World Politics - Page 1277 - CyclingNews Forum

Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Cafe > General

General Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #12761  
Old 12-09-12, 04:56
auscyclefan94's Avatar
auscyclefan94 auscyclefan94 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,831
Default

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/en...208-2b24m.html

*shudders*
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by diggercuz View Post
second post ever after reading the forum for the last few years and one thing i must say, ACF94 is probably the most intelligent poster here, never biased to BMC or Cadel, and never gets worked up over anything.
Reply With Quote
  #12762  
Old 12-09-12, 05:38
BroDeal's Avatar
BroDeal BroDeal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Above 5000 feet
Posts: 12,882
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by auscyclefan94 View Post
Uh-oh. Looks like ACF will have to switch to cheering for Wiggo. Oh, the humanity!
__________________
"Listen, my son. Trust no one! You can count on no one but yourself. Improve your skills, son. Harden your body. Become a number one man. Do not ever let anyone beat you!" -- Gekitotsu! Satsujin ken
Reply With Quote
  #12763  
Old 12-09-12, 05:53
auscyclefan94's Avatar
auscyclefan94 auscyclefan94 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,831
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroDeal View Post
Uh-oh. Looks like ACF will have to switch to cheering for Wiggo. Oh, the humanity!
Seems to be the case! I could always sabotage his green event. He is friends with two people I strongly dislike, Tim Flannery and Cate Blanchett.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by diggercuz View Post
second post ever after reading the forum for the last few years and one thing i must say, ACF94 is probably the most intelligent poster here, never biased to BMC or Cadel, and never gets worked up over anything.
Reply With Quote
  #12764  
Old 12-10-12, 11:49
auscyclefan94's Avatar
auscyclefan94 auscyclefan94 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,831
Default

All the major polls finish the year with the Coalition leading the ALP, 54% to 46% on a two party preferred basis. This result would give the Coalition a very big electoral victory and is good news going into the election year, 2013. If I were Labor, that would certainly be very disappointing result considering that the reports in the media have been shown in a way that has the Opposition under pressure and the Government coming back.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by diggercuz View Post
second post ever after reading the forum for the last few years and one thing i must say, ACF94 is probably the most intelligent poster here, never biased to BMC or Cadel, and never gets worked up over anything.
Reply With Quote
  #12765  
Old 12-10-12, 14:29
movingtarget movingtarget is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,161
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by auscyclefan94 View Post
All the major polls finish the year with the Coalition leading the ALP, 54% to 46% on a two party preferred basis. This result would give the Coalition a very big electoral victory and is good news going into the election year, 2013. If I were Labor, that would certainly be very disappointing result considering that the reports in the media have been shown in a way that has the Opposition under pressure and the Government coming back.
As long as Liberals can stay away from any Labor like scandals and Abbott doesn't not put his foot in his mouth regularly they should win. But it could be an odd election as neither leader is liked and the Greens seem to have slipped backwards. There were rumours that both leaders could be replaced but I doubt that will happen even though Abbott only won the last Liberal poll by one vote over Turnbull and Labor wouldn't have the nerve to bring Rudd back unless Gillard's popularity really started to plummet. Rudd also lost some popularity after the amateur dramatics of the last Labor poll. His behaviour was very odd, more so than usual.
Reply With Quote
  #12766  
Old 12-10-12, 23:32
auscyclefan94's Avatar
auscyclefan94 auscyclefan94 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,831
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by movingtarget View Post
As long as Liberals can stay away from any Labor like scandals and Abbott doesn't not put his foot in his mouth regularly they should win. But it could be an odd election as neither leader is liked and the Greens seem to have slipped backwards. There were rumours that both leaders could be replaced but I doubt that will happen even though Abbott only won the last Liberal poll by one vote over Turnbull and Labor wouldn't have the nerve to bring Rudd back unless Gillard's popularity really started to plummet. Rudd also lost some popularity after the amateur dramatics of the last Labor poll. His behaviour was very odd, more so than usual.
The amusing thing is, that when both Turnbull and Rudd were in the top job, they were both starting to get quite bad poll numbers before they lost their respective leadership roles. On the other hand, Abbott and Gillard looked somewhat popular. Personal popularity does not mean much imo because the people always prefer the people not in the job after a while and then will hate them when/if they get put in.

Liberals just need to get their pre-selection process organised in NSW and they should pick up a swag of seats in NSW, potentially a couple in Tasmania, one in South Australia and probably a few in Queensland (depending on how Newman goes). If Swan gets kicked out, I think I will wet myself with laughter and joy. Victoria should be interesting. State polls say Baillieu is struggling although that poll was a while ago and he has improved in recent months. According to an Essential Poll, the federal Coalition in Victoria are 50:50 2pp which would mean a 4-5% swing to the L/NP in Victoria, which is surprising. Maybe they can pick up a couple of seats in Victoria? It shall be interesting.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by diggercuz View Post
second post ever after reading the forum for the last few years and one thing i must say, ACF94 is probably the most intelligent poster here, never biased to BMC or Cadel, and never gets worked up over anything.
Reply With Quote
  #12767  
Old 12-11-12, 08:22
Vino attacks everyone's Avatar
Vino attacks everyone Vino attacks everyone is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,784
Default Rothbard on Marx

The other was the left-wing, relatively libertarian strand, exemplified in their different ways by Marx and Bakunin, revolutionary and far more interested in achieving the libertarian goals of liberalism and socialism; but especially the smashing of the state apparatus to achieve the “withering away of the State” and the “end of the exploitation of man by man.” Interestingly enough, the very Marxian phrase, the “replacement of the government by men by the administration of things,” can be traced, by a circuitous route, from the great French radical laissez-faire liberals of the early nineteenth century, Charles Comte (no relation to Auguste Comte) and Charles Dunoyer. And so, too, may the concept of the “class struggle”; except that for Dunoyer and Comte the inherently antithetical classes were not businessmen versus workers, but the producers in society (including free businessmen, workers, peasants, etc.) versus the exploiting classes constituting, and privileged by, the State apparatus.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard33.html


On Lenin:

The famous betrayal during World War I of the old ideals of revolutionary pacifism by the European Socialists, and even by the Marxists, should have come as no surprise; that each Socialist Party supported its “own” national government in the war (with the honorable exception of Eugene Victor Debs’s Socialist Party in the United States) was the final embodiment of the collapse of the classic Socialist Left. From then on, Socialists and quasi-Socialists joined Conservatives in a basic amalgam, accepting the state and the mixed economy (= neo-mercantilism = the welfare state = interventionism = state monopoly capitalism, merely synonyms for the same essential reality). It was in reaction to this collapse that Lenin broke out of the Second International to reestablish classic revolutionary Marxism in a revival of left socialism.

In fact, Lenin, almost without knowing it, accomplished more than this. It is common knowledge that “purifying” movements, eager to return to a classic purity shorn of recent corruptions, generally purify further than what had held true among the original classic sources. There were, indeed, marked “conservative” strains in the writings of Marx and Engels themselves which often justified the State, Western imperialism, and aggressive nationalism, and it was these motifs, in the ambivalent views of the masters on this subject, that provided the fodder for the later shift of the majority Marxists into the “social imperialist” camp. [9] Lenin’s camp turned more “left” than had Marx and Engels themselves. Lenin had a decidedly more revolutionary stance toward the State and consistently defended and supported movements of national liberation against imperialism. The Leninist shift was more “leftist” in other important senses as well. For while Marx had centered his attack on market capitalism per se, the major focus of Lenin’s concerns was on what he conceived to be the highest stages of capitalism: imperialism and monopoly. Hence Lenin’s focus, centering as it did in practice on State monopoly and imperialism rather than on laissez-faire capitalism, was in that way far more congenial to the Libertarian than that of Karl Marx.


On fascism:

Fascism and Nazism were the local culmination in domestic affairs of the modern drift toward right-wing collectivism. It has become customary among libertarians, as indeed among the Establishment of the West, to regard fascism and communism as fundamentally identical. But while both systems were indubitably collectivist, they differed greatly in their socioeconomic content. Communism was a genuine revolutionary movement that ruthlessly displaced and overthrew the old ruling elites, while fascism, on the contrary, cemented into power the old ruling classes. Hence, fascism was a counterrevolutionary movement that froze a set of monopoly privileges upon society; in short, fascism was the apotheosis of modern State monopoly capitalism.Here was the reason that fascism proved so attractive (which communism, of course, never did) to big business interests in the West – openly and unabashedly so in the 1920s and early 1930s.

On leninists, on New Deal:

The essence of the New Deal was seen, far more clearly than in the Conservative mythology, by the Leninist movement in the early 1930s; that is, until the mid-thirties, when the exigencies of Soviet foreign relations caused a sharp shift of the world communist line to “Popular Front” approval of the New Deal. Thus, in 1934, the British Leninist theoretician R. Palme Dutt published a brief but scathing analysis of the New Deal as “social fascism” – as the reality of fascism cloaked with a thin veneer of populist demagogy. No Conservative opponent has ever delivered a more vigorous or trenchant denunciation of the New Deal. The Roosevelt policy, wrote Dutt, was to “move to a form of dictatorship of a war-type”; the essential policies were to impose a State monopoly capitalism through the NRA, to subsidize business, banking, and agriculture through inflation and the partial expropriation of the mass of the people through lower real-wage rates and to the regulation and exploitation of labor by means of government-fixed wages and compulsory arbitration. When the New Deal, wrote Dutt, is stripped of its “social-reformist ‘progressive’ camouflage,” “the reality of the new Fascist type of system of concentrated State capitalism and industrial servitude remains,” including an implicit “advance to war.”

Why communism went wrong:

For, in every instance, the Leninists took power not in a developed capitalist country as Marx had wrongly predicted, but in a country suffering from the oppression of feudalism. Second, the Communists did not attempt to impose socialism upon the economy for many years after taking power; in Soviet Russia until Stalin’s forced collectivization of the early 1930s reversed the wisdom of Lenin’s New Economic Policy, which Lenin’s favorite theoretician, Bukharin, would have extended onward towards a free market.
__________________
"I know how to ride my bike" - Nibali

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9LBsWCNE9I

Vuelta 06 - the greatest gt in history!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24TQdI7csHs
Reply With Quote
  #12768  
Old 12-11-12, 18:54
Alpe d'Huez's Avatar
Alpe d'Huez Alpe d'Huez is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 7,516
Default

The US election is over, and at times the conversations seem to be blending between the two political threads. Once we hit the new year I'm either going to close the US Election thread, or split the two political threads, turning this one in to Global Politics, and the other into US Politics.

Thoughts welcome.
Reply With Quote
  #12769  
Old 12-12-12, 02:28
movingtarget movingtarget is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,161
Default

The Peter Slipper verdict won't help the Liberal party. The judge's verdict was scathing and he saw it as a political attack and not much more.
Reply With Quote
  #12770  
Old 12-12-12, 02:46
auscyclefan94's Avatar
auscyclefan94 auscyclefan94 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,831
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by movingtarget View Post
The Peter Slipper verdict won't help the Liberal party. The judge's verdict was scathing and he saw it as a political attack and not much more.
I somewhat agree. He did say that Slipper's texts in the case were 'vulgar, rude, etc...' ans bordered on sexual harassment in some cases. Roxon's interference in the case was also not a good look for the Government.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by diggercuz View Post
second post ever after reading the forum for the last few years and one thing i must say, ACF94 is probably the most intelligent poster here, never biased to BMC or Cadel, and never gets worked up over anything.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:16.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.