I felt exacly he same way; Naomi Klein doesn't appear to have a postion when you first hear her, but realise that she is a lefty and she is a Canadian. PC, feminist, Frankfurt school, the whole gamut. And remember: obscurantism.
Holy shit you are a fucking moron. I read the book and understood instantly what she meant and what her position was. You have a very shallow and slow mind. You took four minutes what a 6th grader could have explained far more eloquently in 1.
He's not talking about the book you dumbass. He's talking about an interview he saw, which he clearly says. Maybe if you weren't such a fucking idiot you could have realized this, but instead you chose to embarrass yourself by being overly critical and obscene for no reason.
Chicago School of economics is bullshit in contrary to Austrian School, but we have to agree with this Milton Friedman quote. he indicates in his essay Tyranny of Status Quo, that changes have to be done quickly, for in other way, the biurocrat elites will prevail.
MrCropper, I know exactly what you mean. I watched her waffling video -- but after I'd seen another one with milton friedman's TV appearances interlaced with Klein's public speaking. I couldn't tell at first if she was pro or con - capitalist. Talk about a middle of the roader.
Stop the Junk Thought. There's no such thing as a free market, only individuals who interact in social networks and organizations. Read "Bad Samaritans: the myth of free trade and the secret history of capitalism." It shows what has actually happened in history, instead of the free market / invisible hand theory.
Research race, ethnic, gender, sexuality, age or class discrimination. It's gone on for a very long time.
multiculturalism is racism?? well it is one of the single biggest forces on which capitalism expands the division of labor and production, but disregarding that evil, as far as human values goes it holds the very key to this deepening of understanding that can end many of the runaway illusory processes of capitalism (which includes fundamentalism and many of the "outside" threats) anyway man, it's hard not to feel that a simple psychological makeup of basic resentment is what animates you, toon!
Klein is one of the biggest hacks against free markets. She can't even get the Chicago School's positions right. I don't like Chicago, but it's a hell of a lot better than most other economics out there...
You know, I had the same reaction while watching that video. I sat through the whole thing going back and forth trying to figure out what the hell she was talking about. She made every single statement with the same kind of neutral, bright voice without adding any kind of vocal signs as to what she might be thinking about what she was talking about.
I swear, sometimes you have to literally dissect what these people are saying to get any meaning out of them.
Something tells me you're not looking for evidence refuting her arguments. Something tells me you just want to watch her smile and laugh at capitalism.
You then just agree with Friedman and those others she mentions, ie, that human tragedy is just an opportunity for landing soft & perhaps long-term contracts, but so what if you agree!
You add nothing to the debate, if it is the same for others like you this is perhaps why Klein is cleaning up with this assessment & encountering little intelligent resistance. Those "Chicago boys" have been flushed out.
Then your notion of justice must mean getting ripped off by a bunch of cowboys with no-bid contracts from the government, ie, those who are the first vultures to appear in the disasters Klein talks about.
MrCropper is actually AGAINST state intervention in the economy. Ayn Rand (whom MrCropper greatly admires) believed in a complete separation of state and economy. Thus, the situation you describe is not one condoned by MrCropper or those who support a free market. The word "free" in the term "free market", refers to "freedom from government intervention/restrictions". I hope that clarifies MrCropper's position a bit for you.
No, he is into state intervention when it is to the advantage of some company or other and against it when it isn't, since he thinks that these interventions that Klein mentions are perfectly ok, yet they were state interventions, and interventions in states.
If he is consistent, he would also be against the more pernicious intervention in states by private interests since this is often covert.
By the way, I find elsewhere too others seem to answer for M.Cropper, are you his secretary?
Almost all the way through he said he had no problem with this use of the state to prize open new markets after disasters that's what the video was about!
If you think that is bad, you should see his other video about a railroad owner, at the end of which he said the Indians were pushed into smaller areas and obliterated cos they were basically outlaws!
At this point I see that it's not accidental that you neither gave a direct quote nor referenced the time in the video when he says what you allege. You can't.
"Almost all the way through"? He talks about free-market solutions. Where do you see state intervention?
Look the video is only a few minutes long, and the man in the video with the t-shirt tells us he has no problem with company's in these disaster situations being given exclusive access to the area usually on a no-bid basis and there aint nothing free about that!
Neither does Klein by the way in the video he talks about. So what the hell are you talking about? At this point, I'm unsure whether you are a pathological liar or suffering from delusion.
Sorry but if you knew anything about the Iraq war, for example, you'd know that the major contracts were no-bid as is typical in these disaster situations. Moreover war & disaster zones are controlled by governments so this "intervention" lays the groundwork for these government contractors while the local people are in "shock." Klein suggests that these government interventions, torture etc. are used to give-away billions in contracts to the corrupt few who are the cronies of the government.
I'm saying what the topic is here not you, the topic is, I quote the opening comment that invited your comment,
"since he [MrCropper] thinks that these interventions that Klein mentions are perfectly ok, yet they were state interventions, and interventions in states."
Now are you trying to tell me that the invasion of iraq was not a state intervention? Welll known too that the contracts issued were at the behest of insiders in washington and a few scatterings for the "willing." Free indeeed!
"No, he is into state intervention when it is to the advantage of some company or other and against it when it isn't, since he thinks that these interventions that Klein mentions are perfectly ok, yet they were state interventions, and interventions in states."
Guess what? You still haven't shown what you say "he thinks" by quoting him, nor have you connected it to what "Klein mentions" by quoting her from the video, which Cropper references. (cont'd...)
(...cont'd) And this is exactly what I've been trying to get you to do all along. You have no specifics in your head. You're just emoting, regurgitating any propaganda that comes to mind. Concrete, verifiable facts scare you.
Klein talks of state interventions, wars, disaster recovery operations etc. Her point is that the local economy is then intervened upon by external corporates (most people also know that most are no-bid contracts). MrCropper says it's fine, it's fine, state intervention (war, torture etc)in the wake of which external actors, companies, called by some the "free-market" though they slander it by calling it such, are forced upon the local population, is fine!
Quote. Give specifics. Stop evading. With all this back-and-forth, you could have done it by now. Don't put words in people's mouths. Stop misrepresenting and strawmanning. Stop repeating the same thing, as if that would make your non-argument any more cogent.
I'll be as specific as MrCropper was, and if you've nothing to say other than giving instructions to me how to comment on this then please desist.
That's as much as your going to get and nothing I said was misrepresentation after all if he was misrepresented he would've said so by now so stop whining and playing the apologist.
And if you think Klein is wrong why do you think that it's ok that Cropper supports her wrong opinion?
"I'll be as specific as MrCropper was, and if you've nothing to say other than giving instructions to me how to comment on this then please desist."
Translation: "No, I will not support anything I say with concrete, verifiable facts. I'd rather just keep talking out of my ass." You should have said so from the get go.
Sorry I've given the "concrete verifiable facts" now three times at least, I think we'd better let Cropper defend himself on this rather than us two go any further. Fact: Cropper said he had "no problem" with the kind of thing Klein talked of, he even had to go and find out if Klein was talking as though this "shock therapy" would in fact be a good idea or not (not the brightest boy in the class or else he was being deliberately obtuse).
Also I'm finding the way youtube formats these messages hard to deal with since they are all in one line, I doubt anyone other than ourselves have been able to follow it. So perhaps as you say we might leave that question.
First, the fact that Cropper doesn't answer you, doesn't mean you're right. He could have no interest, time, patience, etc. to do so.
Second, I'm not whining nor playing anyone's apologist. I don't care for Cropper personally.
What I do care about is that you clearly impute ideas to someone which they do not hold, either due to stupidity or guile, just like your idol Naomi Klein does to people like Milton Friedman. It's a cheap and disgusting tactic.
What does it matter to you if an idea is imputed to Cropper when he himself gladly welcomes the imputation. I've heard of sympathy but your sympathy for him is out of place, anyhow he obviously read it since his was a reply to my comment!
As to Friedman, he was over with Pinochet, as he was with Thatcher, who again was a friend of Pinochet and P. W. Botha (the apartheid man), do you find it odd that right wing folk flock together?
"What does it matter to you if an idea is imputed to Cropper when he himself gladly welcomes the imputation. I've heard of sympathy but your sympathy for him is out of place, anyhow he obviously read it since his was a reply to my comment!"
1. I fail to see how he welcomes how he welcomes it.
2. I'm not motivated by any sympathy. As I said, I don't care much for Cropper personally.
"As to Friedman,...together?"
Guilt by association fallacy. I'm not even going to bother you with facts here.
"I never said he was guilty of anything, just that they were friends. You obviously added the guilt implication yourself!"
You said he was "over." You don't have to use the word "guilty" explicitly for the fallacy to apply. And you have your facts wrong as well, but that would be asking too much of you. Pointing out a logical fallacy will suffice.
When I said Friedman was "over with" Pinochet, it means he visited him. Clearly you are introducing the notion of guilt and guilt by association but this aint no court of law.
You are confused. Cropper doesn't support her wrong opinion. The wrong opinion being that, in short, free market is bad. But she didn't convey this opinion explicitly enough for Cropper. And since Cropper was not aware of her positions beforehand, he thought she was pro-free market. She talked about free-market solutions, which Cropper likes, so he thought she was on his side. He then realized that she was actually critical of the free market and hence this video.
Cropper supported her ideas as given in her video, she talked of the imposition of free or, more correctly, unfree "market solutions" in situations (torture/war) wholly inappropriate. I'm not sure if she is against the free market per se, but against a "market" that is imposed above the heads of the people.
Her point (right or wrong) is when someone points to a market operating and says "see they chose that free market" it may in fact have been violently imposed them.
But Cropper says nothing of "imposition" of free market solutions. That's not surprising, because by definition those cannot be imposed. Quite the opposite, free market solutions involve removal of gov't impositions. Remember, Cropper wasn't even aware of or confused by what angle she is coming from, which reflects a naivete on his part, and didn't see through the sinister caricature of capitalism she was weaving.
Cropper says nothing of this imposition but Klein in the video he watched clearly does refer to war, torture, disaster being used as cover. I agree if a free market is to be true to its terms it would not be imposed but remember the context of this use of "free market" here, free is degraded to just mean a corporation, regardless of the circumstances of the award of its contracts.
Finally, you admit it. And there goes your whole argument. And it doesn't matter what Klein said, because as we know, she went completely over Cropper's head.
Sorry but if Klein said that it was imposed and Cropper understood that and then agreed with it, then what I said is true neither of us know if it went over his head or not, but we can assume he heard it as clearly as both of us did since I don't assume he is any less intelligent than you for example.
I see you're trying to backpedal, but you have already admitted that "Cropper says nothing of this imposition." And neither did Klein by the way, not explicitly, (I've told you this before), so you can't say that Cropper must have heard it and understood.
And we both know that it went over his head, because that's the topic of this very video! He made this video to talk about how he completely missed what Klein was talking about. Did you miss that?
(...cont'd)If you judge by just what he says, all he got from her video is that when a crisis happens, there's no better time to use free market solutions to help people. In fact, this is a testament to the insidious nature of Klein's mindset, that a guileless person like Cropper would misunderstand.
I think this is just obtuseness which we have seen to be false, when she mentioned torture shock etc and then clearly talked of people who didn't want someone carpet baging their local amenities but were afraid to complain (torture tends to have that effect) I think it represents the mafia end of the free market which you seem to be naive towards if you dont mind me saying.
Demonstrative quote from the video: "She thinks that we should have ideas ready on the table, and when there are problems or catastrophe, that's an opportunity for us to go in and say look here's a free market solution, we can't afford to fumble right now, we would get these things implemented and that would be a way to progress and it's also bringing in the free market solutions at the worst times, when we need them the most. And I thought this was great." Nothing sinister here.
There'd be nothing new on the ideas front, there are thousands of agencies in the world who have "ideas on the table" for when disaster strikes, they been there since the Red Cross.
She talked of something very different, torture, war and shocking people such that they are easily taken advantage of and long-term structures are created above their heads. No doubt we see such structures lookin a little shaky these days in certain places.
Exactly. You said it. It's nothing new at all about having "ideas on the table." But Klein spins it into something sinister. She took a harmless quote from Friedman and a post-Katrina free-market solutions plan proposed by the Heritage foundation and turns it into something sinister by falsely associated it with shock, torture, war, etc.
"I'm not sure if she is against the free market per se, ... above the heads of the people."
She is very much against the free market per se. She often contrasts "our" (i.e. progressive/leftist) solutions/ideas with "their" ideas, for example. It's like a game to her. Unable to argue against free market ideas on an intellectual playing field, she instead comes up with a way to undermine them by falsely associating them with "imposition","torture", "shock", "crisis", "brutality."
She is certainly against those that are brought in by way of torture, shock etc.
The "they" she refers to are not free marketeers as they may proclaim themselves and give it a bad name in the process but really hoodlums. This does not deny the existence of genuine free-marketeers who would have nothing to do with this form of imposition until it is long forgotten about.
No, she is against the free market, period. You're taking the claims she is making at face value, when they are false, relying on flimsy, mendacious argumentation. Since she is unable to argue against the free market ideas head on, she comes up with a ludicrous conspiracy that free market ideas were spread by shock, torture, etc.
You have removed yourself outside our discussion of these videos by talking of Klein's wider beliefs, of which I'm not interested; that she is against the free market in toto is not at issue here.
Are you unaware of how often free market slips over into mafia like behaviour, how otherwise do you think there are so many court cases?
She just tries to point out some of these cases which do not easily fall within legal jurisdiction. I'd like to see your thinking make a similar effort.
"Are you unaware of how often free market slips over into mafia like behaviour, how otherwise do you think there are so many court cases?"
Yes, I'm unaware. Because what you just said is a bunch of nonsense. The phrase "free market slips into mafia like behaviour" is as meaningless "colorless green ideas sleep furiously."
"Are you unaware of how often free market slips over into mafia like behaviour, how otherwise do you think there are so many court cases?"
Yes, I'm unaware. Because what you said here makes no sense. The phrase "free market slips over into mafia like behaviour" is as meaningless as "colorless green ideas sleep furiously."
Ok thanks for trying but it seems no one can help MrCropper here, he's is for state capitalism and he is against state intervention, he is for the no-bid contracts Klein exposes and he is against them. In fact he doesn't need us at all he's a one man bag of contradictions.
"You then just agree with Friedman and those others she mentions, ie, that human tragedy is just an opportunity for landing soft & perhaps long-term contracts"
If this is what Klein says Friedman's position was then she's a liar and a fraud.
And I see you're faithfully following her footsteps in mischaracterizing your opponent and then attacking.
She also maligns capitalism to mean any type of economic or industrial growth, no matter the means. As if the human rights abuses brought on by the Communist Chinese government, suddenly struck with a desire for international prestige and modern standards of livings, is somehow the true nature of capitalism.
That is if the Western businesses would just leave these countries alone, their people would live happily ever after, growing and prospering on their own. It's all capitalism's fault.
You didn't pay close enough attention to her video.
The central point she was too dishonest to state openly, but implied throughout, was that free market ideas are so bad that it would take a crisis to have people confused enough to swallow them.
She went further to imply that inducing crises is central part of free market ideology; insinuating that free marketers are sinister sociopaths.
I felt exacly he same way; Naomi Klein doesn't appear to have a postion when you first hear her, but realise that she is a lefty and she is a Canadian. PC, feminist, Frankfurt school, the whole gamut. And remember: obscurantism.
ALFIEAJAPAN 1 year ago
Holy shit you are a fucking moron. I read the book and understood instantly what she meant and what her position was. You have a very shallow and slow mind. You took four minutes what a 6th grader could have explained far more eloquently in 1.
DanMorgan98 2 years ago
@DanMorgan98
He's not talking about the book you dumbass. He's talking about an interview he saw, which he clearly says. Maybe if you weren't such a fucking idiot you could have realized this, but instead you chose to embarrass yourself by being overly critical and obscene for no reason.
senorfarqueso 2 years ago
Naomi Klein a big leftist in Canada
warchild81 3 years ago 3
Chicago School of economics is bullshit in contrary to Austrian School, but we have to agree with this Milton Friedman quote. he indicates in his essay Tyranny of Status Quo, that changes have to be done quickly, for in other way, the biurocrat elites will prevail.
Pieniadzo 3 years ago
bureaucrat*
Bulacanos 2 years ago
MrCropper, I know exactly what you mean. I watched her waffling video -- but after I'd seen another one with milton friedman's TV appearances interlaced with Klein's public speaking. I couldn't tell at first if she was pro or con - capitalist. Talk about a middle of the roader.
zardozcs 3 years ago
Stop the Junk Thought. There's no such thing as a free market, only individuals who interact in social networks and organizations. Read "Bad Samaritans: the myth of free trade and the secret history of capitalism." It shows what has actually happened in history, instead of the free market / invisible hand theory.
Research race, ethnic, gender, sexuality, age or class discrimination. It's gone on for a very long time.
Wake up and stop the Junk Thought!
Rangerpjonwebx 3 years ago
she's not stating her position because she's a journalist, not a philosopher
jtr3030 3 years ago
Search:
Re: The "left"/"right" divide
if you dare : p
politicomark 3 years ago
multiculturalism is racism?? well it is one of the single biggest forces on which capitalism expands the division of labor and production, but disregarding that evil, as far as human values goes it holds the very key to this deepening of understanding that can end many of the runaway illusory processes of capitalism (which includes fundamentalism and many of the "outside" threats) anyway man, it's hard not to feel that a simple psychological makeup of basic resentment is what animates you, toon!
richidpraah 3 years ago
Klein is one of the biggest hacks against free markets. She can't even get the Chicago School's positions right. I don't like Chicago, but it's a hell of a lot better than most other economics out there...
Moragauth 3 years ago
"Sometimes they can the other person's position and you wouldn't know, because they don't denigrate it at all."
That's too funny. All I can say is that you haven't watched enough of Naomi Klein.
Advocate1234, here on youtube, has a good series of videos on her.
somnys 3 years ago
You know, I had the same reaction while watching that video. I sat through the whole thing going back and forth trying to figure out what the hell she was talking about. She made every single statement with the same kind of neutral, bright voice without adding any kind of vocal signs as to what she might be thinking about what she was talking about.
I swear, sometimes you have to literally dissect what these people are saying to get any meaning out of them.
Sarrisan98 3 years ago
Noami Klein's is Canada's sexy female version of Noam Chomsky. A babbling far-leftist bitch, to say the least.
qtronman 3 years ago 5
Have you even read any of her books?
Thought not.
Mjhavok 3 years ago
I read "No Logo" and I almost threw up.
qtronman 3 years ago
Well that totally refutes her arguments.
Mjhavok 3 years ago
You want me "totally refute" her arguments by going back-and-forth with you via YouTube chat?
qtronman 3 years ago
I'm affraid that will take a little more time than I am willing to invest right now.
qtronman 3 years ago
I don't.
Mjhavok 3 years ago
Something tells me you're not looking for evidence refuting her arguments. Something tells me you just want to watch her smile and laugh at capitalism.
qtronman 3 years ago 2
Stodles asked me to ask you to unblock him... he said he has positive comments for your monopoly video.
Moragauth 3 years ago
Which username is this creature going under currently?
qtronman 3 years ago
Khydraa.
Moragauth 3 years ago
It refutes YOUR argument, did you miss that?
senselessbattery 3 years ago
I made no argument.
Mjhavok 3 years ago
From what I've read of review of No Logo, she doesn't offer proof that globalisation or capitalism is ultimately harmful, she just *assumes* it.
Guncriminal 3 years ago
Mjhavok, if you're interested in refutation of her arguments in "Shock Doctrine", go here
tinyurl(dot)com / 4k86p5
somnys 3 years ago
I haven't read her book yet so I will store your link until I have.
Mjhavok 3 years ago
You then just agree with Friedman and those others she mentions, ie, that human tragedy is just an opportunity for landing soft & perhaps long-term contracts, but so what if you agree!
You add nothing to the debate, if it is the same for others like you this is perhaps why Klein is cleaning up with this assessment & encountering little intelligent resistance. Those "Chicago boys" have been flushed out.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
"You then just agree with Friedman and those others she mentions, ie, that human tragedy is just an opportunity for"...
doing away with unjust state controls.
MrCropper 3 years ago
Then your notion of justice must mean getting ripped off by a bunch of cowboys with no-bid contracts from the government, ie, those who are the first vultures to appear in the disasters Klein talks about.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago 2
MrCropper is actually AGAINST state intervention in the economy. Ayn Rand (whom MrCropper greatly admires) believed in a complete separation of state and economy. Thus, the situation you describe is not one condoned by MrCropper or those who support a free market. The word "free" in the term "free market", refers to "freedom from government intervention/restrictions". I hope that clarifies MrCropper's position a bit for you.
D4Shawn 3 years ago
No, he is into state intervention when it is to the advantage of some company or other and against it when it isn't, since he thinks that these interventions that Klein mentions are perfectly ok, yet they were state interventions, and interventions in states.
If he is consistent, he would also be against the more pernicious intervention in states by private interests since this is often covert.
By the way, I find elsewhere too others seem to answer for M.Cropper, are you his secretary?
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
Where is he for it? I've yet to hear him argue for corporate welfare.
Moragauth 3 years ago
He said it in the video, he said he had no problem with it.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
I'm calling your bluff. Where does he say that in the video?
somnys 3 years ago
Almost all the way through he said he had no problem with this use of the state to prize open new markets after disasters that's what the video was about!
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
If you think that is bad, you should see his other video about a railroad owner, at the end of which he said the Indians were pushed into smaller areas and obliterated cos they were basically outlaws!
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
At this point I see that it's not accidental that you neither gave a direct quote nor referenced the time in the video when he says what you allege. You can't.
"Almost all the way through"? He talks about free-market solutions. Where do you see state intervention?
somnys 3 years ago
Look the video is only a few minutes long, and the man in the video with the t-shirt tells us he has no problem with company's in these disaster situations being given exclusive access to the area usually on a no-bid basis and there aint nothing free about that!
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
No, he says nothing about no-bid contracts.
Neither does Klein by the way in the video he talks about. So what the hell are you talking about? At this point, I'm unsure whether you are a pathological liar or suffering from delusion.
somnys 3 years ago
Sorry but if you knew anything about the Iraq war, for example, you'd know that the major contracts were no-bid as is typical in these disaster situations. Moreover war & disaster zones are controlled by governments so this "intervention" lays the groundwork for these government contractors while the local people are in "shock." Klein suggests that these government interventions, torture etc. are used to give-away billions in contracts to the corrupt few who are the cronies of the government.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
Red herring. Try again and stay on topic.
somnys 3 years ago
I'm saying what the topic is here not you, the topic is, I quote the opening comment that invited your comment,
"since he [MrCropper] thinks that these interventions that Klein mentions are perfectly ok, yet they were state interventions, and interventions in states."
Now are you trying to tell me that the invasion of iraq was not a state intervention? Welll known too that the contracts issued were at the behest of insiders in washington and a few scatterings for the "willing." Free indeeed!
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
Good! Let's look at the opening comment.
"No, he is into state intervention when it is to the advantage of some company or other and against it when it isn't, since he thinks that these interventions that Klein mentions are perfectly ok, yet they were state interventions, and interventions in states."
Guess what? You still haven't shown what you say "he thinks" by quoting him, nor have you connected it to what "Klein mentions" by quoting her from the video, which Cropper references. (cont'd...)
somnys 3 years ago
(...cont'd) And this is exactly what I've been trying to get you to do all along. You have no specifics in your head. You're just emoting, regurgitating any propaganda that comes to mind. Concrete, verifiable facts scare you.
somnys 3 years ago
Once more for the hard of hearing...
Klein talks of state interventions, wars, disaster recovery operations etc. Her point is that the local economy is then intervened upon by external corporates (most people also know that most are no-bid contracts). MrCropper says it's fine, it's fine, state intervention (war, torture etc)in the wake of which external actors, companies, called by some the "free-market" though they slander it by calling it such, are forced upon the local population, is fine!
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
Once again for the slow...
Quote. Give specifics. Stop evading. With all this back-and-forth, you could have done it by now. Don't put words in people's mouths. Stop misrepresenting and strawmanning. Stop repeating the same thing, as if that would make your non-argument any more cogent.
somnys 3 years ago
I'll be as specific as MrCropper was, and if you've nothing to say other than giving instructions to me how to comment on this then please desist.
That's as much as your going to get and nothing I said was misrepresentation after all if he was misrepresented he would've said so by now so stop whining and playing the apologist.
And if you think Klein is wrong why do you think that it's ok that Cropper supports her wrong opinion?
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
"I'll be as specific as MrCropper was, and if you've nothing to say other than giving instructions to me how to comment on this then please desist."
Translation: "No, I will not support anything I say with concrete, verifiable facts. I'd rather just keep talking out of my ass." You should have said so from the get go.
somnys 3 years ago
Sorry I've given the "concrete verifiable facts" now three times at least, I think we'd better let Cropper defend himself on this rather than us two go any further. Fact: Cropper said he had "no problem" with the kind of thing Klein talked of, he even had to go and find out if Klein was talking as though this "shock therapy" would in fact be a good idea or not (not the brightest boy in the class or else he was being deliberately obtuse).
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
"I think we'd better let Cropper defend himself on this rather than us two go any further."
I think so too. I've said everything I could say on this issue and can't make myself any clearer.
But I don't think Cropper is interested. He's probably laughing it up as we waste our time arguing.
somnys 3 years ago
Also I'm finding the way youtube formats these messages hard to deal with since they are all in one line, I doubt anyone other than ourselves have been able to follow it. So perhaps as you say we might leave that question.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
"That's as much as your...the apologist."
First, the fact that Cropper doesn't answer you, doesn't mean you're right. He could have no interest, time, patience, etc. to do so.
Second, I'm not whining nor playing anyone's apologist. I don't care for Cropper personally.
What I do care about is that you clearly impute ideas to someone which they do not hold, either due to stupidity or guile, just like your idol Naomi Klein does to people like Milton Friedman. It's a cheap and disgusting tactic.
somnys 3 years ago
What does it matter to you if an idea is imputed to Cropper when he himself gladly welcomes the imputation. I've heard of sympathy but your sympathy for him is out of place, anyhow he obviously read it since his was a reply to my comment!
As to Friedman, he was over with Pinochet, as he was with Thatcher, who again was a friend of Pinochet and P. W. Botha (the apartheid man), do you find it odd that right wing folk flock together?
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
"What does it matter to you if an idea is imputed to Cropper when he himself gladly welcomes the imputation. I've heard of sympathy but your sympathy for him is out of place, anyhow he obviously read it since his was a reply to my comment!"
1. I fail to see how he welcomes how he welcomes it.
2. I'm not motivated by any sympathy. As I said, I don't care much for Cropper personally.
"As to Friedman,...together?"
Guilt by association fallacy. I'm not even going to bother you with facts here.
somnys 3 years ago
I never said he was guilty of anything, just that they were friends. You obviously added the guilt implication yourself!
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
"I never said he was guilty of anything, just that they were friends. You obviously added the guilt implication yourself!"
You said he was "over." You don't have to use the word "guilty" explicitly for the fallacy to apply. And you have your facts wrong as well, but that would be asking too much of you. Pointing out a logical fallacy will suffice.
somnys 3 years ago
When I said Friedman was "over with" Pinochet, it means he visited him. Clearly you are introducing the notion of guilt and guilt by association but this aint no court of law.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
"And if ... wrong opinion?"
You are confused. Cropper doesn't support her wrong opinion. The wrong opinion being that, in short, free market is bad. But she didn't convey this opinion explicitly enough for Cropper. And since Cropper was not aware of her positions beforehand, he thought she was pro-free market. She talked about free-market solutions, which Cropper likes, so he thought she was on his side. He then realized that she was actually critical of the free market and hence this video.
somnys 3 years ago
Cropper supported her ideas as given in her video, she talked of the imposition of free or, more correctly, unfree "market solutions" in situations (torture/war) wholly inappropriate. I'm not sure if she is against the free market per se, but against a "market" that is imposed above the heads of the people.
Her point (right or wrong) is when someone points to a market operating and says "see they chose that free market" it may in fact have been violently imposed them.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
But Cropper says nothing of "imposition" of free market solutions. That's not surprising, because by definition those cannot be imposed. Quite the opposite, free market solutions involve removal of gov't impositions. Remember, Cropper wasn't even aware of or confused by what angle she is coming from, which reflects a naivete on his part, and didn't see through the sinister caricature of capitalism she was weaving.
somnys 3 years ago
Cropper says nothing of this imposition but Klein in the video he watched clearly does refer to war, torture, disaster being used as cover. I agree if a free market is to be true to its terms it would not be imposed but remember the context of this use of "free market" here, free is degraded to just mean a corporation, regardless of the circumstances of the award of its contracts.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
"Cropper says nothing of this imposition..."
Finally, you admit it. And there goes your whole argument. And it doesn't matter what Klein said, because as we know, she went completely over Cropper's head.
somnys 3 years ago
Sorry but if Klein said that it was imposed and Cropper understood that and then agreed with it, then what I said is true neither of us know if it went over his head or not, but we can assume he heard it as clearly as both of us did since I don't assume he is any less intelligent than you for example.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
I see you're trying to backpedal, but you have already admitted that "Cropper says nothing of this imposition." And neither did Klein by the way, not explicitly, (I've told you this before), so you can't say that Cropper must have heard it and understood.
And we both know that it went over his head, because that's the topic of this very video! He made this video to talk about how he completely missed what Klein was talking about. Did you miss that?
somnys 3 years ago
(...cont'd)If you judge by just what he says, all he got from her video is that when a crisis happens, there's no better time to use free market solutions to help people. In fact, this is a testament to the insidious nature of Klein's mindset, that a guileless person like Cropper would misunderstand.
somnys 3 years ago
I think this is just obtuseness which we have seen to be false, when she mentioned torture shock etc and then clearly talked of people who didn't want someone carpet baging their local amenities but were afraid to complain (torture tends to have that effect) I think it represents the mafia end of the free market which you seem to be naive towards if you dont mind me saying.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
Demonstrative quote from the video: "She thinks that we should have ideas ready on the table, and when there are problems or catastrophe, that's an opportunity for us to go in and say look here's a free market solution, we can't afford to fumble right now, we would get these things implemented and that would be a way to progress and it's also bringing in the free market solutions at the worst times, when we need them the most. And I thought this was great." Nothing sinister here.
somnys 3 years ago
Again this is a false deliberately obtuse.
There'd be nothing new on the ideas front, there are thousands of agencies in the world who have "ideas on the table" for when disaster strikes, they been there since the Red Cross.
She talked of something very different, torture, war and shocking people such that they are easily taken advantage of and long-term structures are created above their heads. No doubt we see such structures lookin a little shaky these days in certain places.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
Exactly. You said it. It's nothing new at all about having "ideas on the table." But Klein spins it into something sinister. She took a harmless quote from Friedman and a post-Katrina free-market solutions plan proposed by the Heritage foundation and turns it into something sinister by falsely associated it with shock, torture, war, etc.
somnys 3 years ago
Perhaps just showing how Friedman was misinterpreted, but that is also valuable.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
"Perhaps just showing how Friedman was misinterpreted, but that is also valuable."
I have a hard time parsing this sentence of yours. What are you saying? Who's showing? Who misinterpreted? What's valuable to whom?
somnys 3 years ago
"I'm not sure if she is against the free market per se, ... above the heads of the people."
She is very much against the free market per se. She often contrasts "our" (i.e. progressive/leftist) solutions/ideas with "their" ideas, for example. It's like a game to her. Unable to argue against free market ideas on an intellectual playing field, she instead comes up with a way to undermine them by falsely associating them with "imposition","torture", "shock", "crisis", "brutality."
somnys 3 years ago
She is certainly against those that are brought in by way of torture, shock etc.
The "they" she refers to are not free marketeers as they may proclaim themselves and give it a bad name in the process but really hoodlums. This does not deny the existence of genuine free-marketeers who would have nothing to do with this form of imposition until it is long forgotten about.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
No, she is against the free market, period. You're taking the claims she is making at face value, when they are false, relying on flimsy, mendacious argumentation. Since she is unable to argue against the free market ideas head on, she comes up with a ludicrous conspiracy that free market ideas were spread by shock, torture, etc.
somnys 3 years ago
You have removed yourself outside our discussion of these videos by talking of Klein's wider beliefs, of which I'm not interested; that she is against the free market in toto is not at issue here.
Are you unaware of how often free market slips over into mafia like behaviour, how otherwise do you think there are so many court cases?
She just tries to point out some of these cases which do not easily fall within legal jurisdiction. I'd like to see your thinking make a similar effort.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
"Are you unaware of how often free market slips over into mafia like behaviour, how otherwise do you think there are so many court cases?"
Yes, I'm unaware. Because what you just said is a bunch of nonsense. The phrase "free market slips into mafia like behaviour" is as meaningless "colorless green ideas sleep furiously."
somnys 3 years ago
If you've never seen this, then I'll have to presume you are as naive as your age indicates.
There are huge amounts of legislation in place to prevent this slippage, cartels, anti-trust laws operate in almost all modern democracies.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
"Are you unaware of how often free market slips over into mafia like behaviour, how otherwise do you think there are so many court cases?"
Yes, I'm unaware. Because what you said here makes no sense. The phrase "free market slips over into mafia like behaviour" is as meaningless as "colorless green ideas sleep furiously."
somnys 3 years ago
Where?
Moragauth 3 years ago
Are you a computer? I just told you, watch the video.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
No, I'm not his secretary. I just thought you might want to know what the fuck you're talking about. I apologize if I was mistaken. Do forgive me.
D4Shawn 3 years ago
Ok thanks for trying but it seems no one can help MrCropper here, he's is for state capitalism and he is against state intervention, he is for the no-bid contracts Klein exposes and he is against them. In fact he doesn't need us at all he's a one man bag of contradictions.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
"You then just agree with Friedman and those others she mentions, ie, that human tragedy is just an opportunity for landing soft & perhaps long-term contracts"
If this is what Klein says Friedman's position was then she's a liar and a fraud.
And I see you're faithfully following her footsteps in mischaracterizing your opponent and then attacking.
somnys 3 years ago
Somnys, I'll have to leave this as the comments appear unpredictably up & down this long column and I'm getting lost in it.
plenipotentiarius 3 years ago
She also maligns capitalism to mean any type of economic or industrial growth, no matter the means. As if the human rights abuses brought on by the Communist Chinese government, suddenly struck with a desire for international prestige and modern standards of livings, is somehow the true nature of capitalism.
That is if the Western businesses would just leave these countries alone, their people would live happily ever after, growing and prospering on their own. It's all capitalism's fault.
grantsinmypants2 3 years ago
You didn't pay close enough attention to her video.
The central point she was too dishonest to state openly, but implied throughout, was that free market ideas are so bad that it would take a crisis to have people confused enough to swallow them.
She went further to imply that inducing crises is central part of free market ideology; insinuating that free marketers are sinister sociopaths.
grantsinmypants2 3 years ago
Sounds like an opportunity for Mr. Cropper to write a book.
chris3443 3 years ago
a socialist economist is an oxymoron
Kyberspawn 3 years ago
Indeed. Socialism and economic illiteracy are the exact same thing.
D4Shawn 3 years ago
Naomi Klein is a socialist.
snuffydoug 3 years ago
As if that said anything.
studio7manga 3 years ago