Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

roachboy · 09-30-2008, 06:34 PM

exactly, charlatan. there are different levels of talking in this thread, as in alot of them, which work past each other. if i write "neoliberalism" i refer to an ideology that encompasses both of the right wings of the single party state that it the united states. fundamentally, i do not care about divisions between republicans and democrats because to my way of seeing things, they're minimal. i support obama in this election not because i think he's actually much different from a moderate republican, but rather because he **appears** to be different from a moderate republican, and in that appearance lay the possibility of a momentary break in the trajectory of implosion that the bush people have solidified, but which is just as much the result of reagan, bush 1 and clinton's slight opposition to the same logic--which set up the bush2 reaction (in the strongest possible sense of the term reaction, and with all forms of the word reaction in play)...i do not particularly care about whether republicans or democrats are responsible for the breakdown of such agreement as there was about the first Big Rescue Plan involving the creation of the Magical Debt Absorption Machine--but tactically speaking, it seems pretty clear that it was the right of the republican party that played the role of wedge that resulted in the breakdown of the agreement. and it is of no particular consequence to me whether you can lay a given legisilative action at the feet of nixon or carter or reagan--to my mind, they're all steps along the way to a consolidation of a debilitatingly stupid ideological monoculture.

the problem is the monoculture itself.

there is no meaningful political diversity in mainstream politics in the united states--so far as i am concerned, the american live in a soft authoritarian system that exchanges positions amongst factions of more-or-less the same idiot thing every 4 years--the quirk is that positions fight amongst themselves across the language of "democracy"--but the sad fact of the matter is that the american system is not democratic, that is was set up in opposition to democracy--the system claims for itself the term when in fact it is not oeprational in any way--the american system prefers a type of "stability" that is entirely out of phase with the speed at which the capitalist order for which it stands operates--and it is showing itself structurally and ideologically incapable of managing even the system that it set into motion.

i won't get started about the enormous exploitative joke that is "globalizing capitalism" and its idiot twin "free trade" because it'd go on too long and i'm already sure that few are reading now. but the simple fact is that the problems that the american-dominated (to this point) capitalist system is facing are a demonstration of the fact that the ideology which enabled that system to develop has been outstripped by the system itself, and that unless it can adapt, and adapt quickly, to a different world than it has allowed itself to see for the past decade, but which in the empricial world it has created in significant measure, that the united states is in a situation the result of which will be irrelevance.

obama to me represents a bump in the trajectory that otherwise--and with mc-cain--is inevitable.
personally, i would prefer the bump.
because i live here too, and so does my family, and so do alot of people whom i love, and it would be a a shame to see people that i love suffer because the system as a whole, backed with the docile consent of people who like to like what they are told they like to like in the way they are told to like it, are too mired in their own idiot investments to see that the only way out of this farce is a different one than they are used to thinking about.

i guess this does kinda piss me off.
i should learn to watch sports.

09-30-2008, 06:34 PM	#86 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	exactly, charlatan. there are different levels of talking in this thread, as in alot of them, which work past each other. if i write "neoliberalism" i refer to an ideology that encompasses both of the right wings of the single party state that it the united states. fundamentally, i do not care about divisions between republicans and democrats because to my way of seeing things, they're minimal. i support obama in this election not because i think he's actually much different from a moderate republican, but rather because he appears to be different from a moderate republican, and in that appearance lay the possibility of a momentary break in the trajectory of implosion that the bush people have solidified, but which is just as much the result of reagan, bush 1 and clinton's slight opposition to the same logic--which set up the bush2 reaction (in the strongest possible sense of the term reaction, and with all forms of the word reaction in play)...i do not particularly care about whether republicans or democrats are responsible for the breakdown of such agreement as there was about the first Big Rescue Plan involving the creation of the Magical Debt Absorption Machine--but tactically speaking, it seems pretty clear that it was the right of the republican party that played the role of wedge that resulted in the breakdown of the agreement. and it is of no particular consequence to me whether you can lay a given legisilative action at the feet of nixon or carter or reagan--to my mind, they're all steps along the way to a consolidation of a debilitatingly stupid ideological monoculture. the problem is the monoculture itself. there is no meaningful political diversity in mainstream politics in the united states--so far as i am concerned, the american live in a soft authoritarian system that exchanges positions amongst factions of more-or-less the same idiot thing every 4 years--the quirk is that positions fight amongst themselves across the language of "democracy"--but the sad fact of the matter is that the american system is not democratic, that is was set up in opposition to democracy--the system claims for itself the term when in fact it is not oeprational in any way--the american system prefers a type of "stability" that is entirely out of phase with the speed at which the capitalist order for which it stands operates--and it is showing itself structurally and ideologically incapable of managing even the system that it set into motion. i won't get started about the enormous exploitative joke that is "globalizing capitalism" and its idiot twin "free trade" because it'd go on too long and i'm already sure that few are reading now. but the simple fact is that the problems that the american-dominated (to this point) capitalist system is facing are a demonstration of the fact that the ideology which enabled that system to develop has been outstripped by the system itself, and that unless it can adapt, and adapt quickly, to a different world than it has allowed itself to see for the past decade, but which in the empricial world it has created in significant measure, that the united states is in a situation the result of which will be irrelevance. obama to me represents a bump in the trajectory that otherwise--and with mc-cain--is inevitable. personally, i would prefer the bump. because i live here too, and so does my family, and so do alot of people whom i love, and it would be a a shame to see people that i love suffer because the system as a whole, backed with the docile consent of people who like to like what they are told they like to like in the way they are told to like it, are too mired in their own idiot investments to see that the only way out of this farce is a different one than they are used to thinking about. i guess this does kinda piss me off. i should learn to watch sports. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 09-30-2008 at 06:37 PM..