are you british/new zealander/australian/south african
What? No.
yeah mustang it's not that i'm so piously not racist or whatever it's just that you're not politically provocative so much as deeply confusing as in, "fuck i'm confused, why would anyone spend their time making posts like this?"
To bother Jools. And it's a good conversation starter, what else have people been talking about for 9000 pages?
I would get a better response on RevLeft because I think that's a good place to find people who obstinately hold on to extreme positions.
I fear that "imperialism" or "exploitation" doesn't actually hold much interest to me and I consider Bob Avakian and Glenn Beck to be in a common category of people who like to see politics as a place where the bourgeoise or the elite are always out to get them. Rather than looking at the economics of things, which most people find boring but what's all I care about.
But there was actually potential in the Ottoman Empire discussion, we can get back to that.
mustang posted:But there was actually potential in the Ottoman Empire discussion, we can get back to that.
No there isn't because you don't read, have no job, and lack a girlfriend.
mustang posted:I would get a better response on RevLeft because I think that's a good place to find people who obstinately hold on to extreme positions.
please go there forever
No there isn't because you don't read, have no job, and lack a girlfriend.
This is like the tenth time this has been used as some kind of trump card. I don't even know what a girlfriend is. And there's nothing wrong with going to school you spaz.
please go there forever
That would just be irritating though, communists are adult children.
mustang i don't know why you are so opposed to reading marx, like you don't have to be a leninist or a maoist or anything, i'm barely even a marxist but capital is really enlightening to read, you should read it for the sake of arguing with it because you are seriously embarrassing yourself in here. above all it would probably help you to develop an understanding of exploitation as a specialized term for a particular kind of production and appropriation. i know a lot of liberals use it as a kind of synonym for 'oppression' but you just have to accept that in some circumstances words have more specific uses than in others. please educate yourself mustang, you clearly have a lot of energy and time, use your powers for good not evil
If I fucked earlier I really want an explanation. I get the difference between market and firm-level exploitation and I think that's the only point Jools was making.
Marx is a nausea bomb in places, I really want to be sure I have an incorrect understanding of what he's saying before I have to read him.
what is the difference between market and firm-level exploitation mustang. tell us about your theory of value
Market exploitation is on the market, firm-level is on a firm or feudal estate.
And I could go on about value, I mean wikipedia is a click away.
well... you should read marx though. like as a matter of principle and intellectual integrity
No thanks. I'm not going to ask you to read the Koran or some other book I never read either.
Back on topic, it's racist how there are all these books on the fall of the roman empire but none of the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
Edited by mustang ()
if you read books in turkish or arabic you'd probably find more on the fall of the ottoman empire??? idk though i'm just thinking out loud. also it's probably a good idea to read the koran and the bible and torah and the dead sea scrolls and the analects and zhuangzi and the book of the dead and plato and the bhagavadgita and the sutras, all that stuff might help you out and would help you occupy your time in a way other than posting here
I definitely would. I read a lot of bhuddist stuff for a class and it was interesting the hoops some of the writers jumped through to make a story, for example apparently a good time to kill yourself is when you're overstocked on brownie points for your current realm, so you can bump up to the next one. I don't mind creating these threads though. Anything relating to fertility and demography is obsessively interesting to me, I have no understanding why.
The real question is, why do you keep responding to my crappy posts? I mean I don't mind, it just defies logic.
confusion
But that's the reason I ask you questions, it's a perpetual impasse.
Let me go look up some things on the Ottoman Empire so I can have a pseudo-informed opinion. Do you think that autocracy hindered the economic development of the Ottoman Empire versus feudal Europe, because it didn't allow constructive competition between local elites?
mustang posted:That would just be irritating though, communists are adult children.
mustang posted:confusion
But that's the reason I ask you questions, it's a perpetual impasse.
Let me go look up some things on the Ottoman Empire so I can have a pseudo-informed opinion. Do you think that autocracy hindered the economic development of the Ottoman Empire versus feudal Europe, because it didn't allow constructive competition between local elites?
A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire by M. Sükrü Hanioglu would be a good primer, but you need to stop posting and read and/or reflect on something first.
http://www.revforum.com/showthread.php?1663-Hi-all-done-with-Revleft-%29
I was banned because I said that sometimes people could be partly responsible for being raped (for example getting hammered with no friends about). This was immediately turned into - 'you are a rape apologist', 'you think women deserve to be raped', 'you think a woman in short skirt deserves to be raped' - when all I was saying was that placing yourself in a state of paralysis is moronic - and people should take responsibility for getting drunk. I was flamed, and it was decreed that I was not a communist because I refused to accept their mantra that 'it is NEVER even partly the victim's fault for being raped'. Because it is a sensitive issue they did not look at it objectively, and stamped out any view that was not their own (a bourgeois faux feminist one at that - they also seemed to think that only women are raped).
I don't expect everyone here to agree with me, but hopefully I will not be hounded here as I was there. I think if people can see past their dogma (wether that be leftist or not) they will see that my argument was not so awful and deplorable as revleft made it out to be.
Anyway, thanks for the welcome, to be clear I do not condone rape (ever) - it is disgusting.
PS. I forget where I found out about this forum. I think I found it by googling fuck revleft or something similar, and then I looked around for a bit, and liked it.
A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire by M. Sükrü Hanioglu would be a good primer, but you need to stop posting and read and/or reflect on something first.
Did you actually read that? Do you go around reading random books on the Ottoman Empire?
mustang posted:Did you actually read that? Do you go around reading random books on the Ottoman Empire?
ur rite reading is tough stuff you should stick to mindless contradictory rambling boring trolls on irrelevant spin-offs of dead forums.
ur rite reading is tough stuff you should stick to mindless contradictory rambling boring trolls on irrelevant spin-offs of dead forums.
That's really pessimistic wasted. You say there are other places on the internet but there literally aren't. I mean rHizzone is just one of the places I go but there really are almost no knowledgeable people out there. The serious, non-troll discussions here may seem stupid, and they are, but relatively speaking this forum is Einstein's brain in a sea of dung. Only SA might have better discussions, and they cost money.
you're barely even going to get a pseudo-informed opinion from whatever wikipedia shit you are reading and i don't know much about the ottoman empire but i also don't care about reaching optimal economic development rates or whatever, i don't care if europe was more capitalist and developed faster. just as an educated guess though i seriously doubt ottoman elites did not compete with each other???
To a much lesser degree than was the case in England. Executive constraint emerged under feudal institutions because monarchs weren't able to maintain absolute control. Part of it was that the Ottomans had a large supply of non-Muslim slaves, so the sultan didn't have to cooperate with local elites for military recruitment. Whereas England didn't have such a resource until colonialism, at which point its institutions were well developed already.
Edited by mustang ()
mustang posted:No, I'm pretty sure it's them.
It was never an "either or" formulation, both you and the dumb forums are adult children
It was never an "either or" formulation, both you and the dumb forums are adult children
I hate the term "either or". It's totally pointless. Just say "or".
Additionally only my system is founded on rigorous axioms. Fascism is inevitable, and as we know from marxism, inevitability and desirability are the same thing.
mustang posted:Sure, here's what it sounds like.
i was expecting something more Silversun Pickups
The highlight of the thread was probably jools upvoting wasted posts that criticized his argument.
mustang posted:Additionally only my system is founded on rigorous axioms. Fascism is inevitable, and as we know from marxism, inevitability and desirability are the same thing.
fascism is "inevitable", but cyclical. the inevitability of post-scarcity socialism (brought about of course by solar energy, 3d printing, forced sexual redistribution, and infinite threadshitting) however, is terminal and permanent
page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >
mustang posted:what is the difference between market and firm-level exploitation mustang. tell us about your theory of value
Market exploitation is on the market, firm-level is on a firm or feudal estate.
what makes them different. what is exploitation on the market.
wasted posted:You do realize that the blacks took power but essentially kept the same system of economic/political domination (minus apartheid), right? I mean you're not shooting down striking miners because they're black, right?
i dont see how it obviated what i was saying. it is genuinely incoherent to assume everything has remained the same, particularly in an area like reproductive rights etc
i dont see how it obviated what i was saying. it is genuinely incoherent to assume everything has remained the same, particularly in an area like reproductive rights etc
How does that pull your arse out of the fire? The current South African government pursues basically the same family planning policies, yet all the sudden they become not-racist.
You come up with all these elaborate conspiracies, but conveniently, the programs you support never fit into them.
I think I understand the leftism here now. Rhizzone doesn't actually support communism, that's just a hedging strategy. You take up ridiculous positions like praising Mao and the Taliban at the same time. You never make a serious defense of these positions, and you don't care if your population control enthusiasm is, in fact, racist. You just give rhetorical support to far left positions in order to appear cool and anti-racist among your liberal friends.
Oh, the games people play.
what makes them different. what is exploitation on the market.
Exploitation on the global labor market as opposed to local markets or single firms.
political islam
That article uses the Muslim Brotherhood as an example of political islam. That's a "moderate" movement in violent opposition to fundamentalism. Even the more liberal wahabbi governments like Saudi Arabia fund attacks on US military installations and assets on the side, eg the 9/11 attacks being funded by Omar al-Bayoumi, a defense employee.
Then it goes on to label the Taliban as an example, and only in an indirect way as efforts to prevent the Taliban from winning strengthen it supposedly.
Then it goes on an irrelevant tangent about Palestine where the US supports its "war on terror" bullshit against islamist groups.
And then it admits the US is trying to destroy the Islamic Republic of Iran which doesn't help the author's case at all.
Overall, it doesn't present much of an argument that Al Qaeda is a front for imperial jews and liberals.
Halil inalcik wrote the book on Ottoman capital. There's pdfs of his articles on the topic that are easy to find
Thanks, capital formation in the Ottoman Empire is an example of what I would be looking for.
http://www.yorku.ca/khoosh/Old%20Courses/His%203792-2008/Articles/Capital%20formation%20in%20the%20ottoman-inalcik.pdf
It's really unfortunate that Islamic countries never really enforced the ban on riba, it would be interesting to see that and alternative institutions developed.
I think a lot of the historical economics literature overstates the importance of institutions. Cultural explanations are hard to prove and capitalist institutions were well developed in parts of Egypt, it didn't result in substantial industrialization though. Even in the Ottoman Empire, apparently, nominally precapitalist institutions like the waqf operated like a corporation and used credit markets.
It's just that interest rates were incredibly high and stable, while interest rates fell gradually in Europe during the second millennium for some reason.
Edited by mustang ()