• 0 Posts
  • 20 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2023

help-circle




  • I immediately dislike calling it commerce for 3 reasons:

    1. Most people will not know what I mean so I will have to explain every time
    2. Commerce is an existing word that means something different so it will still be confusing in a different direction
    3. I, on principle, don’t like abandoning words because some dumb group(s) appropriate them and try to change their meaning

    I think I will try saying “regulated capitalism” from now on and see if it works better.




  • CGP gray very specifically refers to democracies as well and explains how things like farm subsidies are used to buy votes. Maybe re-watch the videos.

    And yes, CGP gray also indirectly explains why Marxists kept pumping resources into the government, police and bureaucracy. (Clarification: CGP Gray never mentions Marxists specifically, he just explains why leaders have to funnel resources to areas that help them stay in power.) It is inevitable in a system where you concentrate power in a limited group of people.

    That is why distributing power between large number of independent capitalists and voters is the system that so far worked best, although still very far from perfect.

    As long as humans behave like humans and are in charge, the utopian communism is as realistic as wizards in flying castles.


  • It is the opposite. In capitalism, there is at least a chance a good person has some power because power is distributed, not only held by governments. There are multiple examples in the main post. Even better examples are European countries where the government and businesses hold each other in check instead of govt being bought off legally like in the US.

    In communism, the way power is distributed ensures corrupt people raise to the top. See an amazing video “rule for rulers” by CGP gray for a simplified explanation how that corruption works and why a good person can’t hold power.



  • That’s not how this works. The rule can’t stop you as a private person. You can still post bot reviews.

    It will apply to businesses, which don’t have the right to remain silent or against searches. If they suspect a business is breaking the rules, they can subpoena the employees, computers and bank records to check if they are breaking the rule. And if they think the employees would risk jail time for perjury or destruction of evidence to protect their employer, they can just raid the offices and seize the computers.



  • Here’s my take: the bear thing is causing such a visceral reaction that it is very hard to take a step back, not take it personally and have a rational discussion about it.

    Imo the bear thing was phrased in a way to cause that visceral reaction. It was intended to be antagonistic. If the same point was phrased the way you phrased it above, I want to believe we would have much more civil discussion about it. But instead, the posts put many male readers on the defensive and those that tried to explain were seen as defending this antagonistic stance.

    That is no excuse for DM harassment or harassment on other posts, just my take on the reason the discussion turned so uncivil.








  • Well, I don’t have a study backing me up, but in my experience, promising what you can’t deliver often results in being called a liar.

    I really don’t know why “other candidates do it” would be an excuse. The whole pitch for voting for him is that he is supposed to be better than the other candidates. Seems like whataboutism.