Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The many people here who decry the overly liberal attributes of New York strike me as either billionaire-wanna-be's or Nazis.
Nobody "decried" the overly liberal attitudes of NYC. Another poster misunderstood my post.
BTW, NYC is not "liberal" and hasn't been since the 1970s, when the Koch Administration spear-headed the gentrification of NYC under the guise of "urban renewal." It's neoliberal. The reason why it looks liberal is that it sneakily invokes liberalism to keep carrying out its plan to "revitalize" the city. For example, rezoning working class enclaves to push the residents out to make way for the upper class, but then giving them chintzy "affordable housing" units in out-of-the-way places or in limited supply to "control" what percentage of working class get to live here and where they get to settle.
The many people here who decry the overly liberal attributes of New York strike me as either billionaire-wanna-be's or Nazis.
It's our nature, unfortunately, to pick on the less-powerful; cyclists get demonized while motorists drive off scot-free, for example.
It's all over the animal kingdom, too: you know them cute Japanese macaque monkeys bathing in hot springs? Did you know that every one you see actually in the hot spring is a female -- except the leader to whom those females belong? The rest of the troupe of males are not allowed in -- at all!! (Except the leader's children, of course.) No one else ever gets to enjoy a bath!
That's what you get with a hierarchy. Which seems necessary to achieve civilization, so...a necessary evil? "Colonial House," an early reality show, was roundly criticized for the cast not properly "role-playing" -- but it had this great episode where the black guy gives up, totally stunned by his epiphany: he realized in the very depths of his being the necessity for slavery (my words, not his) due to personally experiencing all the incredible hardships of early colonial life!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kefir King
Europe can afford a strong social system because they haven't pyssed away trillions on attempting world domination like the United States has done since 1945.
Then again, it was American largess that allowed Europe the "breathing space" necessary to grow into the socially advanced nations of today. (Much respect to their postwar statesmen [and women?], however, for their foresight in implementing socialist policies.)
Are you sure? Because it seemed as if from your earlier response you think that "neoliberalism" is the same as liberalism, and it's not.
Yes, I think I do understand you -- I was using "colloquial shorthand" in equating the two (kinda like how socialism and communism are popularly conflated) because for my purposes it sufficed to do so (didn't want to get into drawing distinctions like you're doing now)...but insofar as I'm aware of the difference between liberalism and neo-liberalism, I think I understand you.
I don't necessarily agree with the utility of drawing such distinctions in many contexts, however...again, kinda like how for a capitalist, a socialist and a communist are probably like the devil's minion and the devil himself!
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastFlatbush
Neoliberalism is the opposite of liberalism. It is a belief in a completely free and unregulated market in which corporations and other powerful entities can do whatever they want--form monopolies, engage in predatory practices, engage in the type of behavior that is responsible for what's happening now in NYC with all of this gentrification and driving out of the middle class. In Europe, they don't have these problems because Europe is largely liberal.
Well, Nazism (the original creed) despised Slavs whereas Neo-Nazism (today's stuff) embraces them -- so yes distinctions can be drawn but when discussing "purely social" matters like homosexuality and racism, liberalism and neo-liberalism can often be "the same"...
Again, I'm a Sanders man (like, incidentally, many Neo-Nazis and Trump supporters! So Sanders almost certainly could have won the election*) so I'm aware of the critique you make...but in many cases, there's more similarity than not between "left" and so-called "far-left" (cf. the left/far-left critique of "right" and "far-right" or even "alt-right" these days [cf., indeed, the taxonomy involved with gender identity scholarship!])....
* Though the way the Black Lives Matter drama-queens upstaged him on his own stage does make me wonder how hard he could have swung back against Trump, yes. And I'm not entirely certain that Sanders had a clear grasp of economics and foreign policy -- "though his heart was in the right place" (really ought to separate the office of President from the ceremonial and the practical)....
"Neoliberal" is a term thrown around by Bernie bros who will not accept anything but communism
Not at all. It perfectly describes the regime we've been under for the past forty or so years...though we're going back to Gilded Age crony capitalism in a hurry, to be sure!
Nobody "decried" the overly liberal attitudes of NYC.
Saying that implies you haven't been on this board very long. One of the major mantras is "Woe, oh woe, New York liberal policies are destroying the City."
(And when I say "many on this board" I am not necessarily referring to anyone in particular, HL.)
Last edited by Kefir King; 11-30-2017 at 06:54 AM..
Saying that implies you haven't been on this board very long. One of the major mantras is "Woe, oh woe, New York liberal policies are destroying the City."
(And when I say "many on this board" I am not necessarily referring to anyone in particular, HL.)
Oh, I don't feel personally targeted -- in case you might have thought that!
I don't agree with many of the liberal policies myself -- such as the proposal in the City Council (probably passed by now?) to do away with English tests for taxi driver licenses -- and feel like "identity politics" has, as Al Shanker prophesied, destroy liberalism....
Oh, I don't feel personally targeted -- in case you might have thought that!
I don't agree with many of the liberal policies myself -- such as the proposal in the City Council (probably passed by now?) to do away with English tests for taxi driver licenses -- and feel like "identity politics" has, as Al Shanker prophesied, destroy liberalism....
Identity politics is a big part of politics whether right wing or left wing, most voters are more concerned with the culture war than anything else.
Identity politics is a big part of politics whether right wing or left wing, most voters are more concerned with the culture war than anything else.
Yes indeed -- so-called "mainstream" politics has been mostly white identity politics for much of U.S. history...but what I mean is that, again as Al Shanker complained, it doesn't help the class-based liberalism of yore to get sidetracked into "black liberation" and now transgendered bathrooms....
Remember that someone like the homosexual James Baldwin had to work for civil rights by leaving alone the homosexual equality stuff for the time being -- you have to pick your battles in politics.
And, speaking of picking battles, note that MLK, Jr. was assassinated after he started talking about rich and poor...as long as he's talking about white and black, the only folks being "inconvenienced" were "white" and "black!" But challenge the economic system (which means who gets what and how much) and whoa...!!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.