Super bowl U available now on Nintendo wii U

ahhh, thank you!

sorry for a dumb question - but wouldn't the point be to not have the bourgeoisie in the first place? don't let any singular entity (i. e. a person or a family) own the means of production and you don't have bourgeoisie as a phenomenon, no?
(by sharing the ownership of the means of production)

the last message just brings the whole thing home so exquisitely

middle class is eroded. that's all.

so that's the liberal capitalism that this conversation started from. as opposed to neo-liberal capitalism that erodes the middle class.
that's my entire argument and point. we had liberal capitalism in the 20th century where domestic middle class could grow and we have neo-liberal capitalism where

thank you, but insults are unnecessary.

I can only speak for myself - there is no right kind of capitalism.

that's exactly what it was up until the 80s. and then the exploitation was brought back from overseas.
personally - I'm not defending capitalism, I'm just arguing semantics

"good capitalism" is an oxymoron. the only good capitalism exists in the fantasies of ecomists jerking themselves off to line go up

it can be both at the same time for different groups of people. the world is complex, contradictory and multiple things can be true at the same time. if you want to see the world in black and white, it's not my problem at that point.

sure, it's part of the myth and of the justification.
waging war for the sake of peace and freedom is a common pretense.
doesn't negate domestic liberal approach at the same time.

now the pretense is being dropped

(apologies for unnecessary pinging/notifs)
bsky.app/profile/dave...
this post pretty strongly suggests a national policy discussion, nothing about colonialism and imperialism. this is the pretense it needs to justify violence abroad and at home, but that's not what the conversation was about.

sure. at least in *some* parts of the world there was *an attempt* to make life comfortable for *some* (white) people. the pretense has been completely dropped now.

they are connected, the whole world can't be analyzed without a holistic approach.
you'd just prefer to put words into my mouth.
and yet that's not what the conversation was about.

irrelevant. has nothing to do with what the conversation was about

sure. liberal at home ≠ liberal abroad (i. e. in terms of foreign policy)

in the decades between around 60s and 80s, with thatcher and reagan being the driving force behind neo-liberal capitalism