I literally have family (white) about as far right as that guy is left and they haven’t been arrested for their speech. Literally including violence against cops stuff except framed from the right wing angle (i.e. property rights and 2nd amendment rather than racial oppression, standard NRA/3%er fare). They’re more likely to get a visit from the NYT for a glowing interview about what’s its like to live in Real America than a visit from the FBI.
Not the say that I agree with either of those movements, but there's a big difference in terms of threat between advocating defense of constitutional rights and advocating militant overthrow of the United States government and the capitalist system (to be replaced with a black ethno-nationalist state). The latter is what the groups that Balogun is a member/leader of says it is preparing for (and has already carried out in some cases, see the article).
He’s misunderstanding what tyranny is. Tyranny isn’t when the police state arrests you for criticizing them. Tyranny is when Peter Sweden or whoever is suspended from Twitter for being racist. (Said in a 2018 Libertarian voice).
Wow good points. I’m sure those tens of thousands of people a year who die due to lack of health insurance are so glad nobody got coerced into helping them out. What a useful definition of liberty, that allows the richest country on earth & in history to deny its citizens preventative care so that they end up dying of easily preventable diseases. We have the liberty to beg on GoFundMe! Health insurance companies have the liberty to insert themselves as middlemen to suck up profits for pushing cash around and denying care!
To not quote a fucking TV magician, “Why not err on the side of every first world nation except us?”.
You should consider refuting his argument instead of countering with a rant.
>Many more people in the US would have access to health care, including insurance for catastrophic events, if the state and federal governments stopped interfering in the supply side.
I really don’t care about how to slightly tweak our current unjust system to make it slightly less bad. The fact that it’s unjust (hence why I’m calling out his moral arguments) makes any details a irrelevant. Like asking “How could the trains to Auschwitz have been more efficient - why won’t you debate me on this?” (Sorry for Godwin’s law-ing)
There are alternatives that are picking up support, like Medicare for all, that are worth more time and energy discussing.
Their recent episode on The Atlantic & Kevin Williamson was really enlightening. Establishment media is seen as a “balanced news diet” but it’s really an extremely narrow ideological band. It’s so telling that the NYT or Atlantic would never hire an actual leftist (or on the other side, a true trump believer rather than a never-trump conservative), but they’re bewildered at the angry response from trying to hire someone who said women who get abortions deserve capital punishment. Women’s rights are negotiable to them but capitalism and imperialism can never be attacked. Even in a respected liberal rag.
What an impactful life. Very amusing how she told W, as president, to keep his feet off a table one time. And there’s at least a six-figure body count from the needless decisions of her son and husband whose political careers she supported. Very charitable woman as well.
“Why should we hear about body bags and
deaths, and how many, what day it’s going
to happen?” she asked. “Why would I waste
my beautiful mind on something like that?”
Yup, ideologically, liberals are the enemy of leftists unfortunately. And much closer to neo-cons. It’s why you’ll never see an actual Marxist anti-Imperialist on the masthead of so-called left-leaning (by some) pubs like NYT, WaPo, the Atlantic, etc. But they’ll happily hire tons of right wingers in the name of “ideological diversity” (see Kevin Williamson, Bari Weiss, plus the ones that have actually stayed on)
The future of work is shitty jobs like this, but a la Uber you "get your side-hustle on" AKA have no rights or security as an employee ever anywhere.
e: Which, speaking of Marxism, this situation will keep you permanently alienated from your coworkers and will forever prevent community bonds from forming with them.
Which is basically the MO of those who are in power and control resources since forever, or at least in the U.S. - divide and conquer, project fault on outsiders, etc. For all that the internet has done, it has made weakening local communities easier.
The sad irony of Uber et al is that it's only a matter of time before those drivers are replaced by AI.
The point being, those drivers are doing more for the (short term) future of that company than any other entity. In the long term? For those drivers? The long term is not being an Uber driver.
Struggling doesn't pay. What where they doing with the productivity before Uber, thats the question. Are you saying they weren't doing anything at all and uber lifted them out of extreme poverty?
> AKA have no rights or security as an employee ever anywhere.
I get what you are saying, but somehow this attitude also rubs me the wrong way sometimes.
It's like "Hey, I'll pay anyone a nickle per piece of trash they pick up in the local forests"
Soon: "NiceNature is the worst company ever! They exploit their workers to pick up garbage without proper protection, the employees have no rights or securities and are forced to pee on trees because no bathrooms are provided! Worst of all, they aren't even paid a living wage! /u/ythn is the worst CEO ever, he gluts himself off of the labors of the socioeconomicly desperate!"
Like, all I really wanted was to fix a problem I saw with our local forests, not become a human trafficker...
The problem with your framing is that a lot of companies like to pretend they are about making the world a better place, when what they are actually about is making their owners money.
That's not a good analogy to something like Uber, because there's no profit motive. What you described is essentially a government works program, which is a great idea! But that's not what anyone seems to be talking about.
You're right, the analogy is not good. I was more thinking about making an app for fun that solves some problem, makes you and your users a little money on the side, mostly intended for teenagers/college students, etc., but then the masses move into to squeeze every last cent out of it and I get demonized and accused of exploiting workers, etc, when it was never meant to be a life-sustaining employment opportunity to begin with.
I.e. "biting the hand that feeds you" syndrome. Can't we just make cool things that don't require you to give 401k matching to everyone who touches your cool thing?
Again, maybe this doesn't apply to Uber and they totally could be giving full benefits to all drivers, etc., but I'm just saying in general
this mentality becomes a problem when its pushing real jobs that people rely on out, especially when we are talking about the founders getting immensely rich off this.
Someone has to provide necessities to society. In absence of government directly providing it, we force companies to do it. What you want is, essentially, socialism, with a little bit of the market carved out for market capitalism. Sounds good to me!
This is a ridiculous comparison. How would you be enriching yourself by paying people to pick up trash? Did you get a contract from the government or the owner to pick up the trash? If you did, then yes you should probably take some of that money you made and hire some people to do the work or do it yourself.
