• flossdaily@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The big problem with this argument is that it blames the ineffectual centrists and the ignored left, when the real villain is the anti-science suicide cult that is the Republican Party.

            • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              So here is an explanation of what “neoliberal” means.

              Of course, modern neoliberalism isn’t genuinely about any of that. Those are just the excuses they use to push policies that benefit rich people almost exclusively.

              They know wealth won’t trickle down. They know corporations do horrific things when not bound by regulation. They know that the “free market” has no genuine power to fix it since ethical competiton is prohibitively expensive for both companies and consumers.

              And they’ve definitely done the calculations on the profitability of fascism.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                You don’t need to define neoliberalism to me. I am a proud neoliberal.

                Neoliberals believe the government’s role in economics is to address externalities. A significant number of neoliberals (including H.M. Hillary Clinton) are for things like universal health care or (Yang) even UBI.

                Your link has accurate info. Your interpretation is inaccurate.

                • AA5B@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Interesting, I was about to agree with the post you replied to. I dont know what neo-liberalism is and the Wikipedia entry isn’t specific enough to this conversation,so o don’t know who to agree or is agree with, but ….

                  I don’t see how free market or capitalism is inherently the problem or can’t be the solution.

                  However it’s government’s job to establish the market, set a fair playing field, set common rules to encourage development toward the needs of society. However government is who abandoned their responsibility. At least in the US , we seem to rarely have a functional government, and much of the action taken shows we are owned by the market, rather than the other way around. Where is the government responsible to voters, rather than the rich or corporate interests? Where is our leadership dedicated to improving things for their constituents, rather than their benefactors? Where is the altriistic leadership, rather than petty or spiteful? Where is the leadership who actually believes in our form of government, our principles, the Constituion at the root, rather than taking advantage of them as a source of power and to accumulate wealth?

                • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  A significant number of neoliberals (including H.M. Hillary Clinton) are for things like universal health care or (Yang) even UBI

                  Neither of whom are in any danger of accomplishing their goals, both of which are designed to address the horrific situations that neoliberals have brought us.

                  Were you proud of the GFC? Are you proud to eat Nestlé chocolate? Were you proud when that train derailed in East Palestine? Are you proud when oil company talking points show up on social media?

                  Neoliberalism is been responsible for the wealth inequality, environmental degradation and political extremism that’s currently tearing societies apart.

                  I have no idea why you’d be proud of it unless you’re one of the ones pocketing the obscene profits at others expense.

  • Synthead@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Here is the part in the article that describes what activism needs to take place:

    persuasion, argument, nonviolent direct action or other means

    That’s it. I don’t think this is an article about activism at all.

  • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Really couldn’t disagree more with this article but here’s the big one that stands out:

    Second, what must be done runs directly counter to the way the economy currently works.

    It does not run counter to our existing system at all. We don’t live in capitalist anarchy, we have a government that can act pretty broadly here, actually. The government can and has done cap and trade on NOx and SO2. The government can and has provided tax credits to make alternative energy more cost effective sooner.

    If your complaint is that solutions to your prioritized issue are coming too slow, join the club, that’s definitely true. But that is a different complaint.

    • sadreality@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Government is the only player who can provide a solution short of a revolution.

      The issue is that we have criters and their boomer enables who think this is the their turn to loot younger generations. So reforms are not ton the table.

      Selection of critters up for vote does not install any confidance, at this rate something might happen in 2030s.