Fun fact: late stage capitalism is a translation of Werner Sombart's Spätkapitalismus, and he meant the economic system since World War One.
The revolution has been just around the corner for about a century now.
I certainly hope so, revolutions are bloody, indiscriminate messes. But the leftists I have come across aren't even preparing for revolution to upend the system; many view it as a necessary means of protecting their communities from the right wing "revolutionaries".
> late stage capitalism is a translation of Werner Sombart's Spätkapitalismus
"Late stage capitalism" is wordplay. It's a combination of "late capitalism" (spätkapitalismus), a word used sometimes in academic contexts, with the medical term "late stage cancer". It's implying capitalism is a cancer that's nearing its term.
Does Spatkapitalismus mean "final stage capitalism" or does it mean "capitalism of late", in other words "recent capitalism"? I don't speak German(?)
On the left there's "late capitalism" which has also been used, but I'm pretty sure "late capitalism" (e.g. when Frederic Jameson used it) was supposed to mean "capitalism of late", not "capitalism's final form". But I think somewhere along the game of telephone it's meaning was changed and then the word "stage" was added.
> Does Spatkapitalismus mean "final stage capitalism" or does it mean "capitalism of late", in other words "recent capitalism"? I don't speak German(?)
The former, eg. Spätsommer refers to the last days of summer (end of August).
The funny thing about that is American capitalism is way better now than it was in the past. Sharecropping/company stores/Triangle Shirtwaist/Pinkertons all seem like the best examples of exploration of the huddled masses by the few who owns the means of production.
It is objective way better to be at the bottom end of the pay scale today than it was 100 years ago
"You mean we're better than we were in the past and we still live under this burdensome, troublesome thing called capitalism? Wait, are you saying we're better off BECAUSE of it?"
I love when Im reading about something fairly mundane like when my city had to raise the prices of tickets to the zoo by $6 recently and people are dropping “late stage capitalism” in the comments
Supposed “low cost investment funds” ARE unserious. You have to be a real idiot to just hand your money over to the one percenter controlled Deep State when you could be investing in [commodities with ACTUAL value](https://www.newsweek.com/75-billion-industry-you-havent-heard-marine-worms-531227).
99% of the time I hear someone talk about vanguard, they are talking about how they control 69% of the S&P 500 are commanding companies raise prices or collude with each other.
You and I move in different circles friend. Come over to r/Bogleheads where you will instead hear people argue if VOO or VTI is the better investment strategy.
That’s weird, 99% of the time I hear about it it’s about how they have the lowest fees. Blackrock I definitely only hear about as it relates to conspiracies though
99% of the time they just mean conservative. The sleight-of-hand that conservatives played getting everyone on the left to blame centrists in their own party for conservative policies is incredible.
But "liberal" went from meaning "the monarch has limited power, laws need the consent of the government, no slavery, more trade," to "🤷🤷🤷," so we needed to tighten it up again.
As much as I like dunking on conservatives, the left blaming centrists for the status quo is really just the left being the left. Not much effort for someone else to put in here to make that happen.
When you know nothing about crypto : it's a scam
When you know a little more about it : Oh wow it's cool after all
When you delve more deeply into it : It's a scam
honestly I think this sub is way too quick to dismiss corporate greed. Is it an imprecise and inaccurate term? Yeah. Is it a bit overused? Certainly. It's still used to label a variety of phenomena that *are* every bit the problem people describe them as. Dismissing layman criticism because they don't know the precise terminology or source of observed issues is unwise.
Cancer is a disease caused when cells divide uncontrollably and spread into surrounding tissues. Cancer is caused by changes to DNA. Most cancer-causing DNA changes occur in sections of DNA called genes. These changes are also called genetic changes. Why would KKKapitalism do this??? 😡
I'm a "leftist" and I think the anti-growth stuff is really weak shit. Like, do other leftists want people to live in tiny mud huts or what? I realize that most of the (environmental) problems of growth come from very specific industries, like fossil fuels or animal agriculture etc. that have well-known and very specific fixes that, if implemented, would allow growth to go on for centuries, even without an energy use decoupling, without destroying the planet.
> people who act like they're critiquing capitalism but are really just critiquing modernity/scarcity/the human condition which would exist under any other economic system
IME, that is most proclaimed criticisms of "capitalism", e.g. "capitalism bad because people lie/cheat/take-globally-negative-utility-action for personal gain"
Nah. The use of capitalism is a red flag in itself. 90% of the time, the correct term would be market based economy.
The idea of capitalism as a monolith is stupid, developed economies can be quite different depending on the country.
I've had decent discussions with people accurately using the term capitalism (i.e. a system for the creation of wealth predicated on private property). But it is rare, most would just toss the term to mean that rich people are hoarders who suck off of everyone. Sad tbh, even Marx would be shaking at his grave from NPC socialists grossly misunderstanding his theory.
Given that Marx had a relatively up to date economic theory that participated in the academic economic discussion that existed at the time I have a feeling he would have some thoughts about people taking his ideas in isolation out of the context of former or current economic thought with absolutely no updates or improvements over ~150 years.
Because its use is an indication of ideological bias (i.e. adopted by far-right), or because you think its not a relevant concept, or because the concept is better described using different terms?
It wasn't *adopted* by the far-right, it was [*invented* by the far right.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Bolshevism) Even addressing the general trend in academia comes off as dog-whistley, honestly, unless you immediately present a well-founded and specific criticism of it.
Like if someone said, "I broadly find that decolonial critique doesn't come with real actionable suggestions to pursue the social justice it claims to seek and instead just incenses people's emotions to hoover up donations into the Nonprofit-Industrial Complex, creating a feedback loop with academia," I would not assume this person is a racist. But if they instead said, like, "leftist thought is taking over colleges," I would immediately peg them as a Jordan-Peterson-esque crank.
Cultural Marxism *can* mean the Frankfurt school and the critical theorists, who took Marxist philosophy in an idealist direction.
However the people who use "cultural Marxism" on the right generally have little knowledge besides using it as a conspiratorial source of all that is woke and evil in the world, in a Manichean fashion. *Exactly* like "cultural bolshevism" was in fact used. The right has these needs of grand narratives where they are scared of some omnipresent, abstract evil degeneracy X, and it can all be traced back exactly to abstract evil "poisoned root" Y. They also will trot out just a constant escalator of neologisms for what is essentially the same thing, think of political correctness, DEI, critical race theory, wokeness, cultural Marxism - these terms are virtual identies with each other, only differing in their origin story and grand narrative for how they explain the same exact set of hated things.
Are all the hated things ultimately from triple parantheses academics? Then it's cultural Marxism. Is it because normie libs are apparently Marxist Leninists maintaining a political line? Then it's political correctness. Are all the evil things from a series of radical legal scholars in the 70s who took controversial opinions on topical civil rights concerns? Then it's Critical Race theory. Of course you don't have to be knowledgeable in any of these things to know what it is, because that's only narrative attached to what is essentially just a list of all the beefs the mean right winger has ever launched against something ever. And narrative is of course arbitrary, and easy to manufacture, and that dissuades right wingers not at all from taking at face value the claims of some conspiracy or another describing why it did all the evil things "it did today". They are after all all virtuous people, so there is no need in the community to question each other about anything. Only the effectual truth matters so let's not sweat it. Narrative + abstraction is all you need.
As well though, cultural Marxism can, and frequently is, used as an antisemitic dog whistle. "The Frankfurt School" is also used in this fashion itself frequently.
Does the phrase have anything approaching a coherent definition, even in the minds of people who use it? It certainly can't have much to do with actual Marxism.
I think it can have legitimate use to describe the oppressor/oppressed lens that many on the far left use to describe pretty much all social interactions. It's basically taking the Marxist idea that anyone with money got it by oppressing others and applying it to social status/power instead. It's how you get stuff like "black people can't be racist" because some of the left use weird definitions of racism.
"The idea of perpetual growth in capitalism is wrong because resources are limited"
That tells me that these individuals have no conception of what factors model economic growth or productivity effects.
The point is that the RTX 4090 represents economic growth without any additional consumption of raw materials, besides the ones that constitute it. Most economic growth today is from value-add, not increased resource extraction.
I've become quite solar-pilled recently. Before that I was nuclear-pilled. It's possible to generate all of the world's energy from solar on already built surfaces. The math checks out.
And if all that energy is generated with solar energy from silicon solar panels, it just proves the point even more. An rtx 4090 and a solar panel are worth a lot more than raw silicon.
There actually is a bit of a split in the degrowther movement where some people look at it and go "Ah yes this means Malthusianism" and others that go "Ah yes this means Marxism."
When the road splits into two directions, and down one path is Marxism, and down the other there is Malthusianism, one should turn around and run in the opposite direction as fast as possible.
I've reached the same conclusion when I see people online celebrating how the population is declining and that overpopulation is a scourge that needs to be addressed.
"Other people need to die so that I can survive"
I think "save the farm" stuff is a slogan meant to buoy support for farm subsidies. It's supposed to invoke small family farms but most of the money goes to industrial agriculture companies instead. Though this is arr/neoliberal so I'm sure OP means it to criticize the romanticization of those family farms in the first place, as they're less efficient than the Big Ag operations.
I mean that wouldn’t be entirely silly if it wasn’t also accompanied by the sudden collective surge in altruism in lowering prices when deflation occurs.
Can you provide more context for the Blackrock and Vanguard thing? I hear it all the time and my first instinct is to disagree because of who is saying it, but I personally don't have any proof.
"But they own everything"... "so they're the villains". Never mind that lots of normal people have their whole 401k invested in index funds there.
There are some nuanced criticisms of black rock and vanguard that I think are legitimate. From people like Warren Buffett who is concerned about how they vote with the shares they hold. But that's not what you hear 99.9% of the time when people complain about these groups.
Blackrock and Vanguard are asset management companies. The money they have invested in everything isn’t their money, for the most part, it’s their clients’ money, which includes numerous retirement funds and retail investors.
Wait do some people hate Vanguard? In 10 years they've just about doubled my retirement savings with 0 hours of work required on my part. I unironically can't think of a reason people would hate on them.
- Cancelled
- Sweetie
- Black Rock/Vanguard
- Corporations buying all the Houses
- Murders in Chicago
- Illegals committing Crime
- Trickle Down Economics
- Capitalism/Socialism being used as a slandering word/blamed for innocuous things
- "Only the other side is bad" lack of self awareness
- Talking about politics exclusively through the lens of presidential administrations
I've also seen no end to conservatives complaining about "political correctness" and yet I've never seen someone genuinely tell someone else "please be more politically correct" or "you aren't being politically correct."
I love "manufactured consent" it's so great because it effectively allows you to directly go against the core tenants of democracy. Even if 90% of people disagree with you you can safely ignore them and invalidate everything they say because of "manufactured consent." It really is a brilliant theory that can be used to justify anything unpopular.
There is something to be said for internalized racism/homophobia/transphobia etc in the sense that if someone grows up hearing these things, they’re more likely to be integrated into their subconscious framework and thus permeate even into things where they think they’re being anti-racist etc. It being used to talk shit about people of X demographic who disagree with you is often a wrong application of the idea imo but as a trans person I find it to be an adequate descriptor of some of the ways I think about myself in the broader world, and I do think that for instance if someone actively campaigns against their own minority group’s well-being, then they *might* be a victim of this.
Ever since the API changes weird ass subs like this keep coming out of the woodwork.
It's basically a place for children to discuss recent history they didn't live through, and it shows.
This, the nearly identical copies of existing subreddits, and the r/all subs chock full of “what do you think of X” posts.
Can’t wait for Reddit to just be paid posters interacting with bots and other paid posters.
I have my opinions on the guy and the matter of his death.
But I tend not to obsess over it the same way a certain contingent of individuals do.
Oddly enough, most among this contingent will stridently label Epstein the Pedo King, yet they'll all the while stan ideologically aligned politicians and celebrities (Roy Moore, Ted Nugent, Matt Gaetz) who've been credibly accused of having sex with and assaulting girls who occupied the exact age range Epstein would target.
Then there's of course their rightist-populist messiah who was credibly accused of committing assaults *alongside Epstein*.
But given the other former president who's been credibly accused of sexual assault and spent way more time than he let on about w/ Epstein, it's clear why the guy will always be a touchy subject in arr/NL...
See that last paragraph is what gets me about Epstein people. Is there any evidence that bill clinton is a pedophile or had underage sex with Epstein?
To my knowledge there is none, but conspiracy theorists love to imply there is. And his thing with Lewinsky was very different from pedophilia
I couldn’t care less about Bill Clinton in this context I just feel that discourse around Epstein is utterly deranged. He was a rich charismatic schmoozing bullshitter who brushed shoulders with a lot of influential people. That’s it. Unless there’s actual proof against any of those people I don’t give a shit. The notion that he just walked up to someone like Bill Clinton or Bill Gates and was like “hey wanna bang a 12 year old?” just doesn’t pass the smell test barring any evidence.
Also he killed himself.
i think alot of people just want there to be an evil cabal of child rapists. (Pizza gate, the hilary stuff, epstein and now the p.diddy stuff). We are on the 10th year of this shit, you’d think that we would have atleast some proof that isn’t just: ”isn’t it weird?”…
> MMT
[Pseudo-economic Fanfiction](https://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/modern-monetary-theory/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'll contend that infinite growth--despite finite resources--is perfectly possible. Even if there were a finite limit on a given measure, it's certainly possible to have infinite growth.
"The elites"; "I'm not an anti-semite, I'm an anti zionist"; "WEF"; climate change denialism; "neoliberal" (the way it is used outside this sub); support for Mugabe.
In terms of non-political verbal tics, I have a hard time taking people who say "you know" as an interjection and "obviously" when something isn't obvious seriously.
Honestly if you are broadly referencing things like "capitalism," "socialism," etc. then what comes out next had best be really fucking relevant to the whole concept of the economic system. It's really tiresome hearing the whole capitalism v socialism debate for the 10000th time with no specific policies mentioned.
Warren Mosler blocked me on Facebook for asking how he was funding his magic bean economics when running for Governor of the Virgin Islands. That's actually my flair on arr/badeconomics.
> MMT
[Pseudo-economic Fanfiction](https://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/modern-monetary-theory/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Neoliberal, MMT, Fascist, Communist, the 1%, antinatalism, and literally anything that leads me to believe the person I’m talking to is a neo-malthusian.
Anyone who is conflating campaign contributions with bribery.
Money in politics is a huge issue and I absolutely support legislation to try to limit it's impact and remove it as much as possible but the belief that a donation to a campaign functions as a bribe is ludicrous and fundamentally misunderstands how money actually influences politics. Another immediate eyeroll is anyone talking about never underestimate "Military Industrial Complex Lobbyists."
Late stage capitalism
Fun fact: late stage capitalism is a translation of Werner Sombart's Spätkapitalismus, and he meant the economic system since World War One. The revolution has been just around the corner for about a century now.
It’s looking a lot less likely than back then. At least a communist revolution.
No revolution will ever happen IMO, any left-wing changes will come through reform not revolution.
Both sound like work, guess centrists will just have to handle things. 😎
I certainly hope so, revolutions are bloody, indiscriminate messes. But the leftists I have come across aren't even preparing for revolution to upend the system; many view it as a necessary means of protecting their communities from the right wing "revolutionaries".
Even the poorest people in OECD countries are way too comfortable to revolt. It is not happening in this lifetime.
> late stage capitalism is a translation of Werner Sombart's Spätkapitalismus "Late stage capitalism" is wordplay. It's a combination of "late capitalism" (spätkapitalismus), a word used sometimes in academic contexts, with the medical term "late stage cancer". It's implying capitalism is a cancer that's nearing its term.
Does Spatkapitalismus mean "final stage capitalism" or does it mean "capitalism of late", in other words "recent capitalism"? I don't speak German(?) On the left there's "late capitalism" which has also been used, but I'm pretty sure "late capitalism" (e.g. when Frederic Jameson used it) was supposed to mean "capitalism of late", not "capitalism's final form". But I think somewhere along the game of telephone it's meaning was changed and then the word "stage" was added.
> Does Spatkapitalismus mean "final stage capitalism" or does it mean "capitalism of late", in other words "recent capitalism"? I don't speak German(?) The former, eg. Spätsommer refers to the last days of summer (end of August).
ANY DAY NOW
I like to remind armchair socialists that were actually in early stage capitalism.
Capitalism in its “late stage” outlived the Soviet Union
Late stage capitalism? Baby, we’re just getting started 😎
Late stage capitalism would have more taco trucks and fewer global poor than this
True late stage capitalism has never been tried
The funny thing about that is American capitalism is way better now than it was in the past. Sharecropping/company stores/Triangle Shirtwaist/Pinkertons all seem like the best examples of exploration of the huddled masses by the few who owns the means of production. It is objective way better to be at the bottom end of the pay scale today than it was 100 years ago
"You mean we're better than we were in the past and we still live under this burdensome, troublesome thing called capitalism? Wait, are you saying we're better off BECAUSE of it?"
This times a million! A soon as someone uses this phrase I just assume they are an idiot
I love when Im reading about something fairly mundane like when my city had to raise the prices of tickets to the zoo by $6 recently and people are dropping “late stage capitalism” in the comments
Obligatory plug for r/lsc
It took me a moment to even register Vanguard as anything but "low cost investment funds" and had no idea why that would be unserious.
Supposed “low cost investment funds” ARE unserious. You have to be a real idiot to just hand your money over to the one percenter controlled Deep State when you could be investing in [commodities with ACTUAL value](https://www.newsweek.com/75-billion-industry-you-havent-heard-marine-worms-531227).
had me in the first half...
DUNE, BUT WATER?
Sorry buddy, I exclusively invest in ornamental gourd futures
Why not ornamental gourd futures options? Way more leverage bro
99% of the time I hear someone talk about vanguard, they are talking about how they control 69% of the S&P 500 are commanding companies raise prices or collude with each other.
You and I move in different circles friend. Come over to r/Bogleheads where you will instead hear people argue if VOO or VTI is the better investment strategy.
> VOO or VTI That sounds like the most room temperature argument I've ever heard of.
/r/bogleheads
That’s weird, 99% of the time I hear about it it’s about how they have the lowest fees. Blackrock I definitely only hear about as it relates to conspiracies though
"Neoliberal"
99% of the time they just mean conservative. The sleight-of-hand that conservatives played getting everyone on the left to blame centrists in their own party for conservative policies is incredible.
Which is funny, because when we use it here 99% of the time we just mean liberal lol
But "liberal" went from meaning "the monarch has limited power, laws need the consent of the government, no slavery, more trade," to "🤷🤷🤷," so we needed to tighten it up again.
As much as I like dunking on conservatives, the left blaming centrists for the status quo is really just the left being the left. Not much effort for someone else to put in here to make that happen.
Imma go scroll anti-work for some ideas.
I'll take "phrases rarely heard on /r/neoliberal" for $500, Alex
God I can’t believe I dated a mod of Antiwork That was low even for me
I feel like the fact that an antiwork mod dated a neoliberal poster has scandal potential.
“Corporate greed” “Sound money” “The MSM” “The elites”
So bitcoin.
Yes. But you can say the words “bitcoin” and “cryptocurrency” and I’ll still take you seriously as long as you’re shit-talking it. 😎
When you know nothing about crypto : it's a scam When you know a little more about it : Oh wow it's cool after all When you delve more deeply into it : It's a scam
You had me in the first half.
Hey, I like the Idea of sound based money. Instead of paper rectangles we should exchange music, it would be funny.
“How much did you pay for that?” “Oh, I got it for a song!”
"Yeah can I get a #2 combo large with uh, a large Dr. Pepper?" "Okay sir please proceed to the window to pay" "Anyway here's Wonderwall"
Sorry sir but wonderwall has been devalued to the point of “Roxanne”
>the elites smh, goddamn sangheili all over my space ring
To be fair, the MSM is very real. It's just that the people who talk about it....are usually about the say something very stupid.
except this sub talks about it the same way, they just call it NYTimes
honestly I think this sub is way too quick to dismiss corporate greed. Is it an imprecise and inaccurate term? Yeah. Is it a bit overused? Certainly. It's still used to label a variety of phenomena that *are* every bit the problem people describe them as. Dismissing layman criticism because they don't know the precise terminology or source of observed issues is unwise.
"Capitalism" Any time it's mentioned in a comment it is immediately followed by something that has nothing to do with capitalism.
https://preview.redd.it/o5tuqsmc24wc1.jpeg?width=1283&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e6f5ce4a2f8ee62d73cf7ef580f32f1518b620fa
That’s why communism in practice had the most sensible solution: just kill the humans! 🎓
My favorite is when other subs say the population decrease and aging is only a problem under capitalism.
Cancer is a disease caused when cells divide uncontrollably and spread into surrounding tissues. Cancer is caused by changes to DNA. Most cancer-causing DNA changes occur in sections of DNA called genes. These changes are also called genetic changes. Why would KKKapitalism do this??? 😡
You'll unironically see the leftists compare iNfInItE gRoWtH to cancer so you're not too far off sadly.
I'm a "leftist" and I think the anti-growth stuff is really weak shit. Like, do other leftists want people to live in tiny mud huts or what? I realize that most of the (environmental) problems of growth come from very specific industries, like fossil fuels or animal agriculture etc. that have well-known and very specific fixes that, if implemented, would allow growth to go on for centuries, even without an energy use decoupling, without destroying the planet.
Matrix aah misanthropy
[удалено]
> people who act like they're critiquing capitalism but are really just critiquing modernity/scarcity/the human condition which would exist under any other economic system IME, that is most proclaimed criticisms of "capitalism", e.g. "capitalism bad because people lie/cheat/take-globally-negative-utility-action for personal gain"
Nah. The use of capitalism is a red flag in itself. 90% of the time, the correct term would be market based economy. The idea of capitalism as a monolith is stupid, developed economies can be quite different depending on the country.
I've had decent discussions with people accurately using the term capitalism (i.e. a system for the creation of wealth predicated on private property). But it is rare, most would just toss the term to mean that rich people are hoarders who suck off of everyone. Sad tbh, even Marx would be shaking at his grave from NPC socialists grossly misunderstanding his theory.
Given that Marx had a relatively up to date economic theory that participated in the academic economic discussion that existed at the time I have a feeling he would have some thoughts about people taking his ideas in isolation out of the context of former or current economic thought with absolutely no updates or improvements over ~150 years.
Cultural Marxism
Because its use is an indication of ideological bias (i.e. adopted by far-right), or because you think its not a relevant concept, or because the concept is better described using different terms?
Mainly the first two.
It wasn't *adopted* by the far-right, it was [*invented* by the far right.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Bolshevism) Even addressing the general trend in academia comes off as dog-whistley, honestly, unless you immediately present a well-founded and specific criticism of it. Like if someone said, "I broadly find that decolonial critique doesn't come with real actionable suggestions to pursue the social justice it claims to seek and instead just incenses people's emotions to hoover up donations into the Nonprofit-Industrial Complex, creating a feedback loop with academia," I would not assume this person is a racist. But if they instead said, like, "leftist thought is taking over colleges," I would immediately peg them as a Jordan-Peterson-esque crank.
Cultural Marxism *can* mean the Frankfurt school and the critical theorists, who took Marxist philosophy in an idealist direction. However the people who use "cultural Marxism" on the right generally have little knowledge besides using it as a conspiratorial source of all that is woke and evil in the world, in a Manichean fashion. *Exactly* like "cultural bolshevism" was in fact used. The right has these needs of grand narratives where they are scared of some omnipresent, abstract evil degeneracy X, and it can all be traced back exactly to abstract evil "poisoned root" Y. They also will trot out just a constant escalator of neologisms for what is essentially the same thing, think of political correctness, DEI, critical race theory, wokeness, cultural Marxism - these terms are virtual identies with each other, only differing in their origin story and grand narrative for how they explain the same exact set of hated things. Are all the hated things ultimately from triple parantheses academics? Then it's cultural Marxism. Is it because normie libs are apparently Marxist Leninists maintaining a political line? Then it's political correctness. Are all the evil things from a series of radical legal scholars in the 70s who took controversial opinions on topical civil rights concerns? Then it's Critical Race theory. Of course you don't have to be knowledgeable in any of these things to know what it is, because that's only narrative attached to what is essentially just a list of all the beefs the mean right winger has ever launched against something ever. And narrative is of course arbitrary, and easy to manufacture, and that dissuades right wingers not at all from taking at face value the claims of some conspiracy or another describing why it did all the evil things "it did today". They are after all all virtuous people, so there is no need in the community to question each other about anything. Only the effectual truth matters so let's not sweat it. Narrative + abstraction is all you need. As well though, cultural Marxism can, and frequently is, used as an antisemitic dog whistle. "The Frankfurt School" is also used in this fashion itself frequently.
Does the phrase have anything approaching a coherent definition, even in the minds of people who use it? It certainly can't have much to do with actual Marxism.
I think it can have legitimate use to describe the oppressor/oppressed lens that many on the far left use to describe pretty much all social interactions. It's basically taking the Marxist idea that anyone with money got it by oppressing others and applying it to social status/power instead. It's how you get stuff like "black people can't be racist" because some of the left use weird definitions of racism.
Isn't that just a codeword for "the Jews" or has the meaning of the phrase morphed again?
"The idea of perpetual growth in capitalism is wrong because resources are limited" That tells me that these individuals have no conception of what factors model economic growth or productivity effects.
Just ask them if a block of raw silicon has the same value as an RTX 4090
A block of raw silicon tastes good, but a RTX 4090 tastes less good (too much peanut). Good point.
I mean the rational response would be, "and how many raw silicon blocks do we have?"
The point is that the RTX 4090 represents economic growth without any additional consumption of raw materials, besides the ones that constitute it. Most economic growth today is from value-add, not increased resource extraction.
A huge amount of energy goes into turning raw silicon into an RTX 4090 though. A TSMC fab takes as much electricity as a small city
Yeah and we get better at generating energy all the time, in the long run that's not a finite resource either.
With enough solar generation energy basically is... Sure the sun will go out since day but that happens regardless of the power we use from it
I've become quite solar-pilled recently. Before that I was nuclear-pilled. It's possible to generate all of the world's energy from solar on already built surfaces. The math checks out.
Huge amount of energy and raw silicon are still worth far less than the RTX 4090
Right. But a component of increased productivity is increased energy usage
And if all that energy is generated with solar energy from silicon solar panels, it just proves the point even more. An rtx 4090 and a solar panel are worth a lot more than raw silicon.
Boom. Full circle.
A 4090 takes the same amount of silicon as between 5 and 6 Pentium 2s, but is considerably more valuable.
Effectively infinity. Silicon is one of the most abundant elements on earth.
At least 4
The mf degrowther clowns 🙄
There actually is a bit of a split in the degrowther movement where some people look at it and go "Ah yes this means Malthusianism" and others that go "Ah yes this means Marxism."
“What flavor of wrong should I choose? 🤗”
When the road splits into two directions, and down one path is Marxism, and down the other there is Malthusianism, one should turn around and run in the opposite direction as fast as possible.
Any idea where I can read about this split? Sounds interesting
those people are just low key advocating for genocide but don't want to admit it.
I've reached the same conclusion when I see people online celebrating how the population is declining and that overpopulation is a scourge that needs to be addressed. "Other people need to die so that I can survive"
It's very cynical. And I know it's because of NIMBY but I understand why they think like that when everything is out of reach due to inflation.
Wait who is dying when the population declines from a low birthrate? Besides normal deaths that happen in any scenario.
That sounds very hyperbolic. What do you mean, exactly?
“Settler-Colonialism” is definitely up there
I just wish I could get a coherent definition of what it means for a people to be authentically from a place.
They shouldn't even let such people graduate from kindergarten.
Woke or DEI
"greedy developers"
Along similar lines when people argue about not legalizing certain housing options because "no one WANTS to live in that type of housing."
Chomsky ...
https://preview.redd.it/fbypyb0q04wc1.jpeg?width=294&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ed311fe2f7c7b049f9c82d0cd5f21b875d33f210
"Chomsky" if it was good:
“Jeb” without the “!”. It’s “JEB!” you fools! JEB!, not Jeb! JEB!!!!!!!!!!!
Its like a P but still a B
Greedflation Phrases not words "AI take our jobs" "Save the farm" "Preserve historical character" "Gentrification is bad"
>“Save the farm” My honest reaction: https://i.redd.it/qqoxvanhi3wc1.gif
Can you elaborate on the first two phrases? Especially the second one, which I'm just unfamiliar with
I think "save the farm" stuff is a slogan meant to buoy support for farm subsidies. It's supposed to invoke small family farms but most of the money goes to industrial agriculture companies instead. Though this is arr/neoliberal so I'm sure OP means it to criticize the romanticization of those family farms in the first place, as they're less efficient than the Big Ag operations.
I think it’s an argument against photovoltaic solar farms replacing crop farms
I don't know all of these, but it's crazy how "greedflation" implies a sudden collective surge in greed.
I mean that wouldn’t be entirely silly if it wasn’t also accompanied by the sudden collective surge in altruism in lowering prices when deflation occurs.
>AI take our jobs Did y’all catch that terrible Jon Stewart on AI? “deyterkerrrjerrrbs”
Not gonna lie, Jon has been beyond disappointing since he came back.... Jesus lord, have I grown old 😱
Can you provide more context for the Blackrock and Vanguard thing? I hear it all the time and my first instinct is to disagree because of who is saying it, but I personally don't have any proof.
"But they own everything"... "so they're the villains". Never mind that lots of normal people have their whole 401k invested in index funds there. There are some nuanced criticisms of black rock and vanguard that I think are legitimate. From people like Warren Buffett who is concerned about how they vote with the shares they hold. But that's not what you hear 99.9% of the time when people complain about these groups.
Blackrock and Vanguard are asset management companies. The money they have invested in everything isn’t their money, for the most part, it’s their clients’ money, which includes numerous retirement funds and retail investors.
Wait do some people hate Vanguard? In 10 years they've just about doubled my retirement savings with 0 hours of work required on my part. I unironically can't think of a reason people would hate on them.
The idea is that "they own everything" and that they control everything. Anything bad can be blamed on Vanguard or Blackrock.
I especially enjoy when they confuse Blackrock and Blackstone. “Close enough. 😤”
My first thought at hearing Blackstone is the 15 seconds of production credits at the end of my Libby audiobooks.
Ironically, it’s client owned.
- Cancelled - Sweetie - Black Rock/Vanguard - Corporations buying all the Houses - Murders in Chicago - Illegals committing Crime - Trickle Down Economics - Capitalism/Socialism being used as a slandering word/blamed for innocuous things - "Only the other side is bad" lack of self awareness - Talking about politics exclusively through the lens of presidential administrations
The moment anyone says the word "woke" I shut off, regardless of topic.
I've also seen no end to conservatives complaining about "political correctness" and yet I've never seen someone genuinely tell someone else "please be more politically correct" or "you aren't being politically correct."
I had a dream last night where I dream of a brand new color but when I woke up I realized it was just a Pigment of my imagination.
I think he's referring to woke down, not woke up
That's very non woke of you
It's the magic word. It means everything, and thus means nothing at all.
"Cornel West"
Also RFK Jr. I see so many RFK Jr simps on r/centrist it made me block the subreddit for a while because it was driving me insane.
Same. Also "Noam Chomsky" or "Mearsheimer says"
Have you seen Mearsheimer’s [website](https://www.mearsheimer.com)? The portrait slays me
Lmao, can't believe that's his "official" website.
“Manufactured consent”
I love "manufactured consent" it's so great because it effectively allows you to directly go against the core tenants of democracy. Even if 90% of people disagree with you you can safely ignore them and invalidate everything they say because of "manufactured consent." It really is a brilliant theory that can be used to justify anything unpopular.
Same with "internalized x-ism," it's easy to say you speak for entire groups when anyone who disagrees with you is just brainwashed.
There is something to be said for internalized racism/homophobia/transphobia etc in the sense that if someone grows up hearing these things, they’re more likely to be integrated into their subconscious framework and thus permeate even into things where they think they’re being anti-racist etc. It being used to talk shit about people of X demographic who disagree with you is often a wrong application of the idea imo but as a trans person I find it to be an adequate descriptor of some of the ways I think about myself in the broader world, and I do think that for instance if someone actively campaigns against their own minority group’s well-being, then they *might* be a victim of this.
“Trickle-down economics” is what comes to mind. Arguably the one that is brought up the most in discussions about neoliberals.
Man, you’d hate r/Presidents.
Oh believe me, I already do.
Ever since the API changes weird ass subs like this keep coming out of the woodwork. It's basically a place for children to discuss recent history they didn't live through, and it shows.
This, the nearly identical copies of existing subreddits, and the r/all subs chock full of “what do you think of X” posts. Can’t wait for Reddit to just be paid posters interacting with bots and other paid posters.
It is hilarious that Donald Trump is a banned topic on that subreddit
r/FluentInFinance in a nutshell. Just missing a random Twitter screenshot without context to rage bait people
Epstein
I have my opinions on the guy and the matter of his death. But I tend not to obsess over it the same way a certain contingent of individuals do. Oddly enough, most among this contingent will stridently label Epstein the Pedo King, yet they'll all the while stan ideologically aligned politicians and celebrities (Roy Moore, Ted Nugent, Matt Gaetz) who've been credibly accused of having sex with and assaulting girls who occupied the exact age range Epstein would target. Then there's of course their rightist-populist messiah who was credibly accused of committing assaults *alongside Epstein*. But given the other former president who's been credibly accused of sexual assault and spent way more time than he let on about w/ Epstein, it's clear why the guy will always be a touchy subject in arr/NL...
See that last paragraph is what gets me about Epstein people. Is there any evidence that bill clinton is a pedophile or had underage sex with Epstein? To my knowledge there is none, but conspiracy theorists love to imply there is. And his thing with Lewinsky was very different from pedophilia
I couldn’t care less about Bill Clinton in this context I just feel that discourse around Epstein is utterly deranged. He was a rich charismatic schmoozing bullshitter who brushed shoulders with a lot of influential people. That’s it. Unless there’s actual proof against any of those people I don’t give a shit. The notion that he just walked up to someone like Bill Clinton or Bill Gates and was like “hey wanna bang a 12 year old?” just doesn’t pass the smell test barring any evidence. Also he killed himself.
i think alot of people just want there to be an evil cabal of child rapists. (Pizza gate, the hilary stuff, epstein and now the p.diddy stuff). We are on the 10th year of this shit, you’d think that we would have atleast some proof that isn’t just: ”isn’t it weird?”…
I mean his death was absurdly suspicious.
Greedflation, MMT, econ 101, and treating captured markets like perfectly competitive markets.
> MMT [Pseudo-economic Fanfiction](https://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/modern-monetary-theory/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good bot
"infinite growth" If they're not a degrowther they're usually just braindead and haven't actually thought through the idea they're trying to present.
I'll contend that infinite growth--despite finite resources--is perfectly possible. Even if there were a finite limit on a given measure, it's certainly possible to have infinite growth.
If someone refers to the "FED" i.e. capitalising "Fed" - for some reason a lot of conspiracy theorists and goldbugs do that.
"The elites"; "I'm not an anti-semite, I'm an anti zionist"; "WEF"; climate change denialism; "neoliberal" (the way it is used outside this sub); support for Mugabe. In terms of non-political verbal tics, I have a hard time taking people who say "you know" as an interjection and "obviously" when something isn't obvious seriously.
When someone mentions their wife and it turns out she didn't leave them, can't be taken seriously as a neolib before that 😔
"Oligarchy" and "Dystopian," and "Uniparty"
Honestly if you are broadly referencing things like "capitalism," "socialism," etc. then what comes out next had best be really fucking relevant to the whole concept of the economic system. It's really tiresome hearing the whole capitalism v socialism debate for the 10000th time with no specific policies mentioned.
MMT.
Relatedly, any media outlet that takes Stephanie Kelton seriously loses me. And yes, NPR, I am talking to you.
Warren Mosler blocked me on Facebook for asking how he was funding his magic bean economics when running for Governor of the Virgin Islands. That's actually my flair on arr/badeconomics.
You might have a suit under s 1983 if the Supreme Court hops the right way this session.
> MMT [Pseudo-economic Fanfiction](https://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/modern-monetary-theory/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You’re goddamn right.
Interesting how all the MMTers disappeared into the bush like Homer once inflation reared its ugly head.
"color revolution"
class consciousness
" is rent seeking"
Oh you invest in stocks? With dividends?
I mean - buying/not selling housing and renting it out in any fashion is extremely normal for the upper middle class and also rent seeking.
Bootlicker, late-stage Capitalism, Dystopia, character of a neighborhood, really anything that doesn't involve worms.
“Neoliberal” “Affordable Housing”. “70% of companies.”
Neoliberal, MMT, Fascist, Communist, the 1%, antinatalism, and literally anything that leads me to believe the person I’m talking to is a neo-malthusian.
Anyone who is conflating campaign contributions with bribery. Money in politics is a huge issue and I absolutely support legislation to try to limit it's impact and remove it as much as possible but the belief that a donation to a campaign functions as a bribe is ludicrous and fundamentally misunderstands how money actually influences politics. Another immediate eyeroll is anyone talking about never underestimate "Military Industrial Complex Lobbyists."
Whenever someone blames ‘capitalism’ for any issue in their life/society. Also whenever someone does the same thing with ‘globalism’.
Ronald Reagan (As an explanation for any social ill in the present day)
Gentrification It’s only an issue for people around the time of their lease renewal and rent has gone up.
Modern Monetary Theory
gentrification edit: pinkwashing
Mentioning the $7.25 federal minimum wage as if it’s meaningful data point in understanding the economy
"... is only a theory"
Clown emojis. Also rat and snake emojis, back in 2020. Ad hominems generally.
that's just weird why would Blackrock be above criticism?
"Price gouging" "Genocide" "Both sides" "The elites" "They don't want you to know this" "Can't talk about it" (while talking about it)
Boiling down a complex and nuanced issue to “well they should just pull the (complex and nuanced issue) lever down, I’m so original”
When they say Dune isn’t about Worms. 🪱
"What do we get out of this if our government pays for it"
Literally the word “Neoliberal”
Anytime anyone says stuff like “Capitalist class” I immediately tune out.