Hacker News Reader

Comment by api | Hacker News Reader

I have a new hypothesis I'm terming "sublimation of criticism." This is likely not original since this isn't my field, but here goes.

The campaign to exterminate any alternative political discourse in the West has been so successful that it's now very hard to even talk about any alternative to state corporatist capitalism. This system has many downsides and generates many negative externalities and these are clearly visible to many people, but since the system can't be directly criticized people try to pin its shortcomings on other things like "technology" (an absurdly general term) or thrash around chasing conspiracy ghosts. It's a kind of philosophical scapegoating and fantasizing as a substitute for actual directed criticism.

In other words the effectively prohibited criticism of the system sublimes into other areas.

Maybe state corporatist capitalism destroys people and places. Try that.

I wonder if this phenomenon was common in the late USSR?

View on HN

> it's now very hard to even talk about any alternative to state corporatist capitalism

Have you suffered persecution from the state for discussing such alternatives? Have you been arrested, beaten, your documents confiscated - all for discussing the pros and cons of "state corporatist capitalism"? Have you spent years in camps for it?

Because that's what was common in the late USSR. Of course, it was much more civilized than early USSR, when you'd be executed for discussing much more minor things, so that's an improvement.

Why not call it technology like in the article? What would anti-technology look like?

> it's now very hard to even talk about any alternative to state corporatist capitalism

I don't think this is true: Millenials and Gen-Z are increasingly supportive of socialism and sometimes outright communism. The party machinery of the traditional left has been resisting this effort, as you say, but that wall is crumbling and will not last forever; e.g. see the improbable successes of Corbyn, Sanders, etc.

We can unquestionably say that communism has destroyed people and places.

We can also unquestionably say that communism is not the only alternative. For the record I am not an authoritarian communist and I don't think it's a good alternative.

I was very specific. I said "state corporatist capitalism" because there are even capitalist alternatives to that such as voluntarist libertarian capitalism and communitarian/co-op oriented capitalism. Our system is one of state-backed corporate capitalism backed by a centrally managed financial system and closely tied to defense and intelligence agencies. It was accurately termed the "military-industrial complex" by Dwight Eisenhower, a communist... err... wait... Eisenhower was a conservative Christian and a Republican.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyBNmecVtdU

Your comment is exactly what I mean. We can't discuss alternatives because there seems to have been some campaign to gerrymander the language and discourse such that any questioning of the official system instantly implies that you're a Leninist or alternately a Hitlerist.

You wondered about the USSR. I was replying to that.

My point about the USSR was about how people will often be in denial when the dominant socioeconomic system is displaying severe problems and may be on the brink of failure.

I see, I misunderstood then.

> Maybe state corporatist capitalism destroys people and places. Try that.

Hierarchies destroy people and places. The alternative is lack of a hierarchy, which is anarchy. Which are you more comfortable with, typing on your $1000 phone’s keyboard?

Humans will always form hierarchies, but it is possible to have more equitable hierarchies where I’m still not beaten to death for my iPhone.

What does “equitable hierarchy” mean? Equality of outcome? No thanks. Equality of opportunity? Fine, that’s what we have today.

>...that’s what we have today.

I agree with everything you said except for this part. We certainly don't have equality of opportunity today. Maybe in small microcosms of the first world countries, but there is a lot more work that needs doing in most of the world.

>The campaign to exterminate any alternative political discourse in the West has been so successful that it's now very hard to even talk about any alternative

I’ve seen no evidence of that and with the severity of your claim should you should include a source or two.

Perhaps you’re confusing people disagreeing with your view with people attempting to silence you. Those are two very different things.

Recall the Occupy Wall Street protest where they camped out in downtown NYC for a month? They broke all sorts of laws but were allowed to stay. That doesn’t sound like “extermination”.

What I do see is violence from communist and anarchists against speech that they deem fascists, but are really just moderate voices. I can provide video links if you need, but it’s common knowledge at this point.

We still live in a democracy and so long as we do, you’re going to have to live with consensus, which doesn’t see things your way.

Yes I guess a literal neo-nazi terrorist attack didn't happen on American soil.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_the_Right_rally

Oh wait it did. And so have numerous ongoing campaigns of harassment and death threats against any dissenting voices. Like this guy: https://www.12news.com/mobile/article/news/local/valley/phoe...

Even advocated for by the current President of the United States: https://newrepublic.com/minutes/128896/beat-protester-trumps...

I don’t think an organized group like Antifa promoting “by any means necessary” and getting tacit approval from the main stream left is comparable to one (universally condemned) deranged lunatic, a bunch of keyboard warriors, and something stupid Trump said once.

There aren’t right leaning groups out there organizing violent protests at college campuses trying to prevent left leaning speakers from being heard.

>Perhaps you’re confusing people disagreeing with your view with people attempting to silence you. Those are two very different things.

Actually, if they're talking to random people around them, those people probably are trying to silence them.

It's just about impossible to have rational discourse about politics with a random group of people these days. Far too many of them don't understand how to have a rational conversation about something and quickly fall to just trying to get their way and make the other person shut up. There's no scenario in their minds where they end up parting ways amicably with someone who doesn't believe as they do.

I know some people who seem perfectly rational until you find out that they believe all cops are corrupt, all white people are racist, or everyone who voted for Trump condones racism. (Among other touchy subjects.) They get so mad about these issues that you can't even provide them proof of how wrong they are because they'll just flat call you a liar and ignore everything you say.

If you are racist, sexist, or whatever they have a hot button about, they'll ignore everything you say on every topic as well. To them, it's impossible for someone who is wrong about something they care about to be wise about something else.

Capitalism is one of those hot-button topics for many, many Americans. Decades of propaganda have had a lot of influence and it no longer matters if capitalism is actually the best system. They believe it is, and you can't get them to think about it.

I agree with just about everything you’ve said, I just don’t think capitalism is one of those topics.

“They believe it is, and you can't get them to think about it.”

Not getting someone to think about a topic is a far, far cry from not being able to utter such words for fear of violence against you.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com