ToastedPlanet

Yes. People internalize the flaws of their society as virtues and then iterate on those flaws to make an even worse society.

We need to point all of this out to people now so our choices in the next two elections aren't neoliberals promoting abundance and fascists. Assuming we still have fair and free elections.

This meme is about Abundance Liberalism. Unlike the article that I’ll link, I would argue that the center-left Democrats are actual leaning right of center neoliberals who are desperately trying to rebrand themselves so they can keep implementing their failed policies.

https://www.splinter.com/abundance-liberalism-is-just-a-new-way-for-technocratic-democrats-to-miss-the-point

The new book Abundance by New York Times and Atlantic writers Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson has taken the center-left intelligentsia by storm this week, as it has received backing from outlets ranging from The Economist to Vox while America’s football coach Tim Walz has even endorsed it to a degree. I have not read the book yet, so I will refrain from entering the weeds of the many policy debates it raises, and if you want to read a critique of those weeds, there are thoughtful ones in The Baffler about how “the Abundance authors ask too little of themselves and their readers” and in The American Prospect about the litany of abundance liberalism’s corporate connections that may be informing its market-based policy recommendations.

Pasting this here too.

This meme is about Abundance Liberalism. Unlike the article that I'll link, I would argue that the center-left Democrats are actual leaning right of center neoliberals who are desperately trying to rebrand themselves so they can keep implementing their failed policies.

https://www.splinter.com/abundance-liberalism-is-just-a-new-way-for-technocratic-democrats-to-miss-the-point

The new book Abundance by New York Times and Atlantic writers Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson has taken the center-left intelligentsia by storm this week, as it has received backing from outlets ranging from The Economist to Vox while America’s football coach Tim Walz has even endorsed it to a degree. I have not read the book yet, so I will refrain from entering the weeds of the many policy debates it raises, and if you want to read a critique of those weeds, there are thoughtful ones in The Baffler about how “the Abundance authors ask too little of themselves and their readers” and in The American Prospect about the litany of abundance liberalism’s corporate connections that may be informing its market-based policy recommendations.

Deregulation hasn’t ever incrementally improved society. Especially in housing we need more regulation that prevents corporate ownership of homes, among other reforms.

Yes.

In this case I don’t think Schumer is anti deregulation because of money.

Schumer is beholden to billionaire donors that make up the owner class and will act in their interest whatever that interest is.

So if deregulation is against the interests of the owner class then Schumer will be against deregulation. If regulation is against the interests of owner class then Schumer will be against regulation.

Incremental changes like what neoliberals are calling for with abundance liberalism are all doomed to fail. There is an oppositional force, billionaires, that will seek to obstruct or twist any incremental change that is a detrimental to their shared class interests.

It won't. But even if it would, billionaires would shut it down wherever someone tried it. They have a shared class interest, the class consciousness, and the money to do so.

I've worked through the neoliberal talking points I wanted to refute with memes. I'll need to think about some news ideas going forward. Definitely let me know if you have ideas you would like to see drawn. I can link to my other posts if you want examples.

To fight fires before they reach somewhere.

What do people think about cross posting? I meant to post this here so I cross posted it. But in general, I assume that's for other people to do, so the post migrates naturally.

Because he's the Riddler and Tommy guns are used to riddle people with bullets. 🥁

Poking at a person's insecurities can be one of the best ways to deal with bigotry and hatred. So very much exhaust.

I rewatched that Invincible episode the day before making this. My first thought was a beholder but a cyclops was a much better fit.

It's fine to not care about what other people think and engage with the other person in a discussion. Even then, there can still be value in our arguments for the other people on this website with us. Our discourse can be useful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFpK_r-jEXg

As far this Onion video, we should engage in the relentless pursuit of the truth regardless of other people's opinions real or imagined. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't be grateful when someone is arguing for equality.

The conversations we are having on this public comment section are of course public. This can be observed by the fact that people jump in at different points of the comment chains in this comment section. Not to mention the fact we are having a meta discussion about the discussions. Also, most instances have some form of voting in their default views. So the audience is real.

What I find to be the common misconception is that because we are having this discussion over an artificial medium that somehow cheapens the discourse. However, this is a real discussion with real people about a topic that affects real people.

A primary goal should be to educate people. There's no reason why the discussion can't be entertaining. Usually this shouldn't be at anyone's expense, however we shouldn't tolerate intolerant people. The far-right have seen the internet as a serious means of communication and are using it as a way to spread their ideology to devastating effect. Making fun of these intolerant people is a necessary step to preventing the spread of disinformation. But making the argument on its own is great too.

I don't have the time or the energy to reply to every incorrect take or argument I see on the internet. And I typically read more than I write. That's probably true of most internet users. So I appreciate it when I see other people pushing back against intolerant ideologies. Especially in this case, where the bad faith was so explicitly apparent. No one person could fight back against the right-wing infosphere by themselves. Defeating intolerant ideologies and educating people is a group effort.

Is a rat's tail like a monkey's paw?

Also, I lost track of your username. I thought I was arguing with another person in this chain. So anyway, thanks again! =)