- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Qx needs work on his reading comprehension

Posted by: Joel Jacobson ( none, USA ) on March 22, 1999 at 17:44:02:

In Reply to: Joel alternates between corporatism and bad publicity stunts posted by Quincunx on March 22, 1999 at 12:17:56:

: b: : Not a single one is devoted actually studying the environment.
: JJ: Which was never the issue.
: Qx: Good dodge!

What the hell are you talking about? Don't get like Sammy-Boy on me and lose any ability to comprehend or follow a conversation. Like I said, and made perfectly clear on my post, we don't need to be overly concerned for the environment. It was simple, straightforward, and without any goddamn dodge.

: JJ:My point was taht the whole enviro-scare industry is dead wrong and the "global warming" scare is a manufactured issue to drum up support for left wing ideologies.
: Qx: Not bad for a conspiracy theory but how about some institutional analysis for once?

No conspiricy. Just a simple structural analysis.

: JJ: We don't need to 'save the environment' as it's in no real large-scale danger.
: Qx: Oh....so we go on pretending it doesn't matter since you rely on right-wing (hint*- corporatist) sources that need to keep the status-quo on an even keel?

This whole post is absurd as it simply ignores everything I said. Hey, if ya wanna play like that, okay.

: b: : Nearly all of them represent right wing opinions, with all supporting free-market, laissez-faire ideologies.
: JJ: And your sources represent left wing opinions, with all supporting anti-choice, statist ideologies.
: Qx: Actually, there is a better way than to se it as a left-right thing and since you claim to be loosely affiliated with the Libertarian Party you should brush up a bit. Now, how do you provide evidence that these "leftists" are all anti-choice? For myself, I don't like Public Choice Theory because it assumes that all people are "ratiuonal" and it's basically amoral. In other words, I feel that it's devoid of any true ethics that help people see each other as human beings.

Well, in the spirit of Sammy-Boy and you, here goes:
You must approve of all Stalin's brutal slaughter of all the tens of millions of peasants. That's right you feel the end justifies the means and if anybody disagrees then screw them and to the guns. In fact, you'd probably kill your own mother to get your ideological ideals implemented. In fact, you probably kick dogs and little babies whenever they cross your path. (Said in the spirit of Qx, that's you, and Sammy-Boy).

Hey, guys brush up on your reading comprehension.

: Qx: Oh yes... the collective action of big business and other rich people who get together to claim the planet as their own but not with the rest of humanity. The results of their policies can be seen all over the face ofr the globe.

I don't necessarily disagree with what you say here. But, as you give absolutely no constructive solutions and actions I fail to see how you can talk. And "abolishing money and the nation state" are simple, naive flights of fancy and do not represent any such ideal.

: Qx: Well, that's why these corporatists hire public relations firms to make over their real image and show a supposedly kinder, gentler side that doesn't really exist.

Their goal isn't kind, and gentle. It's to create products people can use in order to turn a profit. The public relations images are a mixed bag: they are apologetics for a company's real mistakes, and they fight the absurd claims of people like Ralph Nader and Al Gore (it should be clear by now how much I despise that man).

: Qx: Now you'll attain enlightenment. Hare Krsna.

Can we make a deal? I'll look into Hare Krishna if you look at improving your reading comprehension. Thanks Qx for completely leaving anything I said unanswered; your attempts at rational dialog are much appreciated.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup