Things that should NOT be a debate: First Worldism

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 4:16 am

I need to burst your bubbles right now, because I'm getting annoyed by some of your responses that happen from time to time.

In case you didn't know there is a thing called imperialism and globalization that benefits one kind of people: The people living in the first world. And as you guys have noticed I read a LOT about Third World Marxism. So it's even more annoying.

So... in case you people didn't know:

1. Imperialism is set upon so all the surplus value, all the benefits, all the capacity of consumption will benefit the imperials at the expense of the exploitation of the third world. Wars these days are about global capital vs state small capital, in other words First world vs Third world. (NATO vs Ukraine, Syria, Libya, North Korea and Venezuela. Among thousands others.

)
2. It does make a difference being poor in the first world than being poor in the third world. People will come and say "Oh well, things are cheaper there!" Yes, we can find things cheaper here, but you make the math. No one, NO ONE, can afford anything with $1 a day. It's actually more expensive to live here than to live in the first world. Even Azzy made the calculation, our salaries are miserable and we have to buy things to pretty much the same price as you do, living in the third world is less affordable.
3. You are spoiled bratts. YOU ARE. I know your people get upset when the benefits get cut, but read number 1. My people pay for your benefits, your cheap fattening foods, all in all you are meant to be the consumers, we are the exploited.

4. Start supporting anti-war movements, anti-war candidates and anti-war policies. So we can get rid of number 1. The world produces enough benefits, food, needs for every single person in the world, the problem is the first world is hoarding it and wasting it, so you won't even have to give up anything.

https://mises.org/blog/poor-us-are-rich ... uch-europe
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... e-U-S.html

Also I linked to a liberal site. Maybe you guys will pay attention if I link a fascist "free market" capitalist site.

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:00 am

The world can never have enough poor little rich girls who are determined to prove that 'limousine liberal' is not a right-wing myth.

My people pay for your benefits, your cheap fattening foods, all in all you are meant to be the consumers, we are the exploited.

Regardless of whether a person's mansion with a full-time maid is in Bel Air or Guatemala, that person still grew up in a mansion with a full-time maid. That person is never one of the exploited but is always one of the exploiters and is never, no matter how many delusions they entertain, one of the "we".

Final note: this self-serving sanctimonious bullshit has reached epic levels. There is no honor in being the female version of DA and thinking that reading makes you an expert. So until the unearned condescending attitude stops this will be my last reply to you because you have simply proven not to be worthy of any serious conversation on a topic you will never be capable of comprehending and I no longer have any desire to even laugh at the unbelievable pretense you have adopted. I always hate it when people I used to respect turn out to be massive hypocritical asshats with an undeserved belief in their own level of knowledge. It's absolutely fucking ridiculous that one of the privileged tries to lecture others about being privileged. Have fun with it.

Post by **aels** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:05 am

You are spoiled bratts. YOU ARE. I know your people get upset when the benefits get cut, but read number 1.

Please make a list of the things it is considered acceptable for me to get upset about. I feel like what I need most in my life is an able-bodied woman who grew up with a maid and has literally never struggled for shit in her life telling me, a disabled woman from a working class family living in one of the poorest parts of Europe, not to get upset about cuts to benefits that are a matter of life and death for vulnerable people here. You have literally never lain awake at night worrying about how cuts to welfare are going to affect you and your family and you don't have mates going to food banks because they can't afford to eat and you know disadvantage because you've seen it on TV.

For what it's worth, I don't even disagree with most of your central arguments, i.e. that the developing world is exploited by developed nations and that the history of imperialism has had a seriously deleterious effect on the countries who suffered under it and that developed-nation-poor is not developing-nation-poor. But please, please, for the love of God, ease off on this 'I am the one true voice of enlightenment because I have seen through the matrix even though not that long ago I was complaining about having to do dental outreach in poor and dirty Mayan villages and how I had to replace my incredibly expensive dental equipment with more incredibly expensive dental equipment and how my preppy fellow students are not to my particular tastes'. Please. Please don't accuse everyone else on this board of living in a fur-lined bonbon palace when I cannot remember the last time I saw you examine your own privilege or culpability in unethical consumerist practices (or is your smartphone fairtrade?)

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:23 am

What the bloody hell is going on?

Blade Azaezel · Post by **Blade Azaezel** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:26 am

I'm pretty sure I also worked out that, with the money I have just spent on a terraced, 2 bedroom house in the rough area of my 1st world town, I could have bought your mansion in Guatemala instead

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:28 am

Blade Azaezel wrote:I'm pretty sure I also worked out that, with the money I have just spent on a terraced, 2 bedroom house in the rough area of my 1st world town, I could have bought your mansion in Guatemala instead

With or without a maid and a security fence/gate?

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:29 am

Cassius Clay wrote:What the bloody hell is going on?

Yeah, that's exactly what I was going to ask.

Post by **aels** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:37 am

I am expressing pent-up irritation at Liszt effectively declaring herself the one true prophet of social truths, complete with a GI-ish refusal to accept any possible fallibility and a tendency to tell everyone that they don't understand the mechanisms of poverty and deprivation even though a lot of us do understand poverty because we grew up poor; in addition, frustration at being told 'Don't care about the things that affect you, because I've decided they aren't important'. That. That is what is going on. Also I think Az bought a house? TBD.

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:45 am

Az, you bought a house in the hood?

Gentrification much?

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:47 am

Well, as someone who also is and has grown up poor and is also one of the people she's talking about, I just don't really see where she says any of the things you're saying she says. From what I can tell all she's really asking for is a little bit of global perspective. I'm pretty sure she doesn't think welfare cuts to poor people are unimportant.

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:58 am

Last sentence is a double negative.

And I get what Liszt is saying anc also get that global perspective is important, but it's complicated.

For example, walmart notoriously exploits Third-world labor, and poor people in America take advantage by shopping at walmart. But you can't really judge poor folks who don't have too many options in desperate situations. But, then again, they are still taken advantage...they're just not the people who's heads you should be coming for.

And I think Liszt is well aware that she too benefits from exploitation. And even as a rich person has moral ground to criticize imperialists for destroying her country.

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:05 am

It was actually a triple negative before I reread it and changed it.

And I really don't get this claim that Liszt does not examine her own privilege or culpability in global corporate imperialism. Am I hallucinating? Or does she do that literally all the time? Literally every time she criticizes someone she prefaces it "And I know I'm a privileged fuck but..."

And I guess I'm speaking only for myself here, but I appreciate it whenever she puts poverty in a global perspective. 'Cuz I grew up in poverty and most of my life my family and I have lived off welfare checks to survive, but I never really understood until fairly recently how extravagantly privileged I was compared to the poverty of other countries, and how little I actually have to complain about in the grand scheme of things.

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:22 am

I think Liszt is mostly right and she does try to examine her privilege. This is just one of those awkward areas at the intersections of multiple oppressions. Like a rich white woman lecturing a poor black dude about "patriarchy"...it's weird, messy and can often be racist. She's not being oppressed in any coherent/meaningful way by a poor black guy. Race complicates things. That's why intersectionality is important.

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:31 am

Right. That's partly why feminists invented the term "kyriarchy" to refer to all the intersecting sets of oppression and privilege and all the unique social dynamics that result from them. It's what people used to refer to as "white supremacist colonialist heteronormative capitalist patriarchy" before they realized that sounded kinda dumb.

Intersectionality is a very useful concept.

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:43 am

No, what I mean is that imperialism benefits you people at the expense of the exploitation of the third world people, creating a dynamic where the first world gets to consume, enjoy better wages over the people in the third world who create the benefits for you. Because that surplus value comes from here.

And I never declared myself the prophet of social truths, I experience frustration about what happens here without not being able to do anything. So yes, it annoys me. Even if my life is privileged over here, it's really not too different from the life you guys are living, you people are saying "You don't depend on benefits because you are rich." Over here we have no benefits, my family has had to rely on the charity of my wealthy uncle (who is a corrupt politican who might end up in jail in a few years) to help my grandma because as I said, life here is more expensive than living over there, over here you can't afford to be sick at all, unless your family comes from a monopoly, which mine doesn't since I come from immigrants, you can't afford to be sick. You can't even afford to get old, even if you are a doctor, or have your own business, you can't get old. It's a fact. So I don't know what is up with you people. Which is also the point, the first world allows you have a better or equal life than me, being a rich light skinned girl over here. That's the global perspective.

Just because my life is privileged it doesn't mean I can't express my frustration at the comments some of you made like "Oh, I don't care if poor people die in your country on african palm farms because Nutella is awesome." "Maybe your people should start thinking about eating insects."

Because that is not offensive at all.

And that line of thinking, is ALSO privilege. Which was the point of my OP.

Also, it's not like "I'm better because my knowledge is only from the books" because I've actually left my country so I can compare, I've been to the poorest areas of my country to the richest ones. From the moment I was born to age 6, I was experiencing a civil war. So yeah, I think I do get to complain about imperialism, if I want to read about how I can understand my reality and if I find that marxism explains it to me, then why shouldn't I? (And I have said several times, my university is at fault of this because they actually push the marxist agenda and force you to see the reality of my country's situation. And now they are starting gender-equality program.)

And I think Liszt is well aware that she too benefits from exploitation. And even as a rich person has moral ground to criticize imperialists for destroying her country

I did say I was the colonizer on the gentrification thread.

I think I did anyway, can't remember if it was here or facebook.

Post by **aels** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:48 am

I'm out, guys. Not because I'm not listening or I'm not agreeing (I've agreed with a lot of this thread, for what it's worth) but because I am having the mother of all panic attacks (see other thread) and I can't. Carry on without me. Assume I am a dick where appropriate!

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:52 am

A few people on this thread need to stop defending the indefensible and actually read the first three sentences of the OP and not through the biased lenses of someone who already agrees with her no matter how condescending she acts.

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:56 am

It was meant to be funny because I talk about imperialism and socialism all the time. I'll stop using that, apparently it fails.

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 7:10 am

I'm gonna go running. When I return this thread better be cleaned up!

Sorry aels.

Post by **OpiateOfTheMasses** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 11:34 am

None of us can help where we're born or the family/circumstances we're born into. We can't control many of the factors pertaining to our health. We don't even have a huge amount of influence over our upbringing.

But as we get older we do generally have more and more say over what we do with our lives. And those of us living in "free" societies, coming from priviledged backgrounds and/or having more disposable income than most have more say over what we do with our lives than others.

There is a slight trade off that once you have a family of your own you need to take responsibility for that family too, so you temper any actions you may choose to make with the awareness that it will potentially impact on your dependents. But if you're free and single, with no children, if you have money, if you're healthy, if you have an education and the freedom to exercise these then you are in an ideal position to do whatever you want to try to change the world to be whatever you perceive to be "a better world".

Even if all these circumstances aren't in place, you can still strive to change things, but you may experience difficulties or limitations.

It's easy to sit back and say "the world should work like this" or "everyone should do that". But chances are that's not going to just happen. So whilst you're campaigning for this or that (i.e. "talking the talk") you should be doing your bit too (i.e. "walking the walk")...

If you're in the 1% and think the 1% should share their wealth, then share your wealth. If you think more should be done to feed the homeless then you raise money for them/organise soup kitchens/distribute food parcels/get-out-there-and-do-something-about-it! And so on...

You can't expect everyone else to change if you're not willing to demonstrate that you will make the first step yourself.

Personally, I am involved in two charities - a local one and a national one and I spend many a weekend or annual leave day at events or going round door-to-door to help out. Sure that's not going to solve all the problems in the world, but it's doing something real to help. And its a start.

That's my two cents on this. I realise that I'm probably the enemy 'cos I'm possibly (just) in the 1% according to the Daily Mail. but I have responsibilities. I have two children and a sick wife. I didn't come from a wealthy family. And I've never lived in a mansion or had a maid...

Blade Azaezel · Post by **Blade Azaezel** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 12:35 pm

CashRules wrote:
Blade Azaezel wrote:I'm pretty sure I also worked out that, with the money I have just spent on a terraced, 2 bedroom house in the rough area of my 1st world town, I could have bought your mansion in Guatemala instead
With or without a maid and a security fence/gate?

Without a maid. It does come with a security gated car park though, because I basically live in my town's version of a ghetto

Blade Azaezel · Post by **Blade Azaezel** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 12:37 pm

Cassius Clay wrote:Az, you bought a house in the hood?

Gentrification much?

Yeah, so basically they did knock down a load of working class homes so they could build some nice shiny houses and lure the middle classes in. Gentrification ftw!!

Post by **Islandmur** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 12:43 pm

Actually here things are much more expensive than in the states, box of cereal is almost 10$ US. A pizza is over 20$ US etc... Those are luxuries. A plate of food rice / meat / greens is actually around 7$ So it's cheaper to eat well :)
And if you make your own food buying the basics at the street market a 6 person meal cost about 12$ to make.

This is just a comment on the "it's cheaper in third world countries" not on the general debate going on.

Post by **OpiateOfTheMasses** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 12:44 pm

Blade Azaezel wrote:
Cassius Clay wrote:Az, you bought a house in the hood?

Gentrification much?
Yeah, so basically they did knock down a load of working class homes so they could build some nice shiny houses and lure the middle classes in. Gentrification ftw!!

But I'm guessing (behind your security gates and the CCTV) you can't see the displaced poor people, so it's not too much of an issue?

Blade Azaezel · Post by **Blade Azaezel** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 12:47 pm

OpiateOfTheMasses wrote:
Blade Azaezel wrote:
Cassius Clay wrote:Az, you bought a house in the hood?

Gentrification much?
Yeah, so basically they did knock down a load of working class homes so they could build some nice shiny houses and lure the middle classes in. Gentrification ftw!!
But I'm guessing (behind your security gates and the CCTV) you can't see the displaced poor people, so it's not too much of an issue?

I can see them sitting on their sofas in the front garden, drinking beer and enjoying their welfare cheques! Bloody moochers

Post by **Islandmur** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 12:54 pm

Cassius Clay wrote:Last sentence is a double negative.

And I get what Liszt is saying anc also get that global perspective is important, but it's complicated.

For example, walmart notoriously exploits Third-world labor, and poor people in America take advantage by shopping at walmart. But you can't really judge poor folks who don't have too many options in desperate situations. But, then again, they are still taken advantage...they're just not the people who's heads you should be coming for.

And I think Liszt is well aware that she too benefits from exploitation. And even as a rich person has moral ground to criticize imperialists for destroying her country.

I may be wrong, but I think the problem is the "you, YOU, you people, people of this board, YOU SPOILED BRATS, etc..." I don't think it's with the contents of the message.

Post by **OpiateOfTheMasses** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 12:58 pm

Blade Azaezel wrote:
OpiateOfTheMasses wrote:
Blade Azaezel wrote:
Cassius Clay wrote:Az, you bought a house in the hood?

Gentrification much?
Yeah, so basically they did knock down a load of working class homes so they could build some nice shiny houses and lure the middle classes in. Gentrification ftw!!
But I'm guessing (behind your security gates and the CCTV) you can't see the displaced poor people, so it's not too much of an issue?
I can see them sitting on their sofas in the front garden, drinking beer and enjoying their welfare cheques! Bloody moochers

On a slightly different tack (your post has inspired me)... I read somewhere that Australia issues it's benefits/welfare payments on pre-paid debit cards. And there was a fuss at the time that this stigmatises people on benefits because people will know as soon as they present a "Welfare" card to pay with.

But debit cards can be blocked (and I don't know if the Australian government already does this) from certain types of purchases (gambling, pornography, alcohol, etc). How would we feel about benefits/welfare cards being blocked from certain types of purchase?

I realise I've gone fairly off topic here...

Post by **Islandmur** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 1:03 pm

I think certain things should be blocked, like gambling and pornography, but not alcohol, because that can have other uses besides getting drunk, and drinking a couple of beers shouldn't be denied just cause you are on benefits.
Thing is when you block something it's usually "global", block drugs and suddenly the person can buy a certain type of medicine because it's classified as a drug... So it's not really practical in the real world.

BruceSmith78 · Post by **BruceSmith78** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 2:34 pm

Who purchases pornography these days? You just have to purchase the internet, and all the pornography you could want comes with it.

Post by **OpiateOfTheMasses** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 2:41 pm

Islandmur wrote:I think certain things should be blocked, like gambling and pornography, but not alcohol, because that can have other uses besides getting drunk, and drinking a couple of beers shouldn't be denied just cause you are on benefits.
Thing is when you block something it's usually "global", block drugs and suddenly the person can buy a certain type of medicine because it's classified as a drug... So it's not really practical in the real world.

I really don't know how I feel about it. Part of me looks at families that are ruined by alcholism or drug abuse and says that it would easier just to remove that from them entirely. I also see the situation we have here in the UK where Housing Benefit used to be paid directly to the landlord, but to make benefit recipients "more responsible" and used to "dealing with their own finances" (and also to make it cheaper for the government to administer) they started paying it to the claimants. The result was that rent arrears shot up as claimants spent the money on things other than the rent (including booze, drugs and gambling).

But the other part of me thinks that being on benefits should not be a punishment and (as you say) if you're managing your money well there's no particular reason why shouldn't be allowed the occassional drink. Or even a fiver on the 3.15 at Newmarket on a Saturday afternoon if that's what you enjoy.

I think I'd support some form of debit card where things like alcohol, gambling etc were blocked out and 90% (or so) of the benefits were paid onto the card, but a small proportion was made available as cash that could be used "as you wanted". This would help to ensure that families bought food, etc to look after their children but still left people the ability to buy other things.

Anyway - enough of my segway. Back to spoilt first worlders not doing enough to help third worlders! Or something like that...

Post by **OpiateOfTheMasses** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 2:43 pm

BruceSmith78 wrote:Who purchases pornography these days? You just have to purchase the internet, and all the pornography you could want comes with it.

The really "specialised" stuff you have to pay for.

Allegedly.

sikax · Post by **sikax** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 3:00 pm

In the states (well, California at least) one's benefits are put on a debit card. There are two levels. The first gets you only food. You cannot buy alcohol or anything that is not food. Simple and plain. The second level, called "General", (guess what it gets you) gets you everything else. You can use that for anything, but there are much stricter screenings for who can get the "General" card. I've had both at different times and am currently only on the "just food" card, but if that were taken from me for some political reason, I would not mind so much. It helps a lot and I do qualify for it, but I believe that one main thing Liszt is trying to convey (and the part I agree with) is that people of a certain privilege can afford to lower their standards a bit. If my food stamp card got canceled, well, then my son and I would just have to be more frugal with our food budget. Nothing wrong with a little suffering. It builds character. As long as he's fed and healthy, I don't give a god damn what else above the bare necessities we have.

On the global perspective thing, though, I do believe it's more of a class issue than a border issue. The extremely rich of this country exploit the impoverished of every country, this one included. And the extremely rich of any country, no matter how generally poor, is also exploiting his own country. Western countries like the U.S. probably started the shittyness and are perpetuating it, but to say that citizens in the first world are spoiled and hyper-privileged unless they zealously support anti-war candidates and sentiments is short-sighted and lacking in understanding. A lot of the "spoiled brats" I live around don't have the luxury of feeling the inherent privilege of their geographic location because they're too busy trying to feed their five kids and hold their three jobs and fend off the drug addicts and burglars. Yes, there are a million things that can be changed about the system, but most of us don't have the fucking time to do much about it because we have lives to drag ourselves through.

Post by **Gendo** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 3:22 pm

Wait a minute... Is Liszt rich??

Blade Azaezel · Post by **Blade Azaezel** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 3:30 pm

Gendo wrote:Wait a minute... Is Liszt rich??

Richer than most of us first worlders

Blade Azaezel · Post by **Blade Azaezel** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 3:32 pm

I think it's a slippery slope when we start dictating what people can and can't spend their money on. I mean, I get that we do this to an extent by making certain stuff illegal, but...if you make it illegal for poor people to spend their benefits on alcohol, as an example, that's classist as fuck.

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 3:59 pm

A lot of the "spoiled brats" I live around don't have the luxury of feeling the inherent privilege of their geographic location because they're too busy trying to feed their five kids and hold their three jobs and fend off the drug addicts and burglars.

I understand that. I never said that no one deserves their benefits. Just that we deserve to have them too, especially when a lot of the food we produce ends up being thrown in the trash in your countries. Because the system is made that way. Being poor in your countries is the equivalent of being high middle class over here.

Also is quite annoying to hear about how your countries doesn't privilege you when it does. You can say that the system is oppressing you, i have never denied that, without saying the oppression is the same or in an way similar as here, when is clearly not. That is eye rolling.

Also I did try to stop saying "you. Your. You people."

sikax · Post by **sikax** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 4:04 pm

"The poorest people in the U.S. are not the poorest people in the world."

OK, now what?

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 4:26 pm

Oooh. For a moment I thought I wrote that and I was looking all over the thread thinking I screwed up and got all stressed.

I don't know, is hard. All I can think of is stop voting war so there can be some breathing space for a lot of countries. Start removing sanctions and blockades. But even simple things like that are very utopian when it should be common sense.

Lets burn down the cia.

Post by **OpiateOfTheMasses** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:10 pm

Yes and no. Personally I have mixed feelings about removing all sanctions to countries like North Korea when the incumbent government is only interested in developing arms to threaten it's southern neighbour. Or if sanctions have peacefully brought an end to Iranian nuclear weapons programme I'd see that as a success.

OurGloriousLeader · Post by **OurGloriousLeader** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:55 pm

HM I find this thread concerning, we seem to be shouting down someone who has been on the receiving end of oppression, simply because their life isn't absolutely awful. We're all sitting around on a forum discussing stuff, roofs over our heads, can eat each day; this privilege dick-length competition is silly. I don't think Liszt is saying you're bad people or that our problems in the first world aren't worth discussing or criticising, BUT that it ought to be put in the perspective of a larger, global system where overall we are the winner.

At the risk of trivialising another contentious issue, the parallels to the white privilege thing are a bit noticeable for me. How many people shouted down Castor, Achilles, and Stelios because their lives were fine and the white people had problems too? I know some of us from the first world aren't exactly fucking rolling in money from our imperial conquests, except Brandon who lives on agricultural subsidies while shouting down big government, but I think if we take a step back we can see Sophia's general point (and anger). I was raised by a single mother in a council estate, poor, and this no doubt limited my options in life. Aels has a disability and a was raised similarly poor and this limits her options. Buttz is limited by an entire economic and political sphere of oppression across a continent by the world's only remaining superpower, and on top of that has been attacked by an armed biker (in a place where kidnap, murder, and rape by armed bikers is pretty common...), and chose to work helping poorer people. Not saying she's a saint (she's a pretty awful person overall) and sure she lives more comfortably than those she 'defends', but I think we are all mature enough to reflect on our advantages and disadvantage, be that based on nationality, gender, race, or upbringing.

So let's all hold hands and give each other oral sex. Get on that Castor, yea...

Post by **OpiateOfTheMasses** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:15 pm

Are you sure this isn't a competition to see who has the shittiest life? And they can then claim to be arbiter of all thing socialist...

And thinking about the practicalities of it all, if we're all holding hands, the mechanics of giving each other oral sex becomes slightly more complicated. Is the "holding hands" bit the important bit or the "oral sex" bit the important bit? Or should we let the shittiest-life-arbiter decide?

Blade Azaezel · Post by **Blade Azaezel** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:25 pm

OpiateOfTheMasses wrote:Are you sure this isn't a competition to see who has the shittiest life? And they can then claim to be arbiter of all thing socialist...

And thinking about the practicalities of it all, if we're all holding hands, the mechanics of giving each other oral sex becomes slightly more complicated. Is the "holding hands" bit the important bit or the "oral sex" bit the important bit? Or should we let the shittiest-life-arbiter decide?

That's the most times 'bit' has ever been used in a post.

Post by **OpiateOfTheMasses** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:34 pm

There are potentially going to be a lot "bits" involved here.

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:36 pm

Whoo! I'm rolling in money!!! Why didn't somebody tell me before now?

BruceSmith78 · Post by **BruceSmith78** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:57 pm

Your name is literally CashRules, after all.

phe_de · Post by **phe_de** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 8:29 pm

OpiateOfTheMasses wrote:It's easy to sit back and say "the world should work like this" or "everyone should do that". But chances are that's not going to just happen. So whilst you're campaigning for this or that (i.e. "talking the talk") you should be doing your bit too (i.e. "walking the walk")...

If you're in the 1% and think the 1% should share their wealth, then share your wealth. If you think more should be done to feed the homeless then you raise money for them/organise soup kitchens/distribute food parcels/get-out-there-and-do-something-about-it! And so on...

You can't expect everyone else to change if you're not willing to demonstrate that you will make the first step yourself.

I agree.
That's also a problem with many so-called "limousine liberals", as Cash so adequately named them (in Europe, the terms "liberal" and "libertarian" are almost synonyms; so we prefer calling them "Armchair Activists", "Luxury Leftists" or "Salon Socialists"): They don't offer workable solutions.
Marxist solutions, as Dr.Liszt mentioned in other threads, have never worked so far; and I don't believe they ever will.

So what solutions are there?

One good idea is: Think global, act local. OpiateOfTheMasses mentioned working for charities. I don't devote time to charities, but regularly donate to organizations like the Red Cross. However, I usually don't donate to organizations in third-world countries; I'm not convinced that the money would really reach those who need it.

Then there's an important part where customers have (limited) power: Buy local products, or at least products where those who produce them get a fair share.

This works quite well for food. I mostly buy food produced in Europe; or if it's not available from Europe, like coffee or chocolate, I usually choose fairtrade products.
With clothes, it's a bit more difficult, but still possible to a degree.
Unfortunately, it becomes quite impossible for electronic consumer devices like smartphones. High-end smartphones which do not rely on ingredients that don't come from places where the workers are exploited are almost nonexistant.
However, there may be limited solutions. One example: The Dutch company Fairphone. They built a smartphone a few years ago, and tried to use only ingredients that don't come with bloodstains, so to speak. But since many rare ingredients come from places ruled by warlords, they were not 100% successful in obtaining "fair" ingredients, and could only produce a small amount of smartphones.

However, the commercial success of the first fairphone (it was quickly sold out) shows that there are first-world consumers who are concerned with social issues. Fairphone is probably doing more for social issues than other manufacturers; even if their product is not 100% fair.
https://www.fairphone.com/about/

But what can be done to make fair electronics available for more people?
I guess it's the situation in the third-world countries that need to change; or someone could invent electronic devices that are based on organic products that can be grown in the first world. One can dream... If I had a workable solution, I wouldn't be sitting here posting on a forum; I would probably prepare my Nobel Prize speech.

But the good things about discussion forums is that ideas can be exchanged. And maybe one day, someone will have a solution.

Whitey · Post by **Whitey** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 9:00 pm

OurGloriousLeader wrote:HM I find this thread concerning, we seem to be shouting down someone who has been on the receiving end of oppression, simply because their life isn't absolutely awful. We're all sitting around on a forum discussing stuff, roofs over our heads, can eat each day; this privilege dick-length competition is silly. I don't think Liszt is saying you're bad people or that our problems in the first world aren't worth discussing or criticising, BUT that it ought to be put in the perspective of a larger, global system where overall we are the winner.

At the risk of trivialising another contentious issue, the parallels to the white privilege thing are a bit noticeable for me. How many people shouted down Castor, Achilles, and Stelios because their lives were fine and the white people had problems too? I know some of us from the first world aren't exactly fucking rolling in money from our imperial conquests, except Brandon who lives on agricultural subsidies while shouting down big government, but I think if we take a step back we can see Sophia's general point (and anger). I was raised by a single mother in a council estate, poor, and this no doubt limited my options in life. Aels has a disability and a was raised similarly poor and this limits her options. Buttz is limited by an entire economic and political sphere of oppression across a continent by the world's only remaining superpower, and on top of that has been attacked by an armed biker (in a place where kidnap, murder, and rape by armed bikers is pretty common...), and chose to work helping poorer people. Not saying she's a saint (she's a pretty awful person overall) and sure she lives more comfortably than those she 'defends', but I think we are all mature enough to reflect on our advantages and disadvantage, be that based on nationality, gender, race, or upbringing.

So let's all hold hands and give each other oral sex. Get on that Castor, yea...

This is my view. But I don't want to give credit to a Scot. I'm conflicted. So um....nicely said....dick.

Gypsy-Vanner · Post by **Gypsy-Vanner** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 9:35 pm

Well, I don't know how much longer 1st world countries will continue to produce more than enough food to feed the world because there's this March Against Monsanto thing that has actually taken hold in many 1st world countries that have resulted in bans against GMO.

I mean, GMO today accounts for most of the surplus production so if things continue to progress for this movement against GMO product, 1st world countries will no longer be producing surplus product in their countries and those 3rd world countries they shamelessly exploit for farm land etc..., I wonder if they'll even be able to produce food for all the 1st world citizens?

I'm all gunho about Monsanto being destroyed but for all GMO to be banned I think might have some crappy consequences for the entire world. There's some report I'm too sick to try and find about how much of the worlds food is GMO and it is pretty much all of 1st world agriculture and stuff.

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 10:14 pm

OurGloriousLeader wrote:HM I find this thread concerning, we seem to be shouting down someone who has been on the receiving end of oppression, simply because their life isn't absolutely awful. We're all sitting around on a forum discussing stuff, roofs over our heads, can eat each day; this privilege dick-length competition is silly. I don't think Liszt is saying you're bad people or that our problems in the first world aren't worth discussing or criticising, BUT that it ought to be put in the perspective of a larger, global system where overall we are the winner.

At the risk of trivialising another contentious issue, the parallels to the white privilege thing are a bit noticeable for me. How many people shouted down Castor, Achilles, and Stelios because their lives were fine and the white people had problems too? I know some of us from the first world aren't exactly fucking rolling in money from our imperial conquests, except Brandon who lives on agricultural subsidies while shouting down big government, but I think if we take a step back we can see Sophia's general point (and anger). I was raised by a single mother in a council estate, poor, and this no doubt limited my options in life. Aels has a disability and a was raised similarly poor and this limits her options. Buttz is limited by an entire economic and political sphere of oppression across a continent by the world's only remaining superpower, and on top of that has been attacked by an armed biker (in a place where kidnap, murder, and rape by armed bikers is pretty common...), and chose to work helping poorer people. Not saying she's a saint (she's a pretty awful person overall) and sure she lives more comfortably than those she 'defends', but I think we are all mature enough to reflect on our advantages and disadvantage, be that based on nationality, gender, race, or upbringing.

So let's all hold hands and give each other oral sex. Get on that Castor, yea...

Hello whore.

Couple of things to add and elaborate on from my own personal experience as a Nigerian-American(with a wealthy, estranged father) with one foot in each camp. 1) Even as a rich person, you still suffer the consequences of the political/social instability caused by meddling Westerners. Nigeria is as fucked up as it is mostly because of imperialism/colonialism. I swear I come back with a story about almost dying every time I've visited Nigeria in the past. And even if I don't personally suffer the consequences as much as most Nigerians have, I should, as Nigerian, still be able to speak(on behalf of my people) against Western bullshit. 2) There are lot of arrogant, Western assumptions about what it means to have a maid, a gated compound, and a driver in a developing country. In Nigeria, having a maid does not necessarily mean you're rich as it does in "the west". Middle-class and lower middle-class people have maids and drivers in Nigeria. And people have gated compounds because they don't have the same type of home security and police response as we have in Europe/U.S. It's not as much a sign of affluence in Nigeria as it is in America and Europe, where you are pretty much a millionaire(or super upper class) if you have these services. I don't know how it is in Guatemala, but I suspect it's similar.

And I'm kinda mad at myself for actually figuring out a way a group of people could hold hands and give each other oral sex....a chain of side-to-side 69ing. Visualize it!

.....I'm so sorry(not really).

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 10:23 pm

Islandmur wrote:
Cassius Clay wrote:Last sentence is a double negative.

And I get what Liszt is saying anc also get that global perspective is important, but it's complicated.

For example, walmart notoriously exploits Third-world labor, and poor people in America take advantage by shopping at walmart. But you can't really judge poor folks who don't have too many options in desperate situations. But, then again, they are still taken advantage...they're just not the people who's heads you should be coming for.

And I think Liszt is well aware that she too benefits from exploitation. And even as a rich person has moral ground to criticize imperialists for destroying her country.
I may be wrong, but I think the problem is the "you, YOU, you people, people of this board, YOU SPOILED BRATS, etc..." I don't think it's with the contents of the message.

Yeah, the "you people" and "spoiled brats" thing is throwing people off. But it's honestly not completely inaccurate. It just sounds off/insensitive coming from someone who might be wealthy themselves.