Comment by madair | Hacker News Reader

Comment by madair | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

You should analyze your statements against what the article said. Oh, and also reality.

Edit: But it is brilliant that this comment would be by someone named CapitalistCartr, what with the class war looming and right v left being an anxious distraction. I can't see how anything other than copious amounts of fear will keep the class war staved off--xenophobia, war, and culture changes surrounding the religious do the job nicely though. Pretty easy to summarize the sources of power.

I don't have much expectation that people will feel played, so looming but maybe not likely. Fox is famous for Fox New at the same time as Family Guy, The Simpsons, and American Dad, and hardly anybody pauses at that; quite a prominent mix of Right v Left right there by an ideologue like Rupert Murdoch.

The very wealthy purchasing power and profiteering on fear. How is the plain obviousness of the corruption even defensible? sigh

What on earth are you on about? He said they did not save during boom times, so it is a human mistake, not some collapse of empire ( I didn't know America is an empire btw, I thought it was a country.)

You didn't know that America is an empire? The most powerful country that has ever existed? The one by which every other major power measures themselves? Time to do some reading I think, TV rots ur brain ;)

What you need to realize is that a minuscule percentage of economists will agree with your "saving during boom times". The money system just doesn't work like that.

As I said, my second part was reactionary to his moniker in relation to his comment, his comment is populist rhetoric and is completely incorrect from a strictly capitalist view.

People who call themselves capitalists should at least bother to get it.

I thought an empire is created when you occupy other countries and impose your system upon them. Like Rome was an empire because it stretched way above the borders or rome, or Mongolia, or persia, though maybe I have a wrong definition of empire.

But it seems that wikepedia agrees with me:

"Politically, an empire is a geographically extensive group of states and peoples (ethnic groups) united and ruled either by a monarch (emperor, empress) or an oligarchy. Geopolitically, the term empire has denoted very different, territorially-extreme states"

Ahaha so it's about semantics. lol, take your time, then go read some Fukuyama and a few state department statements.

Its not about semantics, it is about connecting a word to reality. America is not an empire. It is perhaps the most successful country on earth, it has great influence, but it is just a country. It might however be trying to become an empire with all those invasions, but it is hardly there yet.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com