you keep playing the man, not the issue (and AC keeps replying in kind).

I’ve repeatedly done the same, so: pot, kettle, black? And it is very difficult and even impossible to avoid: Carol Hanisch offered a succinct explanation of how “The Personal Is Political” back in 1969. It’s a useful, if disturbing rejoinder to Stalin’s calling out of the chronically cavalier attitude towards “collateral damage”: “One death is a tragedy. 10 million deaths are a statistic!” But I still think that personal (character) attacks are not always the most effective way to make a point.

… there is archeological evidence to the contrary.

If you have to rely on interpretation of archeological evidence, you are talking about pre-history. At least according to a widely accepted definition of the demarcation between pre-history and the beginnings of recorded history. And the records of history consist to a very large degree of records of war and usurpation.

I’m surprised that one so well-read as you has fallen for capitalist propaganda.

And I am surprised that you are not differentiating between my noting that this propaganda exists, is all-pervasive, and will require huge effort to undo; and my having fallen for it myself.

ArndNovember 18, 2024 at 8:26 am

Also:

I think not, but go ahead. Convince me otherwise.

Just look at the evidence, in Gaza and the Ukraine: someone obviously thinks that murder and mayhem are ok, and has convinced enough people to go along with it to make murder and mayhem a reality.

If you do not find that evidence convincing, I don’t know what else might help.

Steve DavisNovember 18, 2024 at 9:57 am

Arnd, you said “And the records of history consist to a very large degree of records of war and usurpation.”

You have a point about the distinction between pre-history and history, but you ignore a fact of which you are well aware.
Recorded history is by no means unbiased history. Historians or chroniclers of the day do not, as a rule, record the humdrum affairs of society. They record events that are of interest to those of the day. The dramatic. The extraordinary.
We see it in wildlife documentaries today that focus on two bulls or stags fighting for control of the herd, while the herd goes quietly about its business. A case of “Meet the new boss; same as the old boss.”

And so the historical records of warfare are in many cases records of the extraordinary.
They are not records of society as a whole, and so they are not records of social attitudes.
If a particular chronicler is employed in the service of a monarch for example, the historical record flowing from that will be largely a record of royal attitudes and interests.

And so yes, even though your understanding of the propaganda is exceptional, still you fell for the propaganda. I’m not singling you out for this.
We all fall for for it in different ways and to different degrees. But 24/7 propaganda from the moment of birth has a way of getting inside our heads.
It can be so subtle that even those who are aware do not notice it.
There is a branch of science, evolutionary biology, in which a powerful faction pushes the very thing we are discussing here — the “nature red in tooth and claw” fallacy. And we see that fallacy promoted endlessly in the mass media. Because it’s dramatic. Drama sells.

You said “Just look at the evidence, in Gaza and the Ukraine:” To which I would say — yes and no.
You’re quite correct at the practical level, but my point was first made at the moral level. I was pointing out the lack of morality in bourgeois indifference to suffering.

At the moral level we do not have to make a compelling case.
At the practical level Gaza and Ukraine are examples of the lengths liberal democracies will go to, to preserve their dominance.

A CommentatorNovember 18, 2024 at 11:33 am

Let’s recap a few examples of Steve’s overreach
° all liberal democracies are clown shows ( not some, not the USA, UK and France, “all” of them)
° economic facts, data, and information is irrelevant in a discussion about economics
° whinging without any capacity or willingness to provide details of a workable solution
We know Steve’s major tactic is to post a provocative, over the top comment, and hound any people that respond with volume and misrepresentation

wamNovember 18, 2024 at 11:34 am

Putin has a legitimate fear of the septics and NATO so his assault on ukraine is with purpose the defence was good enough to thwart his plans and now he is ‘hoist on his own petard’ deperately needing trump to give him a reasonable way of withdrawal.
Bibi has murdered palestinians for years and this latest incursion is unconscionable

Steve DavisNovember 18, 2024 at 12:11 pm

It’s really standing out now that AC is keen to discuss details of a tiny country (his choice remember) in order to avoid explaining his support for plunder and murder.
Details. Any detail will do.

And when he’s finished with Iceland, as appears to be the case now, (fickle ain’t he) he will try to move on to Finland, or Luxembourg perhaps. Anything at all to hide his indifference to the suffering of others.

Anything to hide his support for a system that spawns abject creatures like this — from The Guardian 11 months ago — In response to the accusation that the US government organised a coup against Evo Morales in Bolivia in order for Tesla to secure lithium there, Musk tweeted: “We will coup whoever we want! Deal with it.”

That’s the history of the liberal democracy AC supports, right there.

CanguroNovember 18, 2024 at 12:28 pm

I have a hunch, just a hunch, could be wrong, but I’m guessing Elmo’s gonna end up as a modern day Howard Hughes, off his rocker, fully nutso, sequestered in his hideaway and tended by solicitous sycophantic carers who’re only there because they’re paid handsomely to acquiesce to every one of the Rocketman’s mad demands.

ArndNovember 18, 2024 at 12:59 pm

Steve, you’re channeling Pjotr Kropotkin’s answer to (social) Darwinism: Mutual Aid: A Factor Of Evolution. And fair enough.

Otoh, I deliberately maintain a heavy degree of suspicion towards any sort of ‘noble savage’ romanticism!

And whilst there’s statistical evaluations suggesting that contrary to widely reported appearances (“drama sells”), the present is a comparatively peaceful epoch, I still maintain that militarism and violence features very prominently in everyday discourse, and that changing this state of affairs requires more than repeated cries to “just stop it”.

… but my point was first made at the moral level

Ahh! We’re about to open another huge subject: I’ve always been deeply suspicious of “morals”. The term “morals” implies to me an attitude of “This is how we do it because that’s how we always have done it!”. Whereas “ethics” implies a reasoned, examined and explainable code to inform human cooperation.

Therefore you actually will have to make an effort to demonstrate the validity of your decisive stance against murder and mayhem.

And why not? Taking myself through that process is actually what provided the grounding for my anarchist perspectives.

Thus, I will look at the practicalities and the ethics of any issue, but I am most reluctant to get drawn on “moral statements”. Which in this instance makes me agree with AC more than with you: yes, you do need to explain your “morals”, and any implications following therefrom. If you do not, you do engage in impotent grandstanding.

Incidentally, I consider that that is the weak point if the whole “wokism” movement as it has emerged over the last decade or so: way too many forgone and unexamined precepts, leaving themselves wide open to philosophical attack from all angles.

A CommentatorNovember 18, 2024 at 1:07 pm

This is why I’ll continue to challenge your verbosity and self importance
Do you agree your main tactic is make provocative and exaggerated comments?
Do you, when challenged , then modify and qualify such comments?
Do you insist on getting the last word on every exchange?
Are you aware that I’ve observed a number of intelligent, thoughtful people reduce or discontinue participation because of this behaviour?
Do you prefer a withering blogging site, an echo chamber, or a vibrant one that tolerates/appreciates a diverse range of informed views?
Have you reflected on this and considered modifying your blogging tactics?

ArndNovember 18, 2024 at 1:23 pm

AC,

all liberal democracies are clown shows

Pretty much! In my reasoned view, all “liberal democracies” have so far failed to address, let alone resolve, what I have identified (so far mainly for my own benefit) as THE SINGLE MOST PRESSING CONCERN OF CONTEMPORARY POLITICS. And that has effectively turned them into self-parodying clown shows. Or else “Three Ring Circuses”: the legislative, the executive, and the judicative powers – which were meant to check and control each other – merely passing the buck around in endless games of shifting blame and responsibility. Pankaj Mishra commented on the subject in The Guardian five years ago. I say that things have gotten worse since.

economic facts, data, and information is irrelevant in a discussion about economics

Again, I (potentially) concur! Economic data are collected, and are relevant, within a particular conceptual understanding of economics. Change those conceptual parameters at some fundamental level, and the data quickly lose their relevance.

But even when thinking and analysing strictly within the parameters of conventional economics, key indicators may, and often do, lose validity. Google AI offers this introduction to the subject:

“When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure” is a common statement of Goodhart’s law, an adage named after British economist Charles Goodhart. The law reflects the idea that when pressure is applied to a statistical regularity for control purposes, it will tend to collapse.

Steve DavisNovember 18, 2024 at 2:00 pm

Arnd, you said “I’ve always been deeply suspicious of “morals””

And yet, “Without equity there is no justice, and without justice there is no morality.”

Stick to Kropotkin and you can’t go too far wrong.

Steve DavisNovember 18, 2024 at 2:09 pm

AC is not happy with my “provocative, exaggerated comments”.
He has a credibility problem there.
An exaggerated comment should be easy to refute, but when asked to refute my assertions about the murderous activities of the liberal democracies, he retreats into discussions about the economic details of tiny irrelevant democracies.
Why are Iceland or Norway irrelevant? After all, they’re to a certain degree liberal democracies. Surely they are legitimately included in this?

It’s because they are not the movers and shakers of the liberal democracy project.
They tag along because although not victims of the system, they have the potential to become so.
They are trapped in a system from which they see no escape. Just as Australia is. And as I pointed out above, even Norway with its wealth from North Sea oil is not immune to pressure from the OECD to cut back on domestic policies that do not conform to the liberal model.

None of this is provocative. None of this is exaggerated.

“Do you, when challenged , then modify and qualify such comments?”
Actually, I do. Check out my recent exchanges with Arnd. And in the past he converted me on MMT.
I do not modify or qualify until presented with evidence.

If intelligent, thoughtful people reduced or discontinued participation here because of me then they need to look at their own behaviour.
I respond with respect to those who show respect.
A problem quite a few seem to have is that they come here unprepared, then get snarly when challenged. I’ve been tarred with every offensive label imaginable, but I do not reciprocate. As far as I can recall, that is.
I have no problem with someone being totally ignorant on a particular matter. It’s the attitude behind the opinion or the question that determines what follows.

Another mistake seen here from time to time is people using everyday language in their comments, then getting offensive when others are offended. Everyday language is softened by body language and oral cues. Too many forget that.
I’ve learned a lot from others here, and I’d like to think that others have learned from me.

So no, I have not considered modifying my blogging tactics.
If you are not happy with my approach, perhaps you should consider some or all of the above.

A CommentatorNovember 18, 2024 at 2:43 pm

“I have not considered modifying my blogging tactics.”
Are you aware that you’re a visitor/guest at a site that operates as a free public service? It seeks inclusion and diversity of opinion , which you do your best to oppose
You’re incapable of self analysis and reflection
You have no capacity to identify the effect you have on this open blog site.
Pathetic

Steve DavisNovember 18, 2024 at 4:41 pm

Arnd, the history of the“nature red in tooth and claw” fallacy is a fascinating one.
Thank heavens for Kropotkin.
His exposure of Thomas Huxley’s fabrications was a joy to read.

There’s a delightful little reference in Kropotkin’s Ethics: Origin and Development, to his public battle with Huxley that goes; “…Huxley, whom I had to remind, when he began developing ideas worthy of Hobbes, that the appearance of societies on earth preceded the appearance of man.”
And another; “This brilliant evolutionist, (Huxley) who was so successful in spreading Darwin’s teaching of the gradual development of organic forms on the earth, proved quite incapable of following his great teacher in the realm of moral thought.”

These were references to Huxley concealing, in a footnote to an essay, the impact of mutual aid on evolution. Collected Essays, Evolution and Ethics, 1893.

There’s a significant strand of cultish individualism that has featured in English thought since the Norman era, and it re-surfaced in the late 1960s with the discovery of DNA. Coinciding with the greed-is-good era.
The evolutionary biology faction I referred to earlier attempted, successfully for quite some time, to use gene functions to discredit group selection.

Michael TaylorNovember 18, 2024 at 6:32 pm

Well, AC, here we are in beautiful Pitlochry for my 70th.

Unfortunately, that’s the only good news. The rest is bad: our hire car has broken down and Avis don’t want to know about it.

CanguroNovember 18, 2024 at 6:54 pm

And in news totally unrelated to Three Poems, Irony and Apologies to Elephants; former ‘shock jock’ Alan Jones’s arraignment on sexual assault charges just squeaks by the ‘Justice delayed is Justice denied’ maxim and will come as an enormous sense of ‘finally, this prick will get his just deserts’; Schadenfreude notwithstanding, I imagine there will be considerable pleasure taken at the overdue downfall of this nasty individual whose radio career was characterised by his willingness to engage in brutal misogyny, character assassination, vilification, championing of pet causes to the detriment of the better good along with an aggressive modus operandi that intimidated all those who took a stand against him.

No doubt the legal processes now in train will be prolonged and drawn out to the maximum extent permissible, but I do hope that the final outcome is a swapping of his luxurious apartment in the Toaster for a much less salubrious jail cell.

Whatever the result, his downfall & public disgrace is assured.

Harry LimeNovember 18, 2024 at 7:00 pm

Canguro,we shouldn’t take pleasure in the misfortune of other sad,execrable little bastards,but in this instance,all bets are off.Been a long time coming….is that the sound of running water in the background?

Michael TaylorNovember 18, 2024 at 7:25 pm

So the law finally caught up with Anal Jones.

That in itself is poetry.

CanguroNovember 18, 2024 at 7:49 pm

A Happy 70th, Michael; Pitlochry looks like the ideal location to celebrate along with your nearest & dearest. Safe travels & best wishes, Grant.

corvusboreusNovember 18, 2024 at 8:31 pm

MT,
Co-la-breith sona dhut, slainte mhath,
CB

Michael TaylorNovember 18, 2024 at 8:48 pm

Thank you, CB. That was nice of you.

I rather fancy Gaelic. I also fancy a particular Scottish whisky, Stroma, which is like Drambuie but with a hint of honey.

Was hoping to make it up to the Old Pulteney distillery in Wick, where it is made.

My plans were to rob a few banks along the way so I could buy every bottle they had. As it is difficult to get in Aus I’m left with no other choice.

Michael TaylorNovember 18, 2024 at 9:57 pm

Thank you, Canguro. For some reason I missed your comment earlier.

Yes, Pitlochry is surely the capital city of Utopia.

Would move up this way in a flash if I ever found the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Maybe not in town, but a few acres with a comfortable manor and a half a dozen of those hairy Highland cows (Heilan’ coos in the Scottish tongue), an army of red squirrels and some majestic elk in my forest.

We’d be running The AIMN from the Scottish highlands. 😃

Michael TaylorNovember 18, 2024 at 10:02 pm

Anyway, time to go shopping.

Priority 1: some long johns (yep, it’s really cold up here).

Priority 2: a pair of braces (I’ve shrunk since arriving here and all my trousers are falling down).

Priorities 3-10: buy Stroma.

wamNovember 18, 2024 at 10:15 pm

many many happy returns, Micheal, My mother’s sister lived in Perth, Her sons were fierce protestants and would never say gaelic which they believed was Irish and catholic they spoke Gallic. But 52 years ago I was fit enough to play golf at Pitlochry. Hilly and cold in November. Using our NT Automobile reciprocal rights we bought a car in london and, apart from parking on hills to aid the starter, we were lucky and sold it for 60%.
ps
Jon,
put the part reasons for trumps win but septic xstians believe the head man made women at 75% of men. if that goes women have a chance

Michael TaylorNovember 19, 2024 at 1:16 am

Thank you, wam.

Why on earth would a person leave Scotland? 😁

corvusboreusNovember 19, 2024 at 6:40 am

Apart from notorious dunny-grub Alan Jones being nabbed on multiple sex offences and his toaster apartment cavity searched, there was another amusing recent A Jones story.

Alex Jones, another perpetually apoplectic shart-stain specialising in climate denial and conspiracy crap, seems to have lost his ‘Infowars’ platform.
It was auctioned off in a court sanctioned compulsory firesale to ensure Jones paid compensation ($1.5b) to the parents of murdered children that Jones had repeatedly and maliciously slandered.
In a beautiful karmic twist, the site was acquired by satirical publishers ‘the onion’, with additional financial assistance provided by some of the greiving parents that Jones had further victimised.

Such schadenfreudic satisfactions are smallfry when scaled against the weight of collective humanity descending into aggressively tribalistic extremism as we continue to ravage our basic sustaining biosphere towards inhabitability, but these days I’ll take what I can get.

Michael TaylorNovember 19, 2024 at 8:41 am

That’s music to my ears, cb.

Return to home page

Login here Register here

KimNovember 10, 2024 at 12:24 am

Well said…
wamNovember 10, 2024 at 2:03 am

liberty as a statue is hardly worth anything when trump showed the world what he and the majority of americans think of women. Oops middle east with another woman?
ps
Wonder when the witches will be exposed and burned???
Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 5:56 am

“I think we all need a break from the curse of this intrusion,…”

Let’s stop pretending that this is an intrusion.
Or that it’s an unfortunate accident of history.
A nightmare that will be over in four years.
What we are seeing is the inevitable decline in standards that we should expect of a system that has based itself on the adoration of the individual, and what is worse, an adoration of the whims of the individual.

This is liberal democracy destroying itself, and was so foreseeable that the rise of a Trump type was predicted almost a century ago.
H L Mencken — “All the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre — the man who can most adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum. The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”

And let’s not pretend that this could only happen in the US.
All the liberal democracies have become clown shows, including ours. Worse still, we are moving beyond the laughs we get from a clown show.

As their clown world disintegrates, the authoritarianism that lies at the heart of liberalism comes to the fore with a crackdown on dissent. As we see in Craig Murray’s summary of the UK Terrorism Act.
“You have no right to remain silent, you have no right to a lawyer, you must hand over all devices and passwords, if you refuse to answer a question you can be imprisoned for 2 years, if you express an opinion that could be interpreted as support for a proscribed organisation, there is a 14 year prison sentence, ( plenty of room for interpretation ), this act includes the phrase ” without cause ” so police can pick up anyone without having to show any reason.”
So ordinary decent folk who are disgusted with the Gaza genocide being facilitated by their own governments, will be swept up as supporters of terrorism when they protest.

This is not an intrusion.
This is us, laid bare for the world to see.
JimNovember 10, 2024 at 6:47 am

If the Democraps had ruled the nation on behalf of all Americans, Trump and his Repub mates would playing golf everyday and out of our hair. So why didn’t the media hold Democraps to account all those years? The answer is MSM are in lockstep with a plan aimed at zero middle class. To achieve that, a country needs one a Uni-party supported by a propaganda unit, the MSM. Same here, the ABC being a shining example of how far an organization can fall in a decade. Kerry O’Brien and Emma Alberici were the last of the real journos and the ABC these days is a woke waste of space, imo. 1984, are we there yet?
CanguroNovember 10, 2024 at 8:54 am

A koala stamp for Steve Davis for his clear-eyed analysis.

On authoritarianism… “[in] the list of the world’s most-watched countries ranked by the number of CCTV cameras, the UK comes in at number four, after China, USA, and Germany.”

It’s a pity that with the overwhelming torrent, nay, tsunami of information & misinformation that pours ceaselessly into the receptive arenas of the human experience, visual, aural etc., that there’s little space or opportunity for a modern-day Mencken to have his observations get the traction that they would otherwise deserve. He died in 1956, well after the advent of radio, but when TV was still in its infancy and yet to capture the zeitgeist in the ways we now comprehend.
A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 10:36 am

I’m inclined to agree with Winston Churchill on this occasion –
‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’
Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 12:47 pm

AC continues to defend the democracy that threw up a Donald Trump not once, but twice.

Democracy has many virtues but also serious potential weaknesses.

Our current form, favoured throughout the West, has two serious weaknesses.

We have opted for representative democracy, where elected representatives are too easily diverted from their declared purpose of serving their constituents, to instead serving vested interests who buy influence and ultimately, buy votes. So institutionalized has this become, so accepted as part of the democratic process, that these influencers now write the legislation that they want enacted.

So we now have a sham democracy, a democracy in name only.
You would think that it could not get any worse that that, but you would be wrong. The sham democracy at the local or national level is only a problem at the local or national level. But another development has ensured that this sickness can operate across national boundaries. Can exert global influence.

By exploiting the weakness in representative democracy, a healthy diversity of views that should be a feature of a robust system have been replaced by an ideology; liberalism.

So successful has this takeover been, that the western democracies are known as liberal democracies. And woe betide any country that strays from the liberal formula in establishing a form of governance suitable to it’s unique circumstances. Any deviation from the liberal norm is immediately branded as totalitarian, fascist, communist, (take your pick) oppressive, illegitimate, illiberal, unfree.

Anyone paying attention will have noticed that the world has become more chaotic since the fall of the Soviet Union. The Soviets were the only check on liberalism following its own natural development path. That being the path of colonialism and exploitation. A path that necessarily involved chaos and misery.

Why was this development path inevitable? Because the financial/economic system the West developed, first creates chaos and misery, then becomes dependent on chaos and misery. One of the early and still most prominent “philosophers” of liberalism, J S Mill, was quite open about the course that the new industrial powers should follow — “Colonization … is the best affair of business in which the capital of an old and wealthy country can engage … the same rules of international morality do not apply … between civilized nations and barbarians.”

So there’s a stark reminder of the weakness of representative democracy and the danger of liberal democracy — the rules of international morality do not apply.

Gaza, anyone?
Terence MillsNovember 10, 2024 at 1:42 pm

Trump may not be our choice but then again we are looking at the prospect of electing someone like Peter Dutton so, ‘go figure’.

It is clear that the majority of the American people saw something in Trump that eludes many of us in Australia (he has not only won the presidency but also the senate and probably the House). With his blunt one-eyed approach it is more than likely that the wars in Ukraine and Gaza will be resolved by Trump policies not that the Ukranians or the Palestinians will necessarily like the final solution.
As Trump has noted, both wars are dependant on the supply of US arms and it is only when this supply dries up that a ceasefire will be possible.

As regards Gaza, it is a poor reflection on the Biden administration that they continue to arm Netanyahu while making weak pleas for a ceasefire.
A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 2:57 pm

Tony Abbott made his career out of a relentless, single minded focus on criticism, rarely bothering with options, proposals and working examples of success
We observe that tactic being applied here.
No proposal, no working examples of success.
I’ll add- I wonder whether Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, etc would prefer to remain a bulwak against liberal democracy
############
The Democrats almost handed the presidency to Trump.
° Biden was only ever going to be a one term president, he should have made this clear a year ago and allowed Harris to contest the nomination against a range of very capable alternative candidates
° Harris is intelligent and capable, but doesn’t always persuade that she is a heavyweight on the international scene
° Many in the US are frustrated and have seen their traditional manufacturing jobs disappear, Trump is able to plug into this sentiment
° Trump (correctly) isn’t seen as a conventional politician. People are frustrated with the political system and many seem to want anything other than a conventional politician.
Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 3:51 pm

“People are frustrated with the political system …”

I never thought I’d see the day when AC supported a comment of mine.

Ok, Ok, no more sarcasm.

In his first comment AC quoted an authority.
There’s nothing wrong with that, it’s a legitimate tool, but only when context is provided.

It would be useful in arguing the superiority of liberal democracy if AC could relate that superiority to the ongoing horror story in Gaza.
A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 4:13 pm

Rather than endlessly whinging about what you see as the problems with western democracy (while also providing context and rationale for brutal autocratic regimes), how about you describe the system you propose?
Also the working examples, so that we can observe you are offering legitimate plans for improvement in the lives of the population.
If you’re incapable of doing this, it is proof of your comfort in hot air and whinging
Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 5:16 pm

Will AC learn from his error in providing a quote that he is unable to relate to liberal democracy as we see it in action right now, in all its brutality?
I doubt it.

He describes my criticism of a system that is totally out of control, that ignores the wishes of its citizens, that enacts legislation designed to jail those who protest against genocide, as whinging.

I wonder if he would have the courage to tell a Palestinian father holding the shredded remains of his dead child in his arms, that his complaints about liberal democracy are no more than whinging?
A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 5:31 pm

Just describe the system you propose to replace liberal democracy with.
Hot air, whining, endlessly complaining, without being capable of articulating or detailing a proposal to improve the lives of people… AIMN’s own version of Tony Abbott
Harry LimeNovember 10, 2024 at 7:13 pm

Churchill, as Lord of the Admiralty,really cut his chops at Gallipoli, didn’t he? He gave Ratso Howard an excellent example of what makes “mates”,”Unaustralian”,”not our types”,xenophobic bullshit and lies,and turned it into a few election wins,with the help of of a rubbish media and a weak opposition.And a fortuitous mining boom,whereby, (sorry Albo), pea heart Costellot could purchase consecutive elections. We are, by and large, a bunch of disengaged, easily led jerks.Bad news is too uncomfortable..let’s not get too exercised…and then ,one day it all went to shit.
Steve Davis…enjoying your eviscerations enormously.
Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 7:15 pm

In demanding that I give details of an alternative to liberal democracy, AC is looking desperate.

He has clearly given up on defending liberalism and is looking for an off-ramp, a diversion.
But in doing so he has given me the opportunity to indulge my favourite pastime — exposing the evils of liberal democracy. So I thank him for that.

And in his blindness it escaped his notice that the answer has already been given.

All the advanced liberal democracies became powerful through colonialism, robbing those who were unable to resist military power.
And this did not end with the demise of the colonial era. Poor nations today who seek aid to develop their economies are forced to surrender economic sovereignty and open themselves to the tender mercies of transnational corporations.
The advice given by JS Mill all those years ago is still faithfully followed — “ the same rules of international morality do not apply … between civilized nations and barbarians.”
The plunder continues.

So the answer to the question is that any democracy that operates on the principles of morality, fair dealing, cooperation, non-interference, mutual development and mutual prosperity would be an advance on the present dog-eat-dog, winner takes all system that prevails.
A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 7:37 pm

You’ve retreated from strident to meek. But that’s understandable, you’re incapable of positively contributing to political discourse.
#”All the advanced liberal democracies became powerful through colonialism, robbing those who were unable to resist military power. And this did not end with the demise of the colonial era.”
Can you detail the colonial past of Switzerland , Austria, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Japan, Ireland and even Greece, Poland, Latvia , Lithuania, Estonia, Czechia, Slovakia (all which have a better quality of life than the regimes you excuse)
A number of them even recognise Palestine.
Your blame of “liberal democracy” for so many of the ills of the world is simply cr@p, without a rationale, without evidence.
You’re unable to articulate the system you propose.
Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 8:23 pm

Since when did Switzerland , Austria, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Japan, Ireland and even Greece, Poland, Latvia , Lithuania, Estonia, Czechia, Slovakia become powerful?

Please stay focused.
A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 9:01 pm

Hilarious!
Your original comment was against liberal democracy, can you show an asterisk or a proviso or where you say -“conditions apply”
This is as entertaining as your claim that economic statistics, facts and data are meaningless in a discussion about economics.
Your original trenchant criticism was of liberal democracy, now you have retreated to criticism of some policies of some liberal democracies.
Keep adding provisos, qualifications and retreating from the strident to the meek.
Steve DavisNovember 10, 2024 at 9:28 pm

Harry, my pleasure.

In regard to the liberal democracies listed by AC, they are not the setters of the liberal agenda, as AC well knows. They are mere pawns in a system. The movers and shakers of liberal democracy drew their power from colonial exploitation.

I’ve pointed out the failings of liberal democracy not only from the past, but also from the present day.
As in the neo-colonialism that is perpetrated today through the liberal financial system.
The neo-colonialism that is the source of much suffering that AC, as a true liberal, dismisses as mere whinging.

But instead of defending liberal democracy, which is the point he started from and now finds impossible to justify, AC pretends that those problems I’ve outlined do not exist.
To divert attention from his failure he demands that I propose an alternative.

This is a further example of his not having a grasp of the issue at hand. I have given a general description of a better system but as usual, AC is fixated on details and seems reluctant to engage with the bigger picture.

The bigger picture in this case is that for a true democracy to flourish it must be whatever its members want it to be. That is true freedom, but true freedom does not figure in the schemes of liberals. AC has demonstrated that point nicely.
In fact, AC’s performance here, with his dismissal of the freedom to pursue independent economic development and governance, finding it unworthy of comment, his indifference to the crackdown on dissent, and his indifference to suffering, has made himself a case in point for the failings of liberalism as a concept.
Liberalism personified.
A CommentatorNovember 10, 2024 at 9:52 pm

Here’s a selection of Steve’s unqualified criticism of “liberal democracy”
Now he retrospectively tries to qualify his comments.
That’s a retreat.
#/.All the liberal democracies have become clown shows, including ours.
#/.As their clown world disintegrates, the authoritarianism that lies at the heart of liberalism comes to the fore with a crackdown on dissent.
#/. By exploiting the weakness in representative democracy, a healthy diversity of views that should be a feature of a robust system have been replaced by an ideology; liberalism.
#/.Anyone paying attention will have noticed that the world has become more chaotic since the fall of the Soviet Union. The Soviets were the only check on liberalism following its own natural development path. That being the path of colonialism and exploitation. A path that necessarily involved chaos and misery.
#/. So there’s a stark reminder of the weakness of representative democracy and the danger of liberal democracy — the rules of international morality do not apply.
Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 4:24 am

AC has kindly repeated some of the significant points I’ve made, so I thank him for that.
It must be tough trying to continue an argument when all you can come up with is a repeat of your opponent’s points.

But one of his dot points is worth further comment as it proves my point about the Soviet Union being a check on US aggression, and proves my overall position, in rather dramatic fashion.

From the Congressional Research Service — The US engaged in 218 military interventions from 1798 to 1990, (1.1 per year) then dramatically increased that rate to 251 (7.8 per year) up to the present.
Why the sudden increase in 1991? That’s the very year that the US became the sole military superpower, with no other power capable of keeping it in check.

The Military Intervention Project at Tufts University’s Center for Strategic Studies states — “With the end of the Cold War era, we would expect the US to decrease its military interventions abroad, assuming lower threats and interests at stake. But these patterns reveal the opposite – the US has increased its military involvements abroad.”

Well well. 7.8 military interventions per year.
That’s a snapshot of the morality behind liberal democracy right there.
The morality of predation.
A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 8:38 am

You didn’t say “some liberal democracies” or “liberal democracies that are former colonial powers” or “the US, UK and France, that claim to be liberal democracies” or “hypocritical liberal democracies that sit of the Security Council “…
You characterised all liberal democracies the same way and the system of liberal democracy. It is typical of your deliberate provocation and hyperbole.
Disingenuous exaggeration is the standard you continually observe.
And you’re unable to articulate the system that you propose in place of liberal democracy.
You should grow up Steve.
leefeNovember 11, 2024 at 9:07 am

We have opted for representative democracy, where elected representatives are too easily diverted from their declared purpose of serving their constituents, to instead serving vested interests who buy influence and ultimately, buy votes. So institutionalized has this become, so accepted as part of the democratic process, that these influencers now write the legislation that they want enacted.

“Why was this development path inevitable? Because the financial/economic system the West developed, first creates chaos and misery, then becomes dependent on chaos and misery.”

Unbridled capitalism is the root of so much evil. Yes.
And yet AC’s point remains: Just describe the system you propose to replace liberal democracy with.
Because, Steve, you never do. It’s all very well to continually point out the faults and flaws with our political and economic systems, but you never actually give solutions or explain exactly how you think those systems should operate. And I don’t mean endless references to Marx or Mills or other political and economic philosophising. How exactly, in your opinion, and in your words, do you want our economic and political structures to operate?
Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 9:26 am

Has anyone else noticed that AC is doing everything he can to avoid defending or justifying liberal democracy?

Not only was he reduced to repeating my arguments in the absence of anything positive that could be said about liberal democracy, now he wants to lecture me on how I should present my arguments.

The serious failings of liberal democracy have been outlined.
AC should refute them or walk away.
Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 9:28 am

“Because Steve, you never do.”
Except leefe, I did.

Furthermore, I explained why such a description must be in general terms.
A truly free democracy should be and must be anything its members want it to be.

But because I’m a lovely fella, I’ll put my view in a single sentence.

An alternative democratic system should be one that operates on the principles of fair dealing, cooperation, mutual development and mutual prosperity.

The difference between such a system and the prevailing system should be obvious.
A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 9:49 am

You chose to reply to (and contest) my comment, where quoted- “No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’ I’m entirely comfortable with that characterisation of democracy. You chose to contest it, and have dug yourself into a huge hole, yet again. You’ve tried to retrospectively qualify your comments , but not withdraw them.
As I said, disingenuous exaggeration and hyperbole are your standard tactics.
And I’m happy to continue to demonstrate that.
As for – “An alternative democratic system should be one that operates on the principles of fair dealing, cooperation, mutual development and mutual prosperity.”
Can you explain how the systems of government in (say) Norway, Finland, Sweden and Switzerland are incapable of meeting these objectives?
Can you provide an example of a successful country that applies a system of government you support?
ClakkaNovember 11, 2024 at 10:01 am

Yes, Steve Davis, thanks for your wit and persistence.

‘Capitalism’, by and large is a system of distributing the proceeds of effort. And in that regard it is very efficient. But as Marx warned, it needs strong regulation lest it be corrupted by ‘class’. ‘Capitalism’ is not a political form – it is a system today used by almost all forms of politics – with varying degrees of success (or not) depending on the wiles of corruption within each polity.

Try ABC RN’s Big Ideas with Natasha Mitchell 3 podcasts SOS Democracy. I find particular interest in Niall Ferguson’s take on the history Is democracy doomed?.

Humanity seems to be really good at regurgitating primordial BS and abdicating responsibility.
Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 10:17 am

Clakka, you make a very good point — capitalism “needs strong regulation lest it be corrupted by class.”

And there is no reason that such a system cannot flourish, with one condition. Non-interference from outside forces.
In other words, such a system is economically practical, quite possibly economically superior, but in the present climate will have to contend with external forces.
BertNovember 11, 2024 at 10:29 am

On democracy.

We in this country have seen several elections conducted this year at state and territory level and have seen two changes of government.

We are preparing for a Federal election within the next seven months and a state election in WA in March.

The people will decide who will govern us.

The same will happen in all democratic countries over their election cycles.

There is inevitably a swing left or right in democracies, so governments will change over time, and following a change of government, I am willing to bet that the sun will continue to rise every morning and set every evening.
Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 10:54 am

Finally, a sensible point from AC — “Can you explain how the systems of government in (say) Norway, Finland, Sweden and Switzerland are incapable of meeting these objectives?”

They are not incapable.

History shows that these nations have in the past made a genuine and successful effort to provide for the welfare of their citizens.
The result was possibly the highest living standards in the world.
They achieved this by putting in place considerable govt intervention in the economy — high personal taxation rates that were used to fund a welfare state.
But high tax rates and a welfare state are not part of the liberal model. High taxes and welfare for example, are regarded as socialism in the US.

Norway is perhaps the stand-out here due to its wealth from North Sea oil, but even Norway with its impressive GDP figures is coming under pressure to conform to the liberal model.

From the OECD — “Norway’s public spending as a share of GDP is the highest in the OECD and rising fast. Managing this trend would require making regional policy more cost-conscious, reinforcing coordination and cooperation in health and education, improving incentives to limit sickness and disability outlays, and revisiting agricultural subsidies.”
“Managing this trend” in public spending is shorthand for reducing public spending.
“reinforcing coordination and cooperation in health and education” is shorthand for concentration of services, aka reduced services. As in “limits to sickness and disability outlays.”

This is the OECD interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation.

So just as I indicated to Clakka, the external forces are already at work.
A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 11:22 am

All accept that as withdrawal of your unqualified criticism of liberal democracy.
You only concede under pressure.
Perhaps try using more precise language.
Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 11:54 am

Withdrawal ??

More like a confirmation of my position.

“Perhaps try using more precise language.”

Perhaps try to mount a defense of liberal democracy.
A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 12:23 pm

My point is that liberal democracy is flawed, and there are various shades of grey.
I made this clear with the comment you chose to reply to.
You launched into an unqualified, trenchant criticism of liberal democracy as a system.
You now accept that there are examples of success in liberal democracy, and you can’t provide examples of success in another system.
That’s fine with me.
Terence MillsNovember 11, 2024 at 12:33 pm

At the end of the day it’s the economy that drives democratic results. In the US, the year-on-year inflation rate was 7.0% at the end of 2021 and 6.5% at the end of 2022. At the end of 2023, it was 3.4%. The rate was 2.4% for September 2024.

Jobs and growth were both positive yet the election seems to have been fought on a perception of individual finances going backwards – Trump asked the question ‘are you better off now than four years ago’ and the inevitable answer was NO !

Dutton yesterday posed the same question in a speech and of course nobody is prepared to say that they are better off under Labor despite inflation having come down from 6.2% to 2.8%.

The problem Labor have going into the 2025 election is that, if the RBA continue to maintain interest rates at current levels, Labor will lose based on the perception that incomes are going backwards and cost of living is increasing.
leefeNovember 11, 2024 at 12:39 pm

An alternative democratic system should be one that operates on the principles of fair dealing, cooperation, mutual development and mutual prosperity.

And still no nuts and bolts, just general principles. Like Trump, you seem to have nothing more than “the concept of a plan”.
Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 1:08 pm

Exactly what do you want from me leefe?

Do you want me to write the Constitution of a hypothetical true democracy?

Get real.
Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 1:13 pm

AC’s quote from Churchill clearly implies that democracy is a superior from of governance.
I agree with the sentiment.
My criticism was directed at liberal democracy, for the reasons given.

AC was happy to “contribute” to a discussion of liberal democracy.
While admitting that liberal democracy is flawed, AC is not happy with my “unqualified, trenchant criticism of liberal democracy as a system.”
If he’s not happy with my criticism he has an obligation to refute it. It appears that he cannot do that.

AC seems to have no appreciation of the value of developing a logical argument.
It escaped his notice that my reply to his query about the Nordic countries flowed seamlessly from the discussion I had with Clakka about the need to regulate capitalism. The Nordic countries are a great example of that, but AC, with his understanding being stunted by a predilection for dot-point brevity, has mistaken the nuance involved as a backdown on my part.

The Nordic countries are regarded as liberal democracies because they have many features in common with liberalism on the political front, but their economic model is not liberal, and so is coming under pressure to conform as confirmed by the OECD report.

Here’s how the benefit of a logical argument played out.
After replying to Clakka, I had to do a search on the Nordics as I had only a very limited knowledge of their economic circumstances.
It only took 5 minutes to come up with data that supported my position.
There is no great skill involved in developing a logical argument.
The important aspect is to not assume. To ensure that points made can be backed by evidence.
Because I had been dealing in generalities, I had to establish details to answer AC’s query properly. And because I had made no assumptions in establishing my criticism of liberal democracy, details in support came quickly.

AC cannot simply declare that my criticism of liberal democracy is not acceptable.
He must refute the arguments.
A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 1:37 pm

You’re all over the shop.
It’s hilarious!
I’m happy to promote change for the better and accept liberal democracy is imperfect. I advocate continuous systemic review and improvement.
I haven’t suggested anything to the contrary. On the other hand, you engaged in unqualified, trenchant criticism of liberal democracy, you didn’t differentiate.
You condemned the system.
Now, under pressure, you provide qualification and moderate your comments, that’s good progress.
There is nothing I need to demonstrate beyond that.
But here’s a suggestion- there are 193 countries.
It is a vast spectrum, such a diversity of choice, which country has a system of government you advocate?
CanguroNovember 11, 2024 at 1:59 pm

Language, to state the bleeding obvious, is a governing feature of humanity and the major differentiating factor between us and the rest of the animal kingdom, not to discount those other creatures’ capacity to communicate in their own unique ways.

Nonetheless, just as consciousness has its ups and downs in terms of quality of perceptiveness and awareness, so does language quality vary on individual bases, clearly there is a gradation allied to intelligence, sensitivity and perception.

It’s often observed that humanity has a herd-like quality, that there is such a thing as a crowd mentality. It’s not that difficult to understand. Fitting in is seen as desirable, rather than being on the edge, the outer. People agree to the current norms, often without any element of discriminatory reflection. Millennials overuse the word ‘like’; it pads out their sentences when in conversation by a significant amount, yet the word itself is mostly meaningless in the overall transmission of information. A century ago many working-class Australians commonly used rhyming slang in their everyday conversations, a pattern adopted from the Cockneys of London.

Herd consciousness implies beliefs in things that may or may not be true. I noticed a comment in the above thread that suggested a willingness “to bet that the sun will continue to rise every morning and set every evening.” We do say that, and I’m willing to bet almost everybody accepts that notion, sun rises, sun sets. Easy peasy. Except it doesn’t. The sun stays in its position at the center of our solar system. It doesn’t rise and set. It only appears to rise and set because of the Earth’s rotation on its axis, once every 24 hours.

Why didn’t we change the way we spoke when this physical phenomenon become the orthodox explanation of the sun ‘rising’ & ‘setting?’ The manner of speaking about this is hardly the most important thing in our lives, but it does point to a significant feature of language use, that for the sake of being in communication with others, we’re willing to tolerate a degree of slippage away, as it were, from the utter truth of the matter.

Trump’s election is a very good example of this human aspect. At individual levels, person by person, any rational appraisal of that man would have him discounted as a contender in a flash. One would say, with the firmest of conviction, ‘no bloody way, mate, am I going to vote for a man like that.’ The same would apply the GOP who if on the same basis selected their candidate for the presidency; he would never have been selected, and more likely marched off to prison.

Herd behaviour… scary, indeed, and likely responsible for much of this planet’s woes.
Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 2:05 pm

“You condemned the system.”
Indeed I did. And I will continue to condemn a system based on exploitation and plunder.
The very system you want to defend but are unable to defend.

“you provide qualifications and moderate your comments.”
There’s no qualifications or moderation from me.
Why do you keep repeating a falsehood?
The Nordics are the perfect example of independent economic development coming under pressure to conform to the liberal model. Are you incapable of understanding the difference? Can you not distinguish between economic liberalism and political liberalism? If you believe that serious govt intervention in the economy is part of the liberal model then your understanding of liberalism is zero.

“There is a vast spectrum, which has a system of government you advocate?”
The old strawman argument.
A sign of an argument struggling for life.
Did I advocate a particular system?

You can begin your defense of liberal democracy whenever you’re ready.
A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 3:23 pm

Keep digging
I’m an advocate of liberal democracy, even with its known deficiencies.
I support a systemic cycle of analysis , review, definitive proposals and implementation of improvement.
You’ve decided to keep up your trenchant criticism of liberal democracy, but you are unable to articulate the system you seek to replace it with. You can’t even identify one of 193 countries that has a better model.
Negativity is pointless (and intellectually lazy), unless it is accompanied by a proposal and details of a specific, guaranteed, better future.
Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 3:50 pm

“You can’t even identify one of 193 countries that has a better model.”
Still going with the straw-man option I see.

“I support a systemic cycle of analysis , review, definitive proposals and implementation of improvement.”

Empty words.

You’ve had ample opportunity to expound on “a systemic cycle of analysis , review, definitive proposals and implementation of improvement” in regard to liberal democracy, but you choose to not do so.
Let’s have it.
Why have we not seen it?

You’ve had ample opportunity to refute my criticisms of liberal democracy but you choose to not do so.

But it’s not all bad news.
Escape from Plato’s Cave is always an option.
A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 6:36 pm

Didn’t I mention that vacuous criticism without providing any counter proposal (or solution) is intellectually lazy?
If you are unequivocally disdainful of liberal democracy, what do you propose to replace it with? And what guarantees can you provide that your preferred system of government will result in widespread prosperity, improved health and greater happiness/satisfaction for the population?
Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 8:12 pm

“what do you propose to replace it with?”
Have you not been paying attention? A true democracy will be anything its members want it to be.
My preferences are therefore irrelevant.

But your insistence on me laying out a structure in black and white is evidence for the authoritarian mindset that lies at the heart of liberalism.

Liberalism is supported by two personality types — those who enjoy laying down the law, and those who are so weak of character that they need others to do their thinking for them.
They actually feel safe and secure by not having to think. And it’s clear from your inability to mount a defense of liberalism which group you belong to.

“And what guarantees can you provide that your preferred system of government will result in widespread prosperity, improved health and greater happiness/satisfaction for the population?”

Since when has a liberal been concerned with the social good?
Oh yes, when election time rolls around.

The whole intent of liberal economics is to service the needs of the individual.
Here’s the manifesto of the UK liberal Party — “The Liberal Party exists to create a liberal society, in which every citizen shall possess liberty, property and security, and none shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity. Its chief care is for the rights and opportunities of the individual, and in all spheres it sets freedom first.”
Do you detect the weasel words there?
A professed regard for the social good, but a clear statement that its chief care is the individual.

Or there’s this from the Oz Libs — “we work towards a lean government that … maximises individual and private sector initiative…where the role of law and justice is maintained… equal opportunity for all Australians; and the encouragement and facilitation of wealth so that all may enjoy the highest possible standards of living, health, education and social justice… and that businesses and individuals – not government – are the true creators of wealth and employment. In short, we simply believe in individual freedom and free enterprise; and if you share this belief, then ours is the Party for you.”
Again we see a professed care for the social good that takes second place to the individual.

So don’t try claiming a regard for the social good and a regard for liberal democracy.
The two concepts are in conflict.
A CommentatorNovember 11, 2024 at 8:43 pm

“A true democracy will be anything its members want it to be.”
Finally we’re making some progress.
Given that there are no widespread demands for fundamental change in our system of government, I believe it’s reasonable that you agree the members of society have decided that this is the model they support.
Thank you.
CanguroNovember 11, 2024 at 9:09 pm

SD, weasel words notwithstanding, the UK Liberal Party ceased to be in early 1988. Relevance please?
Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 9:21 pm

Canguro.

It’s still in existence.
They have a Constitution written 2021.

But it would not have mattered if it was 1821.

I was demonstrating the consistency of the anti-social nature of liberal priorities across the board.
Steve DavisNovember 11, 2024 at 10:04 pm

“Finally we’re making some progress” says AC.

I suspected that AC was not paying attention.
I stated yesterday at 9.28pm that a true democracy must be anything its members want it to be.
That was repeated at 9.28 am today.
AC needs to focus.

But it gets worse.
“Given that there are no widespread demands for fundamental change in our system of government, I believe it’s reasonable that you agree the members of society have decided that this is the model they support.”
Now we really are in la-la land.

AC has introduced the Australian situation to divert attention from the attempt at global control that the liberal democracies engage in.
The Australian situation is not relevant because there is no major movement for change.
But we all know what the reaction would be if such a movement did develop.

The military interventions carried out regularly by the US and its allies, including us, are not about giving the troops an overseas holiday.
They are carried out to prevent the establishment of independent systems of governance.

That’s the true face of liberal democracy.
A system that is prepared to murder and destroy just to preserve an ideology.

I thank AC again for giving me the opportunity to draw attention to this horror story once more.
A CommentatorNovember 12, 2024 at 8:41 am

Just explain which liberal democracy has mass protests against liberal democracy.
Where are there examples of widespread disaffection with liberal democracy?
Only the US. Unfortunately.
Steve DavisNovember 12, 2024 at 8:53 am

Not only the US.

Keep your eye on Europe.
ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 11:57 am

AC:

Where are there examples of widespread disaffection with liberal democracy?

AC, you have heard of Les Gilets Jaunes in France, the Alternative für Deutschland in Germany, the Partij voor de Vrijheid in the Netherlands, Sverigedemokraterna in Sweden, the Fratelli d’Italia in Italy, or Prawo i Sprawiedliwość in Poland?

They are around, you know. The politics of using the liberties provided for by liberal democracy to challenge and constrain liberal democracy itself.
ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 12:10 pm

AC (November 10, 2024 at 4:13 pm)

… how about you describe the system you propose?

There is no “one system” that will rid us of all problems, in one fell swoop, once and for all eternity. The human condition is a moving target, and developing and implementing constructive public policy initiatives necessitates continuous incremental improvement, in a “We build our road as we travel” sort of a manner. Robert Nozick famously hit upon this very problem in his acclaimed 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia:

The preface of Anarchy, State, and Utopia contains a passage about “the usual manner of presenting philosophical work”—i.e., its presentation as though it were the absolute final word on its subject. Nozick believes that philosophers are really more modest than that and aware of their works’ weaknesses. Yet a form of philosophical activity persists which “feels like pushing and shoving things to fit into some fixed perimeter of specified shape.” The bulges are masked or the cause of the bulge is thrown far away so that no one will notice. Then “Quickly, you find an angle from which everything appears to fit perfectly and take a snapshot, at a fast shutter speed before something else bulges out too noticeably.” After a trip to the darkroom for touching up, “[a]ll that remains is to publish the photograph as a representation of exactly how things are, and to note how nothing fits properly into any other shape.”

Of course, Karl Marx beat Nozick to this insight by some 125 years, stating in the Communist Manifesto that:

The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionising the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society.

And that, consequently:

All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real conditions of life, and his relations with his kind.

(Emphasis mine)

I can’t, therefore, provide a complete and exhaustive description of how we should go about governing ourselves from hereon in.

Nobody can!

And anybody who says s/he can, is having you on. Wether due to ignorance or deceitful intent. Or perhaps a mix of both.
ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 1:13 pm

Over the last three days, I’ve repeatedly tried to post a reply to AC’s quest for alternative politics, only to receive “•Access Denied – GoDaddy Website Firewall”.

It’s just this one comment. Other comments, on other threads and on this one, post without problem.

Does GoDaddy have a problem with anarchist content? And the post in question doesn’t even mention the a-word.
CanguroNovember 12, 2024 at 1:31 pm

Arnd, the workaround is to write your post, cut and paste it into a vanilla file space (e.g. Notepad), then copy the first couple of sentences into the AIMN comment field and post.

Then click the edit link within the 20 minute timeframe, and copy the rest of your post into the AIMN field, adjusting for paragraph separation etc.

This gets around the GoDaddy blocking PITA (pain in the arse), and is endorsed by MT.
ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 2:26 pm

Thanks, Canguro. The resident “AIMN Whisperer”.
ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 2:33 pm

Let’s try this:

Given the reservations about “finite” or “ultimate* political schemes as indicated in my previous post, a broad direction for future policy development in western (post-)industrial societies in particular would include the following:

Firstly, we need to find ways of backing and complementing our liberal democratic POLITICAL order with a commensurate liberal democratic ECONOMIC order. Contrary to ubiquitous assumption and assertion, our contemporary Global Corporate Consumer Capitalism operates in violation of basic principles of liberty. It is not a FREE market economy!
ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 2:54 pm

Secondly, we do need fundamentally to review the basic operating principles of our contemporary liberal, representative, constitutional democracy. Most importantly, we need to (re-)define and clarify the actual rightful constitutional LIMITS of limited government.
ArndNovember 12, 2024 at 3:04 pm

Ok, so I chopped up my post into individual bits, and they seem to go up alright.

Except GoDaddy really doesn’t like my third point, about re-orienting our legal system. Is GoDaddy a bloody lawyer?
A CommentatorNovember 12, 2024 at 5:27 pm

“Not only the US.
Keep your eye on Europe”

Congratulations.
The main rallying points for the US and European opponents of liberal democracy are-
° immigration, particularly by those of non European descent
° the rights of minority groups, particularly the most sexually marginalised
° the role of women, including abortion
You must be delighted with your cohort of opponents of liberal democracy
Steve DavisNovember 12, 2024 at 5:48 pm

For a few deluded hours I had convinced myself that AC had adopted a more reasonable persona.

“You must be delighted with your cohort of opponents of liberal democracy”

What delights me is that many who were promised so much by liberal democracy propaganda are waking up to the con.
A CommentatorNovember 12, 2024 at 6:04 pm

Yes, in Europe and the US, extreme intolerance, ignorance, bigotry, sexism and racism are the key characteristics of the opponents of liberal democracy. Congratulations on your cohort.
Steve DavisNovember 12, 2024 at 7:05 pm

Repetition?
That’s all AC has?

He must be really kicking himself for posting a comment that made him look reasonable.

He must learn to guard against such weakness.
A CommentatorNovember 12, 2024 at 7:32 pm

Hardly
You retreated from your trenchant criticism of liberal democracy, to a more moderate view.
When I identified this, your dug yourself deeper into the extreme position.
It was reminiscent of you claim that economic facts, data and statistics are meaningless in a discussion about economics.
That was so hilarious, I see no reason to stop reminding you of your ridiculous statement.
Now, we’ve established that you think democracy is whatever people think democracy is.
That’s ok as long as you accept that overwhelmingly people in democratic nations prefer the system to its options.
And I’ll again point out that the major opponents of the democratic system are ignorant, homophobic, sexist, racists.
Keep cheering them on.
Steve DavisNovember 12, 2024 at 9:01 pm

“You retreated from your trenchant criticism of liberal democracy, to a more moderate view.”
This is not looking good for AC, he’s fantasizing.

“we’ve established that you think democracy is whatever people think democracy is.”

Oh no. He’s reverted to his serial fabricator mode. This is worse than I thought.
My actual statement was “A true democracy will be anything its members want it to be.”

AC on the other hand, even though supporting liberal democracy without actually outlining the reasons for his support, clearly prefers a democracy to be whatever the 1% want it to be.
And that throws some light on what has gone on here for a day or two.
AC has refused to argue a case for liberal democracy because he knows that path will expose the manipulation of democracy by elite interests.
He’s all for the 1%.

“And I’ll again point out…”
AC just cannot stop repeating himself.
Before we know it he’ll be repeating my arguments again, as he did earlier.
I’ll make it easy for him — he has my permission to repeat my arguments in dot form.

Now, if only I could teach him to join the dots.
CanguroNovember 12, 2024 at 10:55 pm

AC, given that you have a track record of strongly defending your points of view, understandably and admirably, I’m curious how you arrived at the position where you assert that “the major opponents of the democratic system are ignorant, homophobic, sexist, racists.”

Can you please provide examples or supporting evidence for this trenchant position. Who are these ‘major opponents’, and why have you labelled them as you have?

It would seem that you possess an uncommon depth of insight or insider knowledge to allege such egregious failings as ignorance, homophobia, sexism & racism.

To be fair to your argument, you ought to be able to cite who these opponents are. Otherwise, it would seem to be merely a wild rant, a shout into the breeze.
A CommentatorNovember 13, 2024 at 11:51 am

Are the increasingly popular movements supportive of immigration? Acceptance of asylum seekers? Do they seek greater diversity? Were they on board with marriage equality? Do they wish to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation and identity? Are they tolerant of others?
Brexit, EU, French, Italian, Hungarian, Austrian, Dutch, US (and more) elections are serious indicators.
The right are the disruptors and the trenchant critics of liberal democracy give comfort to these neo fascists.
Mindless verbose critics, that cannot offer a better, or even an alternative system of government resonate with the right wing, who are largely ignorant, disaffected white men.
ArndNovember 13, 2024 at 2:52 pm

AC,

… who are largely ignorant, disaffected white men.

Firstly, there’s mounting evidence that Trump, for example, did rather well with Latino and Black men, and women, including White women.

Secondly, you make it sound as if White men have nothing rightfully to be disaffected about! I am an able-bodied White cis male, and I can certainly see plenty to be disaffected about.

Others? Maybe not so much. I did, on these pages, reproach Bert Hetebry for his insouciant optimism, bordering on pollyannaish naïvité. I don’t think he sees any need fundamentally to question the precepts of so-called “liberal democracy”, and doesn’t understand, let alone feel any urge to look for alternatives to our present arrangements. You, AC, might be possessed of a similar “relaxed and comfortable” attitude. An attitude which some others – myself included – tend to discount as “smug and complacent”. I have held for some time now that this liberal middle-class self-approbation is one of the major forces driving increasing numbers of disaffected punters into the welcoming arms of reactionary populists.
Steve DavisNovember 13, 2024 at 3:36 pm

AC has refused to answer Canguro’s simple and precise question.
The question was — Who are the “major opponents of the democratic system” that are so disturbing to AC.

It cannot be the countries AC mentioned because they are all liberal democracies.

It cannot be those who swung to the right in recent EU elections because they were simply exercising their democratic right, and many will undoubtedly swing back next time.
It is impossible to tell what motivates individual voters. But AC knows.

A vote for the right is no indicator of opposition to democracy. Yet AC has declared the results of exercising voting rights to be a “serious indicator.” When they exercise their democratic right they are “disruptors”.
The true face of liberalism is revealed right there.

AC sees neo-fascism in protests from the right but cannot see it in the Gaza genocide. He sees neo-fascism in election results that are at odds with the liberal agenda because liberals, for all their fine words, actually fear democracy.

The problem we are seeing here with AC’s view of the world is the very serious problem that arises from the urge to condense the data, the information, and the facts that flow into our consciousness at a rate that we’ve not had to deal with in our entire evolutionary history.
Many people struggle to handle this onslaught, so in understandable desperation they engage in reductionism.
In order to deal with just the small chunk of reality that they are comfortable with, they compartmentalise.
They separate.
In doing so they remove the links between events that give clarity and understanding.

Those who are affected this way deal with it in different ways, and as we’ve seen over many months, AC uses the dot-point format as his escape mechanism.
The brevity of the dot-point format has its uses, but is also prone to excessive reductionism, the exclusion of context, and a false appearance of coherence and order.
It leads to complex matters that developed over decades or centuries being reduced to a few dot points. As we saw at Who Are the Narcissists where the referenda over control of Crimea, with a history covering decades, was reduced to a few dot points.

Simple logic tells us that isolating aspects of reality will result in a warped perception of reality.
Because unless a conscious effort is made to look for connections between compartments, the totality of reality will be missed.

We see no effort from AC to connect. Quite the opposite.
We saw that at Who Are the Narcissists where he was fixated on a memorandum signed in 1994 as though this single item was all that was significant in a complex relationship that developed over centuries and resulted in conflict.
We saw it at Pallywood Tactics, Al-Shifa Hospital and Israel’s Propaganda Effort where he used isolated details from the Hamas Charter to obscure the crimes occurring in the big picture. And for his noble attempt “to provide perspective” as he put it, he copped a hammering from all and sundry.

We see no effort from AC to connect in this current discussion.
For reasons that he will not disclose, he minimises by omission the very real suffering on a massive scale that has been the history of liberal democracy. And which continues today as we look on in disbelief at the brazen contempt that liberal democracy has for ordinary decent values and international law.

At Pallywood AC stated “I think too many people seek out opinions to reinforce their own, rather than specifically seeking to have their views dissected and debated. Opinions are more informed and sharper if they are available for critical examination.”
So why the reluctance to have his views and opinions of liberal democracy dissected and debated here?
Surely he would like to see his views more informed and sharper?
I’m here to help.
He can begin whenever he’s ready.
Steve DavisNovember 13, 2024 at 4:46 pm

Slight correction, the leader of Hungary refers to it as an illiberal democracy, but a democracy nonetheless.
Steve DavisNovember 14, 2024 at 5:28 am

It’s no wonder AC is in a tizz.
The iron grip of the liberal system on international finance and trade appears to be crumbling.

From ledgerinsights.com, 31 Oct 2024 — The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) has been involved with the mBridge cross border CBDC payment system for four years. Today the General Manager of the BIS, Agustín Carstens, said the project has been handed over to the central banks. They are the central banks of China, Hong Kong, Saudi Arabia, Thailand and the UAE. (Basically a BRICS takeover. SD)
mBridge uses blockchain to enable commercial banks to make cross border payments using wholesale central bank digital currencies (wCBDCs). The design supports local currency payments. The G20 has goals of making cross border payments faster, cheaper and more transparent. mBridge is one of the potential solutions to make that happen.
China was responsible for the technology working group and recently shared plans to open source the blockchain-based software. (WOW !!!)
During the recent BRICS summit, discussion of a BRICS Bridge payment system continued. Given China and the UAE are BRICS members, alongside sanctioned countries Iran and Russia, the perception that mBridge could in any way overlap with BRICS Bridge put the BIS in a tricky position.
Talking today at the Santander International Banking Conference, Mr Carstens addressed the issue head on. “Whatever projects we put together should not be a conduit to violate sanctions,” he said. “mBridge is not the BRICS Bridge and I have to say that categorically. mBridge was not created to cater (to) the needs of BRICS. It was put together to satisfy broad central bank necessities.”
According to Bloomberg, the issue was discussed during last week’s IMF meetings. The potential for the BIS to withdraw was considered.
However, Mr Carstens stated that politics was not the driver of the BIS handover. (Yeah, right.)
“I would say that the project has been so successful that we can declare that we’ve graduated out of that project. The BIS is leaving that project. Not because it was a failure and not because of political considerations, but mostly because we have been involved for four years and it is at a level where the partners can carry it on by themselves,” said Mr Carstens.
The mBridge project progressed to the minimum viable project (MVP) stage in June, although Mr Carstens said is still needs many years of work. “mBridge is not mature enough to start operating,” he added. (He hopes. SD)
In a statement, the mBridge Steering Committee expressed its appreciation to the BIS, saying the handover would allow the BIS to redirect resources to other innovation projects at earlier stages.
“The project team remains fully committed to unlocking the full potential of the mBridge platform and will continue to explore the potential for advancing the platform from the MVP to the full production stage,” the Committee stated.
Meanwhile, earlier this week the Bank of China (Hong Kong) announced it is the first fully operational Hong Kong bank that has integrated with mBridge. It will use the platform for select corporate customer payments.

So while claiming that the BIS is not political, Carstens stated that BIS could not be involved in sanctions avoidance. The only sanctions that have legal standing are those imposed by the UN. But it appears from this that the BIS has been assisting US imposed sanctions.

Fear in the West is palpable. From Reuters — Josh Lipsky at the Atlantic Council think-tank said the BRICS debate showed payment systems have become a geopolitical issue. The BRICS summit hosted by Russia earlier this month had raised more concerns among Western powers about cross-border digital currency ambitions, he said.
“If there’s even a possibility that mBridge could be helpful to those ambitions the West wants no part of it,” Lipsky said.
“But it’s fair to ask what the consequences of this decision are. China will surely continue the work, and now the Fed, which is a member of the BIS, will have even less visibility into the project.”

The question now is — Will the Empire strike back? Its history says Yes.
Steve DavisNovember 15, 2024 at 1:20 pm

The activities of the Bank for International Settlements are worth a deeper look.

I have referred in the past to the liberal democratic order as having criminal intent.
That was not merely hyperbole.
The admitted action from the bank CEO seen in my previous comment, can be seen as criminal activity.
The CEO of BIS made it clear that BIS could not be associated with projects that become “a conduit to violate sanctions.”
In other words, the bank assists sanctions.
It sees the facilitating of sanctions as such a crucial part of its activities that it cannot tolerate even an off-shoot organisation such as mBridge working its way around sanctions. This shows how thoroughly politicized the BIS has become.

The legal situation can be seen from the following — From cambridge.org — “In addition to being a major attack on the principle of self-determination, unilateral measures not only adversely affect the rights to international trade and to navigation but also the basic human rights of innocent civilians.”
And from the UN — “On 26 September 2014, the Human Rights Council adopted resolution 27/21 and Corr.1 on human rights and unilateral coercive measures, establishing the mandate. The most recent renewal of the resolution was on October 2023, HRC resolution 54/15. These resolutions stress that unilateral coercive measures and practices are contrary to international law, international humanitarian law, the UN Charter and the norms and principles governing peaceful relations among States …”

The impact of sanctions on developing countries such as Venezuela are immense. The equivalent in fact, to the effects of weapons of mass destruction.

From The Lancet, June 2019 — Since 2014, 43 unilateral, coercive measures have been applied against Venezuela by the US Administration. These have effectively paralysed the economy, blocked oil exportation globally, and frozen Venezuelan financial assets abroad while denying access to international financial systems. This loss in oil revenue and assets has amounted to a shortfall worth billions of US dollars, prohibiting the importation of essential, lifesaving products.
The impact of the US sanctions on the Venezuelan population cannot be overstated. More than 300 000 Venezuelans are at risk due to a lack of lifesaving medications and treatment. An estimated 80 000 HIV-positive patients have had no antiretroviral therapy since 2017. Access to medication such as insulin has been curtailed because US banks refuse to handle Venezuelan payments for this. Thousands to millions of people have been without access to dialysis, cancer treatment, or therapy for hypertension and diabetes. Particular to children has been the delay of vaccination campaigns or lack of access to antirejection medications after solid organ transplants in Argentina. Children with leukaemia awaiting bone marrow transplants abroad are now dying. Funds for such health-assistance programmes come from the PDVSA state oil company. Those funds are now frozen. Food imports dropped by 78% in 2018 compared to 2013. The very serious threat to health and harm to human life caused by these US sanctions are thought to have contributed to an excess of 40 000 deaths in 2017–18 alone.
The UN Human Rights Council reported that “the use of economic sanctions for political purposes violates human rights and the norms of international behavior. Such actions may precipitate man-made humanitarian catastrophes of unprecedented proportions. Regime change through economic measures likely to lead to the denial of basic human rights and indeed possibly to starvation, has never been an accepted practice of international relations.” These sanctions fit the definition of collective punishment of the civilian population, as described by the Geneva (Article 33) and Hague conventions, to which the USA is a signatory. These sanctions are also illegal under international and federal US law. Given the intentional action to destroy a people, in part or in whole, the US economic sanctions and their effect on the preventable mortality of Venezuelans fit the UN definition of genocide.
Furthermore, the US State Department recently boasted about the economic hardship that they have caused through their now expunged communiqué, released on April 24, 2019. They assert that “US policy has and continues to prevent the Venezuelan Government from participating in the international market and has led to the freezing of its overseas assets”. US National Security Advisor John Bolton stated that they are backing the illegal coup in Venezuela, as “it will make a big difference to the United States economically if we could have American oil companies invest in and produce the oil capabilities in Venezuela”.

So, straight from the mouth of Jon Bolton, the US uses sanctions to exploit and plunder. The BIS supports this.

And that is the history of liberal democracy.
CanguroNovember 15, 2024 at 1:48 pm

Lest we forget: I am reminded, on the back of Steve Davis’s latest post, of the comments made in 1966 by Clinton’s Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, on the human cost of American sanctions against Iraq.

When asked to comment on the reported deaths of close to half a million Iraqi children; she responded by saying that “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price — we think the price is worth it.”

I don’t think this is out of character with regard to American foreign policy. Examples of such brutal indifference to the sufferings of others (as in, not Americans) are legion. The political instabilities that characterise most of the South American countries are by & large legacies of American interference; ditto SE Asia, the Middle East and Central Asia, Caribbean countries too. The melding of commercial interests with the willingness of American governments to impose military interventions in support of American corporations is well established, as is, as Steve Davis has pointed out, the continued use of sanctions to throttle and weaken foreign regimes whether duly elected or otherwise, for their own – American – benefit.

What we are witnessing, and have been witnessing for well over a century, is a country exercising its considerable power over lesser nations by virtue of promulgation of policies of deliberate cruelty & inhumanity, in order to harvest benefits for itself. The savagery of the United States of America ought, I would argue, be something that is forced to the front of planetary consciousness and the planet’s peoples ought, as much as they are able, to do everything in their power to disenfranchise that criminal nation and weaken it by whatever means available.

On a side note of decreasing relevance, I see the commentator AC has clearly fallen down a rabbit hole and found himself incapacitated and unable to respond to direct questioning.
ArndNovember 15, 2024 at 4:37 pm

Thanks for the reminder, Canguro.

Maddy A. may well already be be roasting in a special place in hell reserved for women who don’t help the children of other women.
Jon ChestersonNovember 15, 2024 at 5:07 pm

Canguro – ‘Lest we forget: I am reminded, on the back of Steve Davis’s latest post, of the comments made in 1966 by Clinton’s Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, on the human cost of American sanctions against Iraq. When asked to comment on the reported deaths of close to half a million Iraqi children; she responded by saying that “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price — we think the price is worth it.”’

Heavens did she say that! Plain sight and still we are friends with the USA – Unconscionable. 1966, Clinton, surely later? Yet I have never doubted the horror of American foreign policy nor how they seek to justify it.

Liberty should be screaming, sinking in the mud with condemnation and disgust.
Steve DavisNovember 15, 2024 at 5:51 pm

All true Jon.

Available on youtube.

Would have had a gazillion hits by now.
ArndNovember 15, 2024 at 6:15 pm

That quote is from 1996, not 1966!

60 Minutes (5/12/96)
CanguroNovember 15, 2024 at 6:17 pm

Yea, Arnd… must have had one eye closed as I hit the keyboard. 🙁
paul walterNovember 15, 2024 at 7:05 pm

Enjoyed Steve Davis Mencken quote early.

Elephants?

The worlds first mobile organic vaccum-cleaner.
ArndNovember 15, 2024 at 8:13 pm

Hey, paul, Mencken has made many more pithy observations, including a definition of democracy as “the belief that the people know what they want, and deserve to get it, good and hard!”

By the way, Steve Davis is wrong!

What we are seeing is the inevitable decline in standards that we should expect of a system [liberal democracy] that has based itself on the adoration of the individual, and what is worse, an adoration of the whims of the individual.

Steve, please take note: liberal democracy in its conventional (bourgeois) definition is based, not just on the adoration, but on the outright deification of money, and consequently on the glorification of the whims of, not all individuals, but only those individuals who control money.

Go back through your lengthy and closely reasoned posts: do they not all point to the same single problem: the distortion and subversion of political liberty by vested commercial interests?

Hence the need to back up liberal democracy in the political sphere with commensurate democratic principles and processes in the commercial sphere.
Steve DavisNovember 15, 2024 at 8:55 pm

” and consequently on the glorification of the whims of, not all individuals, but only those individuals who control money.”

Not so Arnd.

If that was indeed the case they would be un-electable.
People would eventually see through it.

They curry favour with the masses by telling them their differences are adorable, that their whims are significant and important.
And the masses lap it up because liberalism has given them nothing of real substance to give their lives meaning.

But back to Mencken.
This from Rossleigh just now, just for AC — “For every complex problem, there’s a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” H.L. Mencken
paul walterNovember 15, 2024 at 11:57 pm

With Meckhen the first quote I read of his was,

“Puritanism- the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy”.

You can spend hours reading Mencken quotes and get to revel in your own inner curmugeon.

As to the other, not getting involved. But little doubt much revolves around selfish individualism and its bastard children, victimhood and entitlement. Selfish individualism has been pushed to the max by those who want the consumerist treadmill kept running, but it is only commodiication, if only the poor schmucks ever got a chance to think on it.
ArndNovember 16, 2024 at 1:19 am

Hi Steve,

If that was indeed the case they would be un-electable.
People would eventually see through it.

There’s another Mencken quote about that:

No-one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people!
Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 6:07 am

Arnd, yes indeed, that’s one of my favourites.

And they keep us dumbed down by continually stirring immigration issues and the like.

They keep us focused on difference to keep us isolated, and unaware of the potential for positive change that exists in unity and solidarity.
They want people to see themselves as different.
ArndNovember 16, 2024 at 6:36 am

Good morning, Steve:

They want people to see themselves as different.

Or as Brian insisted:

“You are all individuals!”

And the crowd replied, in unison:

“Yes! We are all individuals!”

A profound insight about humans that Brian hit on there and wanted to communicate. Especially if you consider that, at least according to his mother, Brian was not actually The Saviour.
Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 7:42 am

Thanks for that one Arnd.

I’m gunna borrow that !
Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 8:29 am

I just came across a youtube video from one month ago that covers the matters that came up in this discussion.

I’ve only watched the first nine minutes, so feel free to criticize or praise.

Imperialism, social democracy, and fascism – Garland Nixon & Joti Brar, ep 22

I know, I know, I’ve been dismissive of videos as a medium for political discussion, and still hold that view, but it seems to be evermore commonplace so I guess I’ll have to adjust.

A great improvement on the format would be to restrict the length to 10 mins or so, for those like me with the attention span of a goldfish.
ArndNovember 16, 2024 at 10:47 am

Cool. Except, and as you say: tl;dv (too long; didn’t view). I may get back to it, though. I try to keep an eye peeled for views I do not necessarily agree with.

I googled Yoti Brar. She’s the leader of the British Marxist-Leninists. And good on her – but I have long since concluded that state communism will invariably generate more problems than solutions.

I did some googling myself, and ran across Dr. John R. Ehrenfeld. He and his lot seem to provide quite a few reasonably interesting philosophical prompts, notwithstanding the distinct possibility that they are textbook examples of:

Conservative or Bourgeois Socialism

A part of the bourgeoisie is desirous of redressing social grievances in order to secure the continued existence of bourgeois society.

To this section belong economists, philanthropists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. This form of socialism has, moreover, been worked out into complete systems.

Communist Manifesto, Part III

Of course, Marx most expressly included the anarchists in this unflattering category. But with the philosophical insolence one might typically expect from anarchists, I dismiss that as his problem, not mine!
Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 12:33 pm

Good comment Arnd.
The vid is long, but it’s well worth a look. They jump straight into it.

From the little I know of the UK Marxist Leninists they seem to have the virtue of tolerance of other views.
You referred to the bourgeois socialists, and I’m with Marx on that. They end up stalling progress.
Joti Brar covers it a little also.

“I have long since concluded that state communism will invariably generate more problems than solutions.”

Ah yes, but keep in mind, that’s not the goal.
And Evolution never stops.
A CommentatorNovember 16, 2024 at 1:13 pm

I’ve been busy for a few days, but it seems there are no new insights on the issue under discussion.
In this context I’m willing to make the following observations-
° the system of liberal democracy is our status quo. It is known and well understood.
° no one pretends it is perfect and it’s deficiencies are widely discussed. Advocacy of careful, informed improvement is rational and reasonable
° liberal democracy has produced the vast majority of prosperous countries, with the highest life expectancy and generally the populations with the highest levels of satisfaction
° those proposing significant change to our systems of government and economic regulation remain unable to articulate an alternative
° inability to articulate a compelling case for change, with a clear rationale/guarantee of a better future, is only pointless whinging
° the onus of proof should always remain focused on the whingers who have no positive proposals to advance, particularly the verbose, self important ones
Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 1:53 pm

AC has his head so deep in the sand that he has not noticed that no-one has come to support him. He’s a lone voice in the wilderness trying to convince himself that he’s the voice of reason.
Liberal democracy “is known and well understood” he tells us. Yes, so well known that no-one sees fit to offer support.

“liberal democracy has produced the vast majority of prosperous countries, with the highest life expectancy and generally the populations with the highest levels of satisfaction” he tells us, but does not want to discuss where the prosperity came from and who paid a price for our smug level of satisfaction.

For AC the 500 thousand Iraqi children killed to preserve liberal democracy was worth it.
For AC the Palestinian father holding his shredded child in his arms is a whinger.

My disgust is beyond expression.
A CommentatorNovember 16, 2024 at 2:06 pm

“AC has his head so deep in the sand that he has not noticed that no-one has come to support him.”
Hilarious!!!
Unlike you, I don’t base my comments or views on popularity, or a yearning for cognitive reinforcement.
I’ll leave that to you.
But rather than try to articulate , propose or define a system of government, you (yet again) lapse into “look over there” tactics
Hopeless
ArndNovember 16, 2024 at 4:05 pm

AC, I don’t know whether you have expended any effort in trying to make sense of my previous posts indicating where I think we ought to take democracy from here – GoDaddy certainly did not approve of my elucidations.

Broadly speaking, I am with Steve Davis here: the liberal democratic project that developed in the political West over the last 250 years, commendable and successful as it presents itself, was underwritten by, and is simply unthinkable without, Eurocentric global colonialism and, since the end of WWII, US-centric corporate colonialism (aka “Coca-colonialism”).

Three broad subject areas need addressing.

Firstly, we need to find ways of containing and house-training capitalism.

Secondly, we need fundamentally to re-define and re-negotiate the social contract. Most significantly, the actual limits of “limited government” need to be defined.

Third, we need to embark on a course of sustained reform with the aim of changing the Rule of Law into a “Rule of Reason”.

Of course, these three subject areas are very closely related and interdependent, and consequently any change in one of them is contingent on corresponding changes in the others
A CommentatorNovember 16, 2024 at 4:53 pm

Here’s a little context about my participation here.
° I have a very high regard for the people that created this site. They have sought (successfully) to make it an intelligent, accessible and engaging blog.
° I have no wish to reply to every comment directed to me, or participate on every thread and every subject
° l have zero respect for verbose, opinionated, self important people that try to overwhelm opposing views with sheer volume and relentless whinging, but without offering solution. They appear to have succeeded in discouraging a few previous participants. It is therefore reasonable to push back on them, and that might as well be me from time to time
° I’ve previously identified that democracy has various shades of grey, but the verbose self important type here, didn’t differentiate between the grey of democracies
° If people want to talk about the policies of the USA, go ahead. But “USA” isn’t a universal synonym for “liberal democracy” . I’ve previously made that point. Bland, lazy, thoughtless characterisation should be called out.
° If you wish to delve into the historical consequences of colonialism, go ahead. But don’t ignore or
contextualise the contemporary colonists now disrupting generations of European peace.
° Have you ever seen such a puerile debating point as the one the suggests that a point of view has less credibility if people on this blog don’t chime in with support. That view is beyond pathetic
° But thank you for your informed perspective, I’ll think about it and reply at some point.
ArndNovember 16, 2024 at 6:19 pm

AC, thanks for your reply, and I am genuinely interested in your considered response at some later date.

I’d like to revise two of your points:

First, I agree that “‘USA’ isn’t a universal synonym for ‘liberal democracy’”. Otoh, the USA are almost universally accepted as the dominant exemplar of the political West. The US president is routinely referred to as “The leader of the free world”, and as many nations (NATO, Taiwan, Australia) are finally forced to realise, if the USA can’t or won’t fulfil the role of “Free World Hegemon”, those other nations need to start looking after themselves. That policy shift will have huge consequences and implications.

Second, I am not primarily interested in the historical injustices of Eurocentric colonialism and how the West might atone for them. I am interested in the political and economic implications of the (internally) democratic West now not being able anymore to capitalise on (read: exploit) less advanced nations.

The dynamics and complexities of this subject have attracted my attention way back in the 80s. I had moved to Stuttgart and was furnishing my flat. Unpacking my IKEA shelves, I was surprised to find plenty of “Made in GDR” stickers. Having been manufactured in East Germany made those budget furniture, as well as “Privileg” household appliances, etc., affordable for West German blue collar workers, and provided a source of income for East German industrial workers, even if at much lower wages. I recognised in this no less than a commercial version of commercial apartheid, if you will.

After reunification, this dynamic collapsed, and the net result is the rapid expansion of the German minimum wage sector, which is now the largest in the EU. And which arguably fuels the popularity of the right-wing AfD.

On the same note, during my more recent visits to Berlin I could not fail to notice the almost ubiquitous presence of Polish subcontractors on just about every construction site. Living in Poland, they can afford to undercut German trades, who actually need to charge enough to pay for their families’ living expenses in Germany.

Similar dynamics can be uncovered in many other national economies. Australia’s retail sector – The Good Guys, Harvey Norman, Bunnings – would be unthinkable without cheap consumer goods from South East Asia. And why do you think Australian politicians are so keen to attract Pacific Islanders for menial jobs like fruit picking or aged care?

The much commented hollowing out of the USA manufacturing sector over the last decades, and it shifting to China, clearly precipitated the rise of MAGA. Understandable … – except that Trump’s remedy, namely the imposition of punitive import duties, will price those consumer goods out of reach of many Americans, and really cannot be expected to remedy the fundamental problems inherent in capitalism.

In short, the so-called “Free Market Capitalism” that over the past centuries has generated the “fool’s paradise” wealth of western democracies simply IS NOT A SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS MODEL. It never has been, and it is now running up against its structural limits in a big way. As is the hallowed western notion of “liberal democracy” that has been riding on the back of capitalism since their combined inception.
Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 7:08 pm

The twists and turns of AC’s debating style are a revelation to behold.

Take this for example — “I’ve previously identified that democracy has various shades of grey, but the verbose self important type here, didn’t differentiate between the grey of democracies”
That is a falsehood.
Check my second comment — November 10, 2024 at 12:47 pm, where I stated “Democracy has many virtues but also serious potential weaknesses…By exploiting the weakness in representative democracy, a healthy diversity of views that should be a feature of a robust system have been replaced by an ideology; liberalism.
So successful has this takeover been, that the western democracies are known as liberal democracies. And woe betide any country that strays from the liberal formula in establishing a form of governance suitable to it’s unique circumstances.”

So I actually went to some trouble to differentiate between various forms of democracy and directed my criticism at liberal democracy.

This is not the first time that AC has been caught fabricating.
Check out Who Are The Narcissists where AC was not only caught fabricating, but insisted I discuss a conversation that took place in his head.

AC is a serial fabricator.
A CommentatorNovember 16, 2024 at 10:17 pm

“AC is a serial fabricator.”
Trying to win a point by-
° suggesting credibility is based on likes
° saying economic data, information and facts are “meaningless” in an economic discussion
° makes provocative comments and retreats/modifies when challenged
° stuck in permanent whinging mode, without the capacity or intellect to propose solutions or options
It’s beyond pathetic and hilariously embarrassing
Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 10:35 pm

Economic data are indeed meaningless when presented without context.

As for the retreats/modifies, AC should provide a reference for that or it’s just another porkie.
Michael TaylorNovember 16, 2024 at 11:01 pm

Thank you, AC. That was a huge compliment.

Carol and I are enjoying our first break in almost six years, travelling around the Scottish Highlands.
A CommentatorNovember 16, 2024 at 11:09 pm

You don’t qualify your comments, you retreat under pressure, so let just repeat a few of the comments you’ve made-
#/.All the liberal democracies have become clown shows, including ours (note – “All liberal democracies”
#/.As their clown world disintegrates, the authoritarianism that lies at the heart of liberalism comes to the fore with a crackdown on dissent.
#/. By exploiting the weakness in representative democracy, a healthy diversity of views that should be a feature of a robust system have been replaced by an ideology; liberalism.
#/.Anyone paying attention will have noticed that the world has become more chaotic since the fall of the Soviet Union.
#/. So there’s a stark reminder of the weakness of representative democracy and the danger of liberal democracy — the rules of international morality do not apply.
Then, when challenged, Steve either sooks or qualifies/moderates his comments.
++++++
Now, with regards to economics, can you advise of the context that is required for… 20% interest rates, double digit inflation, a 40% fall in the value of a currency, devoting more of the economy to the military than any NATO country.
They’re the facts (and more) you claimed are meaningless.
Pathetic, self important and verbose.
A CommentatorNovember 16, 2024 at 11:15 pm

Hi Michael, I think you do a great job here with the most difficult group of consumers in the blogosphere!
Scotland in winter is a delight!
My first experience of snow in a city was in Edinburgh, many years ago. It was spectacular
Friendly, funny and self deprecating Scots, with breathtaking scenery, cosy pubs and hearty food.
I’m sure you’ll have a sensational time, and please pass on my best wishes to Carol.
Jon ChestersonNovember 16, 2024 at 11:19 pm

A wee poem for you Michael and Carol while you are over there, slight chance you might have seen it before. Sharing in the spirit of your adventure and don’t drink the stills dry –

And so I look on –
the clan as ne’er it shall be,
mists scroll onto m’
highland seas; moon an’
tartan lay down o’ th’ Clyde,
shimmer an’ sheen
of m’ snare.

The rest of it is over here on AP: https://allpoetry.com/poem/15324132-Cloudy-Isle-by-Barddylbach
Steve DavisNovember 16, 2024 at 11:46 pm

OK, let’s go through them.
And thanks to AC for giving me the opportunity to put my case again.

“All the liberal democracies have become clown shows, including ours”
True. AC can dispute that whenever he’s ready.

“As their clown world disintegrates, the authoritarianism that lies at the heart of liberalism comes to the fore with a crackdown on dissent.” True, with evidence given in support. AC can refute that whenever he’s ready.

“By exploiting the weakness in representative democracy, a healthy diversity of views that should be a feature of a robust system have been replaced by an ideology; liberalism.” True, with evidence given, AC can refute that whenever he’s ready.

“Anyone paying attention will have noticed that the world has become more chaotic since the fall of the Soviet Union.” True, with evidence given, he can refute that whenever he’s ready.

“So there’s a stark reminder of the weakness of representative democracy and the danger of liberal democracy — the rules of international morality do not apply.” True, with evidence given, he can refute that whenever he’s ready.

So where’s the “qualifies/moderates his comments” that it’s been stated I’m guilty of?
Yep, more fabrication from AC.

In regard to the economic data AC suddenly introduced to a discussion, it’s all meaningless if presented without context.
For example, a 20% interest rate is most likely from the central bank dampening a booming economy.

But the fact is that this is pointless anyway.
I could dig out economic data about Australia, or UK, or US, or China that on the surface looks bad, but ultimately it means nothing. None of the major economies are about to go down the gurgler.
It’s just pointless noise.

But fabrication?
Ah, yes. That has a quality all of its own.
Michael TaylorNovember 17, 2024 at 12:06 am

We do love it here, AC. We’ll be in our favourite village, Pitlochry for my 70th. Forecast for the day is -3° overnight and a top of 1° during the day. Snow is possible.

Jon, we will travel up to the Old Pulteney distillery at Wick and will buy every bottle of Stroma they have.
A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 12:19 am

In the past, I think I’ve mentioned my fondness for Scotland. But going for a birthday celebration, that makes it even better
There’s nothing better than a wee dram after being out in the bracing highland chill.
I love the conviviality of the Scots
I’ve just had a look at Pitlochry, beautiful!
And I’m envious!
Jon ChestersonNovember 17, 2024 at 12:43 am

Ah but y’ cannit take it with you Michael, and they’ll not let you back in the country with it all.
A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 9:16 am

Your standard tactic is to make an over the top, provocative comment without qualification.
Under pressure or challenge, you modify or retreat.
You then try to overwhelm opposing views with the volume of self important babble.
It appears to be a compulsive disorder about having the last word in every exchange.
It’s time for this to be (repeatedly) indentified.
° “clown shows” according to you- Norway, New Zealand, Iceland, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Ireland, Switzerland…
° credibility is related to need to have others chime in with support. How embarrassing for you.
° high inflation, punishing interest rates (that continue to increase), a currency that continues to fall, are “meaningless” when discussing economics (now retreating/qualifying)
° keep digging that hole for yourself
Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 10:29 am

“clown shows” indeed.

Who can forget the UK circus where the buffoon Bojo was Ringmaster until he wasn’t, and the lettuce that lasted longer than one of his replacements. As for the others on his list, they are beset by protests because they are clown shows. Liberal democracy is failing as a moral inspiration and failing in practical terms, hence the rise in protests across the board and the repressive quelling of dissent that follows, that has been referred to, and that AC will not discuss. No problem, his choice. But the quelling of dissent undermines all the alleged virtues of liberal democracy that are claimed to place it at the apex of political development.

But in regard to others chiming in with support, it’s great to see that at long last I’ve found a substantial point on which AC and I are in agreement.
AC has chimed in to support me.
He said “… don’t ignore or contextualise the contemporary colonists now disrupting generations of European peace.”

This is a great step forward for AC. He has now shown that he has the integrity to reverse a strongly held position, so full marks to him for that.

He refers of course to the colonization of Ukraine by the US, which has not only disrupted the peace of Europe but also has the very real possibility to progress to a 3rd world war.

And full marks also to AC for detecting the features of colonization that can be seen in Ukraine, but are never referred to as such by the despicable Western media.

Those features are — the setting up of a puppet government amenable to the policies of the colonizer, the privatization of national resources in which foreign corporations now have an interest, the presence of the colonizer’s military in the country, the off-shore training of the colony’s military where the ideals and aspirations of the colonizer can be instilled more effectively — it’s a text-book case of colonization.

And the result of course, that I hope AC will comment on further now that he has a firm foundation, is the ruin of the colonized country.
The ruin of colonized countries is the story of colonization in a nutshell.
And it is the story of the wealth behind the champions of liberal democracy.
A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 10:34 am

More symptoms of a compulsive obsessive disorder.
A craving for cognitive reinforcement and an overwhelming desire to misrepresent, combined with an over inflated sense of importance.
Keep digging
CanguroNovember 17, 2024 at 11:36 am

“The ruin of colonized countries is the story of colonization in a nutshell. And it is the story of the wealth behind the champions of liberal democracy.”

Clear-eyed, unprejudiced, it’s hard to disagree…

The destruction of South American societies began in the 15th century and continued for the next 500 years:
The destruction of African societies also began many centuries ago and continued into the modern era:
The destruction of South-East Asian societies began in the 16th century and continued into the modern era:
The destruction of Australian indigenous societies began in the 18th century and continues to these days:
The wholesale destruction of North American indigenous societies occurred from late 15th century onwards:

In all of these examples, white-skinned colonialists prospered whilst those colonised were exploited – murdered, enslaved, raped & pillaged, exterminated en masse. Monuments praising the debauchery of colonial butchers adorn cities across Europe and North America. Initial American wealth was built on the basis of the exploitation of African slaves. England, Spain, Portugal, Belgium & France all prospered by virtue of exploitation of colonised peoples.

The history of colonisation is ugly, brutal, tragic… there is nothing whatsoever to celebrate; Read (or watch) Jared Diamond’s Guns, Germs and Steel, same for Sven Lindqvist’s Exterminate all the Brutes.
Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 12:02 pm

“… an overwhelming desire to misrepresent”
But what have I misrepresented?

Surely I interpreted AC’s reference to “contemporary colonists” correctly 🙂

Ah, I see what’s happened.
I’ve been warning AC for months that brevity and vagueness are impediments to the development of a logical argument, but what would old mate Steve know? And so we saw brevity and vagueness in the one dot-point.

Did I hasten to exploit this vulnerability?
Everyone knows that’s just not me.

Come on buddy, surely this is good enough for a laugh.
At least a chuckle.

How about a wry grin?
Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 12:06 pm

Canguro, thank you.

A great summary, and much needed.
A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 12:34 pm

When did you decide “all liberal democracies” didn’t mean all of them?
Can you explain how Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Ireland, Switzerland New Zealand etc are “clown shows”?
Did you notice that when I listed those countries you tried to change the subject to the government of the UK, but 4 Prime Ministers ago?
Can you detail how getting support on this blog site adds to your credibility?
Are you able to explain why economic facts, data and statistics are meaningless in a discussion about economics?
CanguroNovember 17, 2024 at 1:02 pm

AC, your partiality is noted. On November 12, 2024 at 10:55 pm I wrote:

AC, given that you have a track record of strongly defending your points of view, understandably and admirably, I’m curious how you arrived at the position where you assert that “the major opponents of the democratic system are ignorant, homophobic, sexist, racists.”

Can you please provide examples or supporting evidence for this trenchant position. Who are these ‘major opponents’, and why have you labelled them as you have?

It would seem that you possess an uncommon depth of insight or insider knowledge to allege such egregious failings as ignorance, homophobia, sexism & racism.

To be fair to your argument, you ought to be able to cite who these opponents are. Otherwise, it would seem to be merely a wild rant, a shout into the breeze.

You ignored my questions. Yet here you are, asking Steve Davis for detail to support his comments.

Seems like you like to play the game of cherry-picking; no doubt you will criticise SD for ignoring you or pointing out your hypocrisy.

Pot, kettle, black, would seem an appropriate descriptor of your presence in these pages.
Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 1:34 pm

Ok, Ok, there’ll be no laugh, no chuckle, not even a wry grin.

“Can you explain how Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Ireland, Switzerland New Zealand etc are “clown shows”?” Already done that, this is getting tiresome.

“Did you notice that when I listed those countries you tried to change the subject to the government of the UK, but 4 Prime Ministers ago?”
No change of subject, because the UK is a great example of the clown show. Your “4 Prime Ministers ago” adds to that. Can you not see it? Do I have to define what a clown show is now?

“Can you detail how getting support on this blog site adds to your credibility?”
You are doing that for me with every comment.
Your “4 Prime ministers” being but one example. I won’t even mention your reference to the US colonization of Ukraine.
A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 2:32 pm

Hilarious! You can’t help yourself.
Let’s make it direct.
How is Iceland (specifically ) a clown show?
Given that “all liberal democracies are clown shows” exactly what system of government do you propose?
How exactly does getting someone to agree with you, on this blog, make your comments more credible?
Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 3:57 pm

How is Iceland a clown show?

AC has forgotten already how Iceland fell for the lies of the free marketeers, aka liberal economists, and deregulated the banks. AC loves economic stats so I’ll leave it to him to fill in the details that led to Iceland having to be bailed out.
Iceland did to itself what the US did to Chile to “make the economy scream.” That’s a clown show.

“How exactly does getting someone to agree with you, on this blog, make your comments more credible?” By having them provide evidence for my points, as AC has done. And I thank him for that.

“exactly what system of government do you propose?” As stated previously, any system based on fairness, cooperation, mutual respect and development would be an advance on the present liberal system that is predatory and murderous. Does AC have a memory problem? Or does AC not have a problem with predation and murder?
A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 5:16 pm

I’ve already pointed out my rationale for participation here.
I’ve been exchanging direct and testing views with the founders of this site for the best part of 2 decades.
Their willingness to accommodate such diversity of opinions and characters is outstanding, and I don’t wish to take advantage of their hospitality.
I don’t reply to every question to me, I don’t participate on every thread, I don’t comment on every issue every day.
I think others might show respect to the founders and their objectives, rather than hounding some participants out.
I have also explained my recognition of the flaws in liberal democracy. I’ve said I’m entirely comfortable with proposals to review, recommend, improve and implement informed, considered change.
Changes to a well established system of government should never be a roll of the dice, or “here’s an (untested) option/idea, let’s try it”
The status quo, and its careful reform doesn’t need detailed explanation, by definition it is the known.
My view is that the onus is entirely on those advocating radical change to make a compelling case. To provide details of their proposed system or solution. They must provide evidence of success, guarantees that the population will be better off- prosperity, health, life expectancy, life satisfaction.
Without taking responsibility for detailing a solution, commentary amounts to nothing more than pointless whining.
This is generally acceptable.
My problem is with compulsive, self important, verbose, vacuous types who try to overwhelm those with an opposing views with sheer volume, rather than intellect.
Fortunately, there seems to be only one of them here.
Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 6:10 pm

AC asked for the reason that Iceland is a clown show, but now does not want to discuss it.
He walks away as though nothing happened.
He asks for a response, he gets a response, and he treats it with contempt.

He has diverted attention from that failure with a repeat of his pledge of loyalty and respect for this site, a pledge that is meaningless. And twice?? What’s going on here?
If he really respected the site he would not engage in fabrications, or insist that others discuss conversations that take place only in his head.
I could overlook an occasional lapse, but these are regularly trotted out.
It is AC who is disrespecting the site.

AC states “My view is that the onus is entirely on those advocating radical change to make a compelling case…They must provide evidence of success, guarantees that the population will be better off- prosperity, health, life expectancy, life satisfaction.’’

I need to make a compelling case to stop predation and murder? How about the world just cries “STOP!”

We are getting some insight now into AC’s thought processes. His character.
He is looking more and more like someone who wants the predation to continue.
Because his argument is that the predation and murder should only stop if there is a guarantee that his smug comfortable lifestyle can continue unchanged. That his comfort and “life satisfaction” is more important than predation and murder.
No discomfort, no bumps in the road for AC.
No thought at all for the millions suffering right now from the colonialism and neo-colonialism that was summarized so well by Canguro.

I cannot comprehend his thought processes.
A CommentatorNovember 17, 2024 at 9:29 pm

You’re really not very good with actual information and facts, are you? Did you notice the following –
° Iceland booms after introducing 4 day working week
° Iceland wins WHO award for focus on “well being” economy
° unemployment rate of 3.1%
° inflation under control
° a stable exchange rate
… try harder to come.up with some justification for your claim that Iceland is a “clown show”
But I’ll admit you have an outstanding ability to inflate your own ego, misrepresent others (deliberately), ignore facts, engage in obfuscation and invent opinions/positions for others
Steve DavisNovember 17, 2024 at 11:07 pm

Iceland did to itself what the US did to Chile to “make the economy scream.”
That’s a clown show. By any definition. And general mistrust in the political system in Iceland continues to this day.

But not only does AC want to forget the bail-out, he also wants to forget the Panama Papers, with revelations “which had major consequences for the Icelandic political context. The Icelandic business community appeared to have an unusually high proportion of ownership of firms and accounts in Tax Havens, such as in Tortola of the Virgin Islands, through at least one intermediary in Panama (many other intermediaries were of course also being used). And it was not just business people that were in the Panama Papers, but the Prime Minister – through his wife – also held assets with a sizable sum in offshore accounts. So were also the leader of the IP, the Minister of Finance, as well as the deputy leader of the IP, the Minister of the Interior.”
Yep. It’s a clown show.

And I thank AC for reminding me that making the economy scream is a great description of the business plan that sustains the neo-colonial operations of the financial institutions set up by the liberal democracies.
But AC does not have to worry himself with that.
He’s OK.
That’s all that matters.
ArndNovember 18, 2024 at 5:45 am

Steve Davis, November 17, 2024 at 6:10 pm

I need to make a compelling case to stop predation and murder? How about the world just cries “STOP!”

Well, the inescapable fact is that so far the world has not cried “Stop!” And it has been a long-standing insight of mine that to expect people to simply stop doing whatever it is they’re doing is not going to work.

What is required are some credible alternative instructions about how to do things differently.

Exploitation, violence, death and mayhem have always been throughout all of human history, and still now are such a constant and deeply ingrained part of the human condition, that most people seem plainly incapable of thinking outside of the violence/ domination/ oppression box.

Steve, take some time out and scroll though Quora or Reddit: you’ll find yourself only ever two or three links away from some “Thank you for your service” patriotic military glorification. And the armament industry is one of the major employers and super fund investment opportunity providers globally.

Deconstructing all of this, and more, WILL take some doing. It will require some “road-mapping”, and it will be more demanding than either Arnd having an exasperated go at Bert Hetebry, or Steve Davis impatiently scoring debating points off A Commenter.
Steve DavisNovember 18, 2024 at 6:57 am

Arnd, I’m surprised at your interpretation of what is happening here.

For starters I believe my patience is exemplary.

You stated “Exploitation, violence, death and mayhem have always been throughout all of human history, and still now are such a constant and deeply ingrained part of the human condition, that most people seem plainly incapable of thinking outside of the violence/ domination/ oppression box.”
That is not correct.

Warfare has not been a constant, there is archeological evidence to the contrary.
And even when it does occur, it is in most cases something of a sideshow because it is a minority that is so engaged. The rest just go about their business and hope it all goes away.

I’m surprised that one so well-read as you has fallen for capitalist propaganda. They want us all to see conflict and division as part of our make-up. The only reason that “most people seem plainly incapable of thinking outside of the violence/ domination/ oppression box” is down to a constant stream of propaganda telling us it’s so. The deliberate dumbing down of society.

And “how about the world just cries STOP!” was never intended as a comprehensive solution to the problems of the world, as you seem to assume.
It’s clear from the two sentences you quoted that it was only about predation and murder.
Think about it.
Do we need to make a compelling case against predation and murder before doing all that’s possible to stop it??

I think not, but go ahead. Convince me otherwise.
ArndNovember 18, 2024 at 8:20 am

Steve,

I believe my patience is exemplary.

Uhhmmm … – I think I can see why you say that. But I also could not fail to notice that in your exchange with AC, you keep playing the man, not the issue (and AC keeps replying in kind).

I’ve repeatedly done the same, so: pot, kettle, black? And it is very difficult and even impossible to avoid: Carol Hanisch offered a succinct explanation of how “The Personal Is Political” back in 1969. It’s a useful, if disturbing rejoinder to Stalin’s calling out of the chronically cavalier attitude towards “collateral damage”: “One death is a tragedy. 10 million deaths are a statistic!” But I still think that personal (character) attacks are not always the most effective way to make a point.

… there is archeological evidence to the contrary.

If you have to rely on interpretation of archeological evidence, you are talking about pre-history. At least according to a widely accepted definition of the demarcation between pre-history and the beginnings of recorded history. And the records of history consist to a very large degree of records of war and usurpation.

I’m surprised that one so well-read as you has fallen for capitalist propaganda.

And I am surprised that you are not differentiating between my noting that this propaganda exists, is all-pervasive, and will require huge effort to undo; and my having fallen for it myself.
ArndNovember 18, 2024 at 8:26 am

Also:

I think not, but go ahead. Convince me otherwise.

Just look at the evidence, in Gaza and the Ukraine: someone obviously thinks that murder and mayhem are ok, and has convinced enough people to go along with it to make murder and mayhem a reality.

If you do not find that evidence convincing, I don’t know what else might help.
Steve DavisNovember 18, 2024 at 9:57 am

Arnd, you said “And the records of history consist to a very large degree of records of war and usurpation.”

You have a point about the distinction between pre-history and history, but you ignore a fact of which you are well aware.
Recorded history is by no means unbiased history. Historians or chroniclers of the day do not, as a rule, record the humdrum affairs of society. They record events that are of interest to those of the day. The dramatic. The extraordinary.
We see it in wildlife documentaries today that focus on two bulls or stags fighting for control of the herd, while the herd goes quietly about its business. A case of “Meet the new boss; same as the old boss.”

And so the historical records of warfare are in many cases records of the extraordinary.
They are not records of society as a whole, and so they are not records of social attitudes.
If a particular chronicler is employed in the service of a monarch for example, the historical record flowing from that will be largely a record of royal attitudes and interests.

And so yes, even though your understanding of the propaganda is exceptional, still you fell for the propaganda. I’m not singling you out for this.
We all fall for for it in different ways and to different degrees. But 24/7 propaganda from the moment of birth has a way of getting inside our heads.
It can be so subtle that even those who are aware do not notice it.
There is a branch of science, evolutionary biology, in which a powerful faction pushes the very thing we are discussing here — the “nature red in tooth and claw” fallacy. And we see that fallacy promoted endlessly in the mass media. Because it’s dramatic. Drama sells.

You said “Just look at the evidence, in Gaza and the Ukraine:” To which I would say — yes and no.
You’re quite correct at the practical level, but my point was first made at the moral level. I was pointing out the lack of morality in bourgeois indifference to suffering.

At the moral level we do not have to make a compelling case.
At the practical level Gaza and Ukraine are examples of the lengths liberal democracies will go to, to preserve their dominance.
A CommentatorNovember 18, 2024 at 11:33 am

Let’s recap a few examples of Steve’s overreach
° all liberal democracies are clown shows ( not some, not the USA, UK and France, “all” of them)
° economic facts, data, and information is irrelevant in a discussion about economics
° whinging without any capacity or willingness to provide details of a workable solution
We know Steve’s major tactic is to post a provocative, over the top comment, and hound any people that respond with volume and misrepresentation
wamNovember 18, 2024 at 11:34 am

Putin has a legitimate fear of the septics and NATO so his assault on ukraine is with purpose the defence was good enough to thwart his plans and now he is ‘hoist on his own petard’ deperately needing trump to give him a reasonable way of withdrawal.
Bibi has murdered palestinians for years and this latest incursion is unconscionable
Steve DavisNovember 18, 2024 at 12:11 pm

It’s really standing out now that AC is keen to discuss details of a tiny country (his choice remember) in order to avoid explaining his support for plunder and murder.
Details. Any detail will do.

And when he’s finished with Iceland, as appears to be the case now, (fickle ain’t he) he will try to move on to Finland, or Luxembourg perhaps. Anything at all to hide his indifference to the suffering of others.

Anything to hide his support for a system that spawns abject creatures like this — from The Guardian 11 months ago — In response to the accusation that the US government organised a coup against Evo Morales in Bolivia in order for Tesla to secure lithium there, Musk tweeted: “We will coup whoever we want! Deal with it.”

That’s the history of the liberal democracy AC supports, right there.
CanguroNovember 18, 2024 at 12:28 pm

I have a hunch, just a hunch, could be wrong, but I’m guessing Elmo’s gonna end up as a modern day Howard Hughes, off his rocker, fully nutso, sequestered in his hideaway and tended by solicitous sycophantic carers who’re only there because they’re paid handsomely to acquiesce to every one of the Rocketman’s mad demands.
ArndNovember 18, 2024 at 12:59 pm

Steve, you’re channeling Pjotr Kropotkin’s answer to (social) Darwinism: Mutual Aid: A Factor Of Evolution. And fair enough.

Otoh, I deliberately maintain a heavy degree of suspicion towards any sort of ‘noble savage’ romanticism!

And whilst there’s statistical evaluations suggesting that contrary to widely reported appearances (“drama sells”), the present is a comparatively peaceful epoch, I still maintain that militarism and violence features very prominently in everyday discourse, and that changing this state of affairs requires more than repeated cries to “just stop it”.

… but my point was first made at the moral level

Ahh! We’re about to open another huge subject: I’ve always been deeply suspicious of “morals”. The term “morals” implies to me an attitude of “This is how we do it because that’s how we always have done it!”. Whereas “ethics” implies a reasoned, examined and explainable code to inform human cooperation.

Therefore you actually will have to make an effort to demonstrate the validity of your decisive stance against murder and mayhem.

And why not? Taking myself through that process is actually what provided the grounding for my anarchist perspectives.

Thus, I will look at the practicalities and the ethics of any issue, but I am most reluctant to get drawn on “moral statements”. Which in this instance makes me agree with AC more than with you: yes, you do need to explain your “morals”, and any implications following therefrom. If you do not, you do engage in impotent grandstanding.

Incidentally, I consider that that is the weak point if the whole “wokism” movement as it has emerged over the last decade or so: way too many forgone and unexamined precepts, leaving themselves wide open to philosophical attack from all angles.
A CommentatorNovember 18, 2024 at 1:07 pm

This is why I’ll continue to challenge your verbosity and self importance
Do you agree your main tactic is make provocative and exaggerated comments?
Do you, when challenged , then modify and qualify such comments?
Do you insist on getting the last word on every exchange?
Are you aware that I’ve observed a number of intelligent, thoughtful people reduce or discontinue participation because of this behaviour?
Do you prefer a withering blogging site, an echo chamber, or a vibrant one that tolerates/appreciates a diverse range of informed views?
Have you reflected on this and considered modifying your blogging tactics?
ArndNovember 18, 2024 at 1:23 pm

AC,

all liberal democracies are clown shows

Pretty much! In my reasoned view, all “liberal democracies” have so far failed to address, let alone resolve, what I have identified (so far mainly for my own benefit) as THE SINGLE MOST PRESSING CONCERN OF CONTEMPORARY POLITICS. And that has effectively turned them into self-parodying clown shows. Or else “Three Ring Circuses”: the legislative, the executive, and the judicative powers – which were meant to check and control each other – merely passing the buck around in endless games of shifting blame and responsibility. Pankaj Mishra commented on the subject in The Guardian five years ago. I say that things have gotten worse since.

economic facts, data, and information is irrelevant in a discussion about economics

Again, I (potentially) concur! Economic data are collected, and are relevant, within a particular conceptual understanding of economics. Change those conceptual parameters at some fundamental level, and the data quickly lose their relevance.

But even when thinking and analysing strictly within the parameters of conventional economics, key indicators may, and often do, lose validity. Google AI offers this introduction to the subject:

“When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure” is a common statement of Goodhart’s law, an adage named after British economist Charles Goodhart. The law reflects the idea that when pressure is applied to a statistical regularity for control purposes, it will tend to collapse.
Steve DavisNovember 18, 2024 at 2:00 pm

Arnd, you said “I’ve always been deeply suspicious of “morals””

And yet, “Without equity there is no justice, and without justice there is no morality.”

Stick to Kropotkin and you can’t go too far wrong.
Steve DavisNovember 18, 2024 at 2:09 pm

AC is not happy with my “provocative, exaggerated comments”.
He has a credibility problem there.
An exaggerated comment should be easy to refute, but when asked to refute my assertions about the murderous activities of the liberal democracies, he retreats into discussions about the economic details of tiny irrelevant democracies.
Why are Iceland or Norway irrelevant? After all, they’re to a certain degree liberal democracies. Surely they are legitimately included in this?

It’s because they are not the movers and shakers of the liberal democracy project.
They tag along because although not victims of the system, they have the potential to become so.
They are trapped in a system from which they see no escape. Just as Australia is. And as I pointed out above, even Norway with its wealth from North Sea oil is not immune to pressure from the OECD to cut back on domestic policies that do not conform to the liberal model.

None of this is provocative. None of this is exaggerated.

“Do you, when challenged , then modify and qualify such comments?”
Actually, I do. Check out my recent exchanges with Arnd. And in the past he converted me on MMT.
I do not modify or qualify until presented with evidence.

If intelligent, thoughtful people reduced or discontinued participation here because of me then they need to look at their own behaviour.
I respond with respect to those who show respect.
A problem quite a few seem to have is that they come here unprepared, then get snarly when challenged. I’ve been tarred with every offensive label imaginable, but I do not reciprocate. As far as I can recall, that is.
I have no problem with someone being totally ignorant on a particular matter. It’s the attitude behind the opinion or the question that determines what follows.

Another mistake seen here from time to time is people using everyday language in their comments, then getting offensive when others are offended. Everyday language is softened by body language and oral cues. Too many forget that.
I’ve learned a lot from others here, and I’d like to think that others have learned from me.

So no, I have not considered modifying my blogging tactics.
If you are not happy with my approach, perhaps you should consider some or all of the above.
A CommentatorNovember 18, 2024 at 2:43 pm

“I have not considered modifying my blogging tactics.”
Are you aware that you’re a visitor/guest at a site that operates as a free public service? It seeks inclusion and diversity of opinion , which you do your best to oppose
You’re incapable of self analysis and reflection
You have no capacity to identify the effect you have on this open blog site.
Pathetic
Steve DavisNovember 18, 2024 at 4:41 pm

Arnd, the history of the“nature red in tooth and claw” fallacy is a fascinating one.
Thank heavens for Kropotkin.
His exposure of Thomas Huxley’s fabrications was a joy to read.

There’s a delightful little reference in Kropotkin’s Ethics: Origin and Development, to his public battle with Huxley that goes; “…Huxley, whom I had to remind, when he began developing ideas worthy of Hobbes, that the appearance of societies on earth preceded the appearance of man.”
And another; “This brilliant evolutionist, (Huxley) who was so successful in spreading Darwin’s teaching of the gradual development of organic forms on the earth, proved quite incapable of following his great teacher in the realm of moral thought.”

These were references to Huxley concealing, in a footnote to an essay, the impact of mutual aid on evolution. Collected Essays, Evolution and Ethics, 1893.

There’s a significant strand of cultish individualism that has featured in English thought since the Norman era, and it re-surfaced in the late 1960s with the discovery of DNA. Coinciding with the greed-is-good era.
The evolutionary biology faction I referred to earlier attempted, successfully for quite some time, to use gene functions to discredit group selection.
Michael TaylorNovember 18, 2024 at 6:32 pm

Well, AC, here we are in beautiful Pitlochry for my 70th.

Unfortunately, that’s the only good news. The rest is bad: our hire car has broken down and Avis don’t want to know about it.
CanguroNovember 18, 2024 at 6:54 pm

And in news totally unrelated to Three Poems, Irony and Apologies to Elephants; former ‘shock jock’ Alan Jones’s arraignment on sexual assault charges just squeaks by the ‘Justice delayed is Justice denied’ maxim and will come as an enormous sense of ‘finally, this prick will get his just deserts’; Schadenfreude notwithstanding, I imagine there will be considerable pleasure taken at the overdue downfall of this nasty individual whose radio career was characterised by his willingness to engage in brutal misogyny, character assassination, vilification, championing of pet causes to the detriment of the better good along with an aggressive modus operandi that intimidated all those who took a stand against him.

No doubt the legal processes now in train will be prolonged and drawn out to the maximum extent permissible, but I do hope that the final outcome is a swapping of his luxurious apartment in the Toaster for a much less salubrious jail cell.

Whatever the result, his downfall & public disgrace is assured.
Harry LimeNovember 18, 2024 at 7:00 pm

Canguro,we shouldn’t take pleasure in the misfortune of other sad,execrable little bastards,but in this instance,all bets are off.Been a long time coming….is that the sound of running water in the background?
Michael TaylorNovember 18, 2024 at 7:25 pm

So the law finally caught up with Anal Jones.

That in itself is poetry.
CanguroNovember 18, 2024 at 7:49 pm

A Happy 70th, Michael; Pitlochry looks like the ideal location to celebrate along with your nearest & dearest. Safe travels & best wishes, Grant.
corvusboreusNovember 18, 2024 at 8:31 pm

MT,
Co-la-breith sona dhut, slainte mhath,
CB
Michael TaylorNovember 18, 2024 at 8:48 pm

Thank you, CB. That was nice of you.

I rather fancy Gaelic. I also fancy a particular Scottish whisky, Stroma, which is like Drambuie but with a hint of honey.

Was hoping to make it up to the Old Pulteney distillery in Wick, where it is made.

My plans were to rob a few banks along the way so I could buy every bottle they had. As it is difficult to get in Aus I’m left with no other choice.
Michael TaylorNovember 18, 2024 at 9:57 pm

Thank you, Canguro. For some reason I missed your comment earlier.

Yes, Pitlochry is surely the capital city of Utopia.

Would move up this way in a flash if I ever found the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Maybe not in town, but a few acres with a comfortable manor and a half a dozen of those hairy Highland cows (Heilan’ coos in the Scottish tongue), an army of red squirrels and some majestic elk in my forest.

We’d be running The AIMN from the Scottish highlands. 😃
Michael TaylorNovember 18, 2024 at 10:02 pm

Anyway, time to go shopping.

Priority 1: some long johns (yep, it’s really cold up here).

Priority 2: a pair of braces (I’ve shrunk since arriving here and all my trousers are falling down).

Priorities 3-10: buy Stroma.
wamNovember 18, 2024 at 10:15 pm

many many happy returns, Micheal, My mother’s sister lived in Perth, Her sons were fierce protestants and would never say gaelic which they believed was Irish and catholic they spoke Gallic. But 52 years ago I was fit enough to play golf at Pitlochry. Hilly and cold in November. Using our NT Automobile reciprocal rights we bought a car in london and, apart from parking on hills to aid the starter, we were lucky and sold it for 60%.
ps
Jon,
put the part reasons for trumps win but septic xstians believe the head man made women at 75% of men. if that goes women have a chance
Michael TaylorNovember 19, 2024 at 1:16 am

Thank you, wam.

Why on earth would a person leave Scotland? 😁
corvusboreusNovember 19, 2024 at 6:40 am

Apart from notorious dunny-grub Alan Jones being nabbed on multiple sex offences and his toaster apartment cavity searched, there was another amusing recent A Jones story.

Alex Jones, another perpetually apoplectic shart-stain specialising in climate denial and conspiracy crap, seems to have lost his ‘Infowars’ platform.
It was auctioned off in a court sanctioned compulsory firesale to ensure Jones paid compensation ($1.5b) to the parents of murdered children that Jones had repeatedly and maliciously slandered.
In a beautiful karmic twist, the site was acquired by satirical publishers ‘the onion’, with additional financial assistance provided by some of the greiving parents that Jones had further victimised.

Such schadenfreudic satisfactions are smallfry when scaled against the weight of collective humanity descending into aggressively tribalistic extremism as we continue to ravage our basic sustaining biosphere towards inhabitability, but these days I’ll take what I can get.
Michael TaylorNovember 19, 2024 at 8:41 am

That’s music to my ears, cb.

Democracy - Is It Worth The Fight?

Fencing the Ocean: Australia’s Social Media Safety Bill

HECS Debt Forgiveness: Path to Free Education

Implementation will be key to success of Aged…

Trump, AUKUS and Australia’s Dim Servitors

Expert alert: Misinformation bill before Australian Senate…

Political Futures: Will Conservative Global Middle Powers Go…

Does the Treasurer have a god complex or…

Three Poems, Irony and Apology to Elephants

Like this:

Related Articles

149 comments

Leave a Reply

Union calls for Julie Bishop to be sacked from ANU…

Angry America

Share this:

Like this:

Related Articles

149 comments

Leave a Reply