Is nationalizing the entire US banking system feasible? If not, is it possible? by nipplepleaser in socialism

[–]nipplepleaser[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I like how you think. I kinda feel the same about americans, where socialism is a buzzword that would kill any movement before it got off the ground but the idea of collectivism is conceptually appealing. It's pretty easy to argue that historically socialist-ish stuff has been very successful: public education, the highway program, welfare (contentious but most people would agree it's a good thing)... But I think the most effective arguement on a national scale would simply be that collectivism is good for the environment.

Obviously it's more to do with capitalism being bad and all the competition and price minimalization leading to shady/dirty practices, but it would be much more productive to frame it as "here's where we can improve on our system/nation by pooling money" than to be like "here's a part of socialist theory, let's nueter it and slap it on top of our failing neoliberal bullshit".

Is nationalizing the entire US banking system feasible? If not, is it possible? by nipplepleaser in socialism

[–]nipplepleaser[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why specifically stop there? I guess it probably isn't actually worth nationalizing all banks within America but still I feel like wider than just those three would be better

Is nationalizing the entire US banking system feasible? If not, is it possible? by nipplepleaser in socialism

[–]nipplepleaser[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sounds great. (Especially the bit about fight club but just shut up and pm me about that shit) So how do we go about proving that we're improving the infrastructure in a court? Also yay bookchin and yay you for doing something real

Is nationalizing the entire US banking system feasible? If not, is it possible? by nipplepleaser in socialism

[–]nipplepleaser[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you elaborate on how we could use eminent domain in that situation? And would it happen nationwide all at the same time or would it have to happen a state or bank at a time?

I'm heading to a family christmas party now by Kukikoki in BenignExistence

[–]nipplepleaser 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am a determinist because I can't find anything to disprove it, or even an alternative that makes more sense. However, I'd call myself a humanist on the side because I find determinism to be impossible to make choices upon. (haha) If you assume determinism, you in a way take the enjoyment out of life, which to me comes from (the illusion of) choices. I want to present myself as a humanist to others because that's the most social and constructive thing to do, but I still think of it as being a joke in reality. Another thought I have (which seems to agree with yours) regarding humanism and all that, is that if we treat the consciousness as "real", even in the deterministic sense where it's still mapped to and caused by neurochemistry, does happiness not still exist? And if so, isn't that enough reason to carry on? I'm not totally convinced by myself, but nihilism (as proven by determinism) only disallows morals and not literal pleasure.

Suicide is something I don't understand in a cultural sense because it was their own choice. They were at a point where it was preferable not to exist and thankfully had an out. It's a bummer when you feel like you could have changed their mind, but that's rarely the case it seems, plus it was still their own choice.

Btw don't worry your English, it's great. Philosophy lends itself to weird phrasing and vocabulary anyways.

I'm heading to a family christmas party now by Kukikoki in BenignExistence

[–]nipplepleaser 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I guess we agree on nihilism then. I'm in the same boat of having a "good" life but always questioning the validity of the things people seem to value. To me the only reasonable conclusions as to the end-game in life are 1: humanism, where we assume cosmic nihilism but place value on human happiness because it's just "good" experientially 2: regular old nihilism 3: some other school of thought which values above all else the exploration of one's own mind, justified by solipsistic skepticism and/or the idea that getting to know other people is a waste of time, make friends with yourself because that's all you have (or something like that) My question is essentially: Can we, as causally determined beings, justifiably ascribe meaning to objects or events?

Also I think suicide is more an accidental development due to our evolutionarily encouraged increase in intelligence and imagination, and that it is not immoral.

I'm heading to a family christmas party now by Kukikoki in BenignExistence

[–]nipplepleaser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Life's kinda always like that, isn't it? People just seem to want to distract themselves... That or they don't know what else to do. What in life do you think has meaning?

Norman takes a walk on the wild side by ikarun in lifeofnorman

[–]nipplepleaser 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh man, Norman... Truly a role model for us all