Welcome To Tier 2 Politics and History!

[Daniel Balan]

"Every policy that a socialist calls for is in fact the cause of the problem that they are trying to solve"

They call for rent control  to lower the rents, and then wonder why rents end up being higher than they were before  rent control, and why there are slumlords and housing shortages. They don’t realise the  knock-on effects of their policies. They just want to save society - and that’s great! But:  "The short-term gain hides the long-term cost."

I encourage everyone to take a deep look at the video above and to subscribe to TIK History! To me TIK History is on par with Actualized.org in terms of thorough research and tier 2 development! When I see TIK explain various topics regarding history and doing parallels with what's happening today in the world makes me think that I am so lucky to have been exposed to such beautiful minds such as TIK and @Leo Gura. To me TIK is the Leo of history in terms of how he approaches his work.

[aurum]

I would not consider this tier 2.

He is making many errors.

[Daniel Balan]

@aurum I've watched dozens of hours of his content an I can say hands down that this is tier 2 content. All his takes are factual, well thought and based on nuanced, multi source research. Just because he is not parroting the same errors that mainstream takes have had about various ideologies and events doesn't mean that he is making many errors, I've never sensed any error from him in over 20+ hours of content. If you had found a error in his rhetoric we can debate it. History lies in the heart of the debate!

[aurum]

29 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

@aurum I've watched dozens of hours of his content an I can say hands down that this is tier 2 content. All his takes are factual, well thought and based on nuanced, multi source research. Just because he is not parroting the same errors that mainstream takes have had about various ideologies and events doesn't mean that he is making many errors, I've never sensed any error from him in over 20+ hours of content. If you had found a error in his rhetoric we can debate it. History lies in the heart of the debate!

He has many libertarian / free-market fantasies.

I'm not interested in debating it. I'm just pointing it out.

[Lyubov]

Blasphemy. This is not tier 2. Any reasonable tier 2 take does not take on the clear libertarian anti-socialist argument you make. What you claim here is riddled with confirmation bias and oversimplifications. Tier 2 is incredibly dynamic, conscious, and holistic. 

Edited Monday at 09:27 PM by Lyubov

[Daniel Balan]

@Lyubov Isn't tier 2 supposed to acknowledge different perspectives? Are his takes wrong about how some socialist policies backfire in the face of the very people socialism tries to help? I deeply condemn the use of the word blasphemy. You can disagree, it is your right, but in a tier 2 discussion you can't just outright dismiss one's point of view just because you have already taken a stance regarding a subject. Tier 2 is about open mindedness towards topics. Plus he is not anti socialistic, he values the welfare state and everything that it brings, he just points out that policies have often on the long term opposite outcomes than initially intended.

Edited Monday at 10:08 PM by Daniel Balan

[Daniel Balan]

@aurum Everyone has different views on different topics, I find value in what he is saying. He is not a libertarian, nor a anti - socialist, How I view it, he tries to find the middle ground and to point out at different aspects of each economic ideology. My role as a spectator is to find nuggets of truth from multiple sources. From Leo I have one piece of the puzzle, from TIK I have another, and so on, even from Tate if you toss away all the bullshit that he promotes you can still find valuable pieces of the puzzle. 

[aurum]

2 hours ago, Daniel Balan said:

@aurum Everyone has different views on different topics, I find value in what he is saying. He is not a libertarian, nor a anti - socialist, How I view it, he tries to find the middle ground and to point out at different aspects of each economic ideology. My role as a spectator is to find nuggets of truth from multiple sources. From Leo I have one piece of the puzzle, from TIK I have another, and so on, even from Tate if you toss away all the bullshit that he promotes you can still find valuable pieces of the puzzle. 

That’s good you’re looking to put the puzzle pieces together.

The most important thing is an honest sense-making process.

[Leo Gura]

TIK is deluded with libertarianism.

He thinks any government control of anything is socialism. He thinks Hitler was a socialist. He's very biased and you should not take him seriously.

[zazen]

Tier 2 should be able to recognise the flaws in extremes and point them out. Libertarionism can far too easily become capitalism repackaged in a higher moral philosophy of freedom, dignity and sovereignty. It can be corrupted when it becomes a ideaological cover for corporate or elite interests because those elite interests often claim liberty for themselves (producers) but limit it for others (consumers). It can have overconfidence in the market to solve all problems and prioritises freedom from the state but overlooks the positive freedoms states can provide such as health care, welfare and education. But it does quite well to point at the flaws of bloated states and over-regulation in that they end up producing less of what they intend.

On 10/28/2024 at 10:41 AM, zazen said:

The Western mind gets too hung up on definitions, labels and ideologies to fit itself and others into. As a comment in that Richard Wolff video said- China follows whateverworksism lol. Both extremes can help in understanding the flaws in the other.

Both systems (capitalist and communist) concentrate power - communism does so through the state, capitalism does so through private power. Both systems claim to undermine monopolies and the concentration of power that is abused - communism literally concentrates power via the state, capitalism claims market competition can challenge, disrupt and keep monopolies in check. Both systems under-appreciate half of human nature - communism dismisses that people need incentives to thrive, capitalism dismisses that unchecked power always tries to concentrate itself. They don’t deny the other side, just dismiss its importance.

Communism fundamentally contradicts itself in its core tenent which is to have a classless and stateless society. In order to have a classless society, you need a state to enforce it via redistributing wealth from elite classes to the masses - but inequality is natural and inescapable, though we strive to shrink the gap, it can never truly be closed which is the naive aspiration of the Utopian minded. Communism believes that once the state creates a classless society, it will dissolves itself. But that's now how human nature works. How does a centralized power structure ie the state - relinquish its own power, power simply doesn't walk away. Communism also relies on central planning - which also requires a state. What plans the economy once the state no longer exists to centrally plan it…the market? But that’s bad old capitalism.

Capitalism contradicts itself in that it thinks free market competition doesn't create monopolies and that wealth trickles down to the many. But just like communism overlooks one part of human nature, so does capitalism. Capitalism turns a market place into a chessboard where others get dominated and power concentrates itself, never wanting to let go. Capitalists love to view their society as a wild jungle, where the chaos thrives to create innovation and growth and where the invisible hand of the market regulates itself. But apex predators turn that jungle into a rigged game where the most powerful animals decide who gets fed and who doesn't.

In a nutshell: Both systems produce outcomes that contradict the systems ideals.

There has to be some regulation and oversight. It's all about balance.

Edited Tuesday at 12:30 PM by zazen

[Alex4]

1 hour ago, zazen said:

Tier 2 should be able to recognise the flaws in extremes and point them out. Libertarionism can far too easily become capitalism repackaged in a higher moral philosophy of freedom, dignity and sovereignty. It can be corrupted when it becomes a ideaological cover for corporate or elite interests because those elite interests often claim liberty for themselves (producers) but limit it for others (consumers). It can have overconfidence in the market to solve all problems and prioritises freedom from the state but overlooks the positive freedoms states can provide such as health care, welfare and education. But it does quite well to point at the flaws of bloated states and over-regulation in that they end up producing less of what they intend.

There has to be some regulation and oversight. It's all about balance.

Very well explained, I couldn't have done it better.

I summarize some mistakes libertarians make:

-Overlooking the many advantages that the state provides them.
-Overconfidence as you said on the market.
-Ignoring or not giving importance to economic inequality.

Like other failed ideologies, it falls into the trap of easy solutions (no state intervention in this case). The reality is that every problem needs to be carefully addressed on a case-by-case basis, and solving by not creating more indirect problems that are hard to spot at first glance.

[Leo Gura]

TIK has said that corporate monopoly is socialism. The guy does not understand basic economics, that's how much libertarianism has rotteded his mind. Anything bad he just calls socialism, and anything good capitalism, thus reinforcing all his biases. By his logic capitalism cannot do bad because if it's bad it can't be capitalism, it must really be socialism.

Edited Tuesday at 04:22 PM by Leo Gura

[whh2222]

Op thought he was on to something lmao 

[Lyubov]

@Daniel Balan I wouldn’t say tier 2’s main characteristic is open mindedness. There are plenty of open mind people like Joe Rogan who will still go along with some edgy trend and gobble up tons of shit. Open mindedness is one characteristic of it but in my opinion tier 2’s main characteristic is balancing that non-material truth, intrinsic value, god, whatever you want to call it with the sort of material dualistic survival based truth, creating a yin and yang / Wu Wei balance. Tier 2 is no different than what we are trying to do here in our personal lives but from a much larger macro perspective on politics and the formation of society aligned with truth. 

Edited Wednesday at 03:40 AM by Lyubov

[Apparition of Jack]

TIK is just one of countless grifters out there who’ve mistaken greed for wisdom. If there’s one thing I despise about current civilisation it’s the fact too many people attribute divine properties to money, rather than seeing it for the illusionary tool that it is.

[aurum]

2 hours ago, whh2222 said:

Op thought he was on to something lmao 

Try to be encouraging for newer forum members.

Politics is hard to understand and our standards are high.

[FourCrossedWands]

@Leo GuraSo, what do you think is the best political system? Scandinavian type of socialism?

It has been described many times that Scandinavia is a very specific region where people have been depending on each other for centuries and therefore trust the government much more than in other parts of the world.

This can't be replicated in 99% of the world.

Edited Wednesday at 10:11 AM by FourCrossedWands

[Leo Gura]

28 minutes ago, FourCrossedWands said:

@Leo GuraSo, what do you think is the best political system? Scandinavian type of socialism?

It has been described many times that Scandinavia is a very specific region where people have been depending on each other for centuries and therefore trust the government much more than in other parts of the world.

This can't be replicated in 99% of the world.

1) Scandinavia is not socialist. It is capitalist.

2) Well-regulated capitalism seems to be the best system at this time.

3) I don't see trust of government as a big issue. If we invest resources into making government function well then it will be trusted. Clearly creating a well-functioning government is possible. It just requires eliminating corruption and hiring/electing high quality people with integrity and good character. This can be done in America and Europe. It's just that people aren't serious about doing it.

Edited Wednesday at 10:40 AM by Leo Gura

[FourCrossedWands]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

1) Scandinavia is not socialist. It is capitalist.

2) Well-regulated capitalism seems to be the best system at this time.

3) I don't see trust of government as a big issue. If we invest resources into making government function well then it will be trusted. Clearly creating a well-functioning government is possible. It just requires eliminating corruption and hiring/electing high quality people with integrity and good character. This can be done in America and Europe. It's just that people aren't serious about doing it.

Well, I didn't say that Scandinavian countries are socialist, I just meant that it's one of the few regions in the world whe some degree of socialism can actually work and has been working.

But then, once you visit those countries, you quickly realize that it's still not working 100% and there are some big issues such as the rise in criminal activities. But yeah, that's due to extreme liberalism, not socialism.

So basically the ideal system is a "non crony capitalism" right? At least that's what I think.

Unfortunately, we might never get one.

Edited Wednesday at 11:59 AM by FourCrossedWands

[Davino]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

1) Scandinavia is not socialist. It is capitalist.

2) Well-regulated capitalism seems to be the best system at this time.

Could we call it stage Green Capitalism?