Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

thx, Patrons!

Files

Previews only

Postgame - 85 - ft. Felix Biederman

Thanks for being patrons!

Comments

Bijou Smith

Brooksy's gloss on the Burgis debunking suggested to me an elegant succinct way to very directly frame the debunking of libertarian non-aggression principle: you can ask them, which principle is more primary, "might makes right" or "non-aggression"? Then you pretty much have them in a logical choke-hold, because all current material property claims are founded on "might makes right". Hence, to adopt Non-Aggression as more primary means all current property claims must be annulled and all current material needs to be redistributed by a non-aggression compliant principle, such as democratically, or democratically with a weighting for recognizing historical injustices. I'd like to hear how that sloppy thinking Dave Smith would respond.

Bijou Smith

Brooksy's take on Yang is 100 times more important than the nonetheless delightful Burgis debunking segment imho. If only Brooksy could be writing material for Bernie rallies. You need a louder voice dude, not enough people hearing you.

Bijou Smith

Regardless of whether the "most"in "most would prefer $1000 cash" is doing a lot of heavy lifting, it is only doing lifting to persuade, it is not doing much else. In other words, it is propaganda and manufacturing of consent. There's another framing which does far more justice, which is that "most people would prefer never to have to worry about money", and that need not imply any UBI, but could imply something far more spiritually enlightening, such as giving people whatever they need to do socially good work that they love doing.