New Chat Thread

[fuzzyroes]

though it's usually funny to see people take on Trotsky and the inevitable shitstorm that follows; Trotsky, don't waste your time man. This guys a bigot idiot.

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by reprise85

I'm not apologizing for shit, just stating statistics that prove a point, something you are failing to do.

you mean you're using second hand statistics you found in the end of history & the last man by fukuyama or some liberal capitalist trash just like it that apparently uses "data" to justify that world war 2 was less deadly than ceasar's campaigns against the gauls because of the "world population" lmao ok

fucking liberals are so shameless

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by reprise85

the world is not as violent as it used to be.

FALSE
FALSE
FALSE
FALSE
FALSE

[JESUSNEEDSAHIT]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

why would you make up such an outrageous lie in the first place

it's not a lie and you haven't actually refuted anything. I respect your work trolling the alt right on the to this board it has made my life easier, but you are obviously wrong on this. quantification is not a lie. science is not a lie. statistics are not lies.

look basically people are saying by specific quantifiable things like homicide rate or number of people who starve to death, that has gone down. that's not arguable. it's facts. those things have gone done relative to the size of humans species.

but then you are sort of creating this straw man where you think the argument everyone is making is "capitalism is the best and should be defended" but that's not even close to what is being said. this is clearly an emotionally motivated position, you seem to identify with believing everything modern is evil. to admit that capitalism has gone hand and hand with positive developments for people would be anathema to your identity I guess

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by ohnoitsbonnie

Where is your family from? Where are you from?

dimes to dollars its war torn because western capitalist interests need the region to play ball with them to make our lives so much "better" than they were in the middle ages, or whatever

[JESUSNEEDSAHIT]

it's almost reminiscent of people who think crime is out of control and the world is becoming this evild dangerous place it wasn't when they were young

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by JESUSNEEDSAHIT

it's not a lie and you haven't actually refuted anything.

• if someone is comparing history against older history they're wrong
• if someone is using terms like "better" and "best" and the like to compare history they are extremely wrong
• if someone is using "world population statistics" to "prove" that cesar or even the middle ages were more deadly than the world war period (10th! 11th! LMAO!) then they are deliberately lying to you

[Trotskilicious]

guys there are no world population statistics until modern times, are you fucking kidding me here

you're taking these people's word for it, statistics are easily manipulated, fudged, and juked to present a case that is beneficial to the person manipulating the statistics. the end of history third way liberal theory about how the great arc of history is showing that we're constantly making "our" lives better is so fundamentally douchey, self serving and completely subjective.

[JESUSNEEDSAHIT]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

you mean you're using second hand statistics you found in the end of history & the last man by fukuyama or some liberal capitalist trash just like it that apparently uses "data" to justify that world war 2 was less deadly than ceasar's campaigns against the gauls because of the "world population" lmao ok

you haven't actually explained why you think this is a bad way to measure though. you think mean numbers is all that counts? so even if I have 100 people and 50 die of disease and then I have a thousand people and 100 die of disease, life is worse in second scenario?

[JESUSNEEDSAHIT]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

• if someone is comparing history against older history they're wrong
• if someone is using terms like "better" and "best" and the like to compare history they are extremely wrong
• if someone is using "world population statistics" to "prove" that cesar or even the middle ages were more deadly than the world war period (10th! 11th! LMAO!) then they are deliberately lying to you

you know better than to think this is a serious response come on dude. we're not children if you have a real argument make it already

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by JESUSNEEDSAHIT

but then you are sort of creating this straw man where you think the argument everyone is making is "capitalism is the best and should be defended" but that's not even close to what is being said. this is clearly an emotionally motivated position, you seem to identify with believing everything modern is evil. to admit that capitalism has gone hand and hand with positive developments for people would be anathema to your identity I guess

i'm saying that when people tell you how great and best you have compared to chinese peasants in 1200 they're trying to manipulate you into accepting the status quo

there's literally no reason to make this stupid ass argument unless you were defending the status quo & liberal capitalism

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by JESUSNEEDSAHIT

you know better than to think this is a serious response come on dude. we're not children if you have a real argument make it already

this is ridiculous, this is what i was taught as a historian. is history now about using fungible statistics to justify your political beliefs?

[JESUSNEEDSAHIT]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

i'm saying that when people tell you how great and best you have compared to chinese peasants in 1200 they're trying to manipulate you into accepting the status quo

uh as far as I see the people you are arguing with defined "better" in quantifiable terms

[JESUSNEEDSAHIT]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

this is ridiculous, this is what i was taught as a historian. is history now about using fungible statistics to justify your political beliefs?

you should be able to make a better argument than "comparing different time periods is wrong" then

[JESUSNEEDSAHIT]

this argument is precariously on the ledge of "it is impossible to know anything"

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by JESUSNEEDSAHIT

you haven't actually explained why you think this is a bad way to measure though.

i didn't think i needed to explain why record keeping from 200AD is spotty at best, and its definitely incomplete

i think the most of you believe this fukuyama trash because you don't study history and you don't quite realize that nobody in Germany was keeping headcounts. nobody in scandinavia, russia, all of africa, i mean how do you guess a world pop when almost 90% of the data is missing? using "science"

further, i didn't realize i had to explain how terms like "better" and "best" and "good" are completely subjective

our agriculture has improved, our infastructures have improved, but western capitalists use these as leverage to exploit the rest of the world for its benefit and comfort and you're like this is "better" i'm like "this is a different kind of the same."

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by JESUSNEEDSAHIT

uh as far as I see the people you are arguing with defined "better" in quantifiable terms

you mean ludicrous war casualty ratios and crime stats?

you were the first person to bring up agricultural progress. the FIRST. yes. that's undeniably "better" i suppose, but i do think humans are supposed to die far more often than they do and while you think keeping 8 billion people alive and out of poverty is a "good thing" i wonder what kind irreverasble harm that does to the environment.

the fact is, maybe we're supposed to die often. maybe that IS better, on a macro scale. but liberals can't think that way, its about keeping everyone alive and full of food and ready to make more babies to buy more stuff.

[Trotskilicious]

the way i see it, western liberal capitalism is the extension of aristocracy only quasi-meritocratic and the rest of the world is the serfs and there's less wars now because practically all of the west is allied & has nuclear weapons. wow! PROGRESS.

people say napoleon betrayed liberalism by proclaiming himself emperor and i feel that it was merely the logical conclusion

bottom line tho: what is to be gained by saying we've progressed in some ways since Ug and Ogg lived in caves? I mean its elementary & not beholden to capitalism and liberalism and will continue after both are dead. We don't need statistics to prove that agriculture is more robust and produces higher yeilds and yet its not PROGRESS because we don't use this to feed the world. we throw away half our food.

[JESUSNEEDSAHIT]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

i didn't think i needed to explain why record keeping from 200AD is spotty at best, and its definitely incomplete

i think the most of you believe this fukuyama trash because you don't study history and you don't quite realize that nobody in Germany was keeping headcounts. nobody in scandinavia, russia, all of africa, i mean how do you guess a world pop when almost 90% of the data is missing? using "science"

so if anything the past was probably a lot bloodier than was recorded

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

further, i didn't realize i had to explain how terms like "better" and "best" and "good" are completely subjective

the terms were defined though. homicide rate is not a subjective measure. and like I just said unless you think that violence was over reported in the past which seems kind of absurd becuase it was the almost certainly extremewly under reported, I'm not sure what you are saying to back up your point

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

our agriculture has improved, our infastructures have improved, but western capitalists use these as leverage to exploit the rest of the world for its benefit and comfort and you're like this is "better" i'm like "this is a different kind of the same."

there is also the possibility that things are complex and exploitative systems can occur side by side with positive developments. just because data shows this doesn't mean it's some kind of plot to defend capitalism. It seems insane to me that you think accepting capitalism is better than what came before and also seeing the inherent flaws in capitalism are mutually exclusive. this is not black and white, again you are too smart to think like this

[JESUSNEEDSAHIT]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

you mean ludicrous war casualty ratios and crime stats?

you were the first person to bring up agricultural progress. the FIRST. yes. that's undeniably "better" i suppose, but i do think humans are supposed to die far more often than they do and while you think keeping 8 billion people alive and out of poverty is a "good thing" i wonder what kind irreverasble harm that does to the environment.

the fact is, maybe we're supposed to die often. maybe that IS better, on a macro scale. but liberals can't think that way, its about keeping everyone alive and full of food and ready to make more babies to buy more stuff.

you are moving the goal posts

this is an entirely different and philosophical argument, not at all what was being argued before which defined "better" in pretty specific terms, less war, less disease, less starvation, more literacey. I don't think anyone here would take issue with most of what you just said, it's just an entirely different argument

[Trotskilicious]

and i think less war, less disease and less starvation are actually overall harmful things in an hilariously ironic & deserved kinda way

[JESUSNEEDSAHIT]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

and i think less war, less disease and less starvation are actually overall harmful things in an hilariously ironic & deserved kinda way

ok, but again you have changed the argument. maybe what you were trying to say all along is that quality of living measurements shouldn't be focused on because they draw attention from other things and AGAIN I don't think anyone here would really begrudged you that points. we all went to liberal art school too and were taught the evils of late stage capitalism. but it is a different argument

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by JESUSNEEDSAHIT

so if anything the past was probably a lot bloodier than was recorded

thats not how science works

homicide rate is not a subjective measure.

yes it is, its a subjective statistical category that depends on whether or not someone counts a thing as a murder or not a murder. you're telling me that "homicide rates" for chicago 2015 and Rome BC 222 are both equally reliable?

there is also the possibility that things are complex and exploitative systems can occur side by side with positive developments.

of course, but it seems like to me most of you are arguing on behalf of keeping the economic status quo where you are denied control of the means of production & are routinely exploited by generational wealth...you know like all of human history

just because data shows this doesn't mean it's some kind of plot to defend capitalism.

for the last time, the data is not reliable and they are deliberately misleading you for their own benefit that is to justify liberal capitalism as the best and only answer

It seems insane to me that you think accepting capitalism is better than what came before and also seeing the inherent flaws in capitalism are mutually exclusive. this is not black and white, again you are too smart to think like this

the thing again is that what is better. i cannot say that living in ireland before the norman conquest was better or worse than what i have now because i did not live in Ireland in 1123 AD. Its fundamentally fucking ridiculous to me when people apply this subjective crap to history. I'm sick of it.

[JESUSNEEDSAHIT]

if you aren't going to actually come up with something other than "data lies" and "THEY are trying to mislead you" there is nothing else interesting to speak on to me

[JESUSNEEDSAHIT]

I am interested in how you think crime rates in ancient societies were over reported though

[Trotskilicious]

these arguments fundamentally are about maintaining status quo, there is literally zero reason to mention this unless you were defending western liberal capitalism

[JESUSNEEDSAHIT]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

these arguments fundamentally are about maintaining status quo, there is literally zero reason to mention this unless you were defending western liberal capitalism

how subjective

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by JESUSNEEDSAHIT

I am interested in how you think crime rates in ancient societies were over reported though

i'm interested in how you think reliable statistics for ancient societies even exist

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by JESUSNEEDSAHIT

how subjective

all you can do, like a proper liberal college student, is reject my analysis as false because i haven't sited a half dozen old dead white guys to prove my point

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

i'm interested in how you think reliable statistics for ancient societies even exist

you're telling me i should consider gregory of tours as reliable as the US govts crime statistics report for baltimore

and even then its made up of mostly lies, and fixed rates. watch the wire. i mean jesus christ dude the only statistics that are even sort of reliable are sports stats. everything else is "what did you count & why did you count it?" its very dodgy and they use crime stats to make themselves look good & make it look like they're tackling crime because a lot of these offices are electable & demand political power. the best way to do this is not by being "good cops" its by using statistics to your advantage.