politicsmoribund

[politicsmoribund]

Demolatrist - One who venerates or idolizes democracy to an excessive degree at the cost of individual rights and freedoms.

The root "demos" refers to the people or democracy. The suffix "-latrist" indicates someone who worships or idolizes something. So a "demolatrist" suggests someone who reveres democracy like a religion, even when it infringes on personal liberties or natural rights. #Demolatrist [See: Demolatrist] #MorPolitics

[politicsmoribund]

"Capitalism and the Production of Specialty Goods: An Exploration of Meeting Niche Market Demand"

When it comes to meeting the needs of niche markets, capitalism is often seen as a system that may not be well-suited to accommodate specialized or unusual consumer interests. This is because capitalism is driven by the pursuit of profit, which means that companies may be less likely to invest in producing products for small or specialized markets. However, the concept of the "blue ocean strategy" suggests that it is possible for companies to create new market spaces and capture untapped demand by focusing on innovation and differentiation. This approach involves identifying unserved or underserved market segments and developing new products or services to meet their needs. In the case of individuals with unusual compulsions, such as a strong desire to lick boots, a company that is able to successfully identify and target this market segment could potentially create a "blue ocean" of untapped demand and capture a significant share of this niche market. While it may be challenging for a company to successfully execute a blue ocean strategy and meet the needs of this specialized market, it is possible that capitalism, with its focus on innovation and competition, could provide the best conditions for creating products for individuals with unusual compulsions.

In addition to the blue ocean strategy, there are other factors that contribute to creating conditions that allow for greater differentiation of products within the marketplace. Lowering the barriers of entry into a market, voluntary association, and voluntary exchanges all play a role in promoting competition and innovation. When barriers to entry are low, it is easier for new companies to enter the market and offer new and innovative products, which can increase competition and lead to a greater variety of options for consumers. Voluntary association, or the ability of individuals and businesses to freely associate and engage in economic activity, also promotes competition and innovation by allowing companies to form partnerships and collaborate to bring new products and ideas to the market. Finally, voluntary exchanges, or the ability of individuals and businesses to freely enter into economic transactions, give consumers the power to choose which products they wish to purchase, which can incentivize companies to create new and differentiated products in order to appeal to consumer demand. All of these factors work together to create the conditions that allow for greater differentiation of products within the marketplace.

In conclusion, it is important to recognize that capitalism, while driven by the pursuit of profit, can provide the conditions that allow for companies to successfully meet the needs of niche markets. By identifying and targeting specialized market segments and utilizing strategies such as the blue ocean strategy and by taking advantage of factors that promote competition and innovation, such as lowering barriers to entry, voluntary association, and voluntary exchanges, companies may be able to capture a significant share of these markets and meet the needs of consumers with unusual interests. While it may be challenging for companies to successfully execute a blue ocean strategy and meet the needs of niche markets, it is possible for companies to do so within a capitalist system. Overall, capitalism can create the conditions that allow for the successful production of specialty goods for niche markets, even if it is not explicitly designed to accommodate or support these markets.

[politicsmoribund]

Here Blaire White reacts to a series of events involving Andrew Tate, Jeffree Star, woke TikTok users, and Jordan Peterson. Andrew Tate was arrested, leading Blaire to express their thoughts on the situation. In addition, Jeffree Star has claimed that he "escaped the Illuminati", which has caught Blaire's attention. Woke TikTok users have also been causing a stir by claiming that dating preferences are transphobic, which has prompted Blaire to share their thoughts on the matter. Finally, Jordan Peterson has been sentenced to a re-education camp.

[politicsmoribund]

Tam Laird the Leader of The Scottish Libertarian Party talks about libertarian traditions in Scottish history and the current state of Scotland's liberty movement at the Scottish Libertarian Students launch event on the 17th of June 2017.

[politicsmoribund]

Atlanticism [アトランティシスム] - (politics) A philosophy of cooperation among Western European and North American nations. 

[politicsmoribund]

George Will discusses liberalism, conservatism, and the future of American political ideology with Institute for Humane Studies president Emily Chamlee-Wright. This wide-ranging conversation includes discussion of Will’s recent book “The Conservative Sensibility,” where he argues that the Founders’ beliefs in natural rights, limited government, religious freedom, and in human virtue and dignity ushered in two centuries of American prosperity. Will says those principles that make our democracy possible are now under threat, both from progressives on the left and from elements within conservatism on the right. Will also explains some of the confusion between terms like “liberal” and “conservative,” since American conservatism draws heavily from the classical liberal intellectual tradition, which would be referred to as “liberalism” in Europe, and is distinct from European conservatism. Will emphasizes the importance of Founders like James Madison, who advanced the notion of natural rights that pre-exist government, and later thinkers like Friedrich Hayek, who spoke of the “fatal conceit” of central planners. Will criticizes progressive thought, including figures like Woodrow Wilson, and also criticizes conservatives who are abandoning classical liberal principles to embrace populism or big government, including “common good conservatives.”   Books mentioned during this conversation: The Conservative Sensibility by George Will, The Radicalism of the American Revolution by Gordon S. Wood, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution by Bernard Bailyn, Crisis of the House Divided by Harry V. Jaffa, and Last Call by Daniel Okrent.

[politicsmoribund]

In this episode of Classics of Liberty, Caleb O. Brown reads the iconic speech “What to a slave is the Fourth of July?” by Frederick Douglass.

[politicsmoribund]

Commanding Heights

[コマーンディング・ハイツ] -  (Marxism) Clipping of commanding heights of the economy: Certain strategically important sectors of the economy such as public utilities and natural resources.Etymology Coined by Soviet political leader Vladimir Lenin.

#CommandingHeights [See: Commanding Heights] #VladimirLenin #Marxism

[politicsmoribund]

A Reaction to Jordan Peterson's "12 Rules for Life Tour - Melbourne, Australia." YouTube Video

Jordan Peterson seems a bit monomaniacal in regards to this hierarchy/nature over nurture vibe to his argumentation. I Sydney Barbour slightly oppose this "vibe".  I prefer a non-positional mindset [An insouciant attitude towards the rat race, especially when someone has gratitude for things regardless of how they may benefit from them in regard to the pecking order.]. Jordan Peterson wants to maximize the minimum prospects with a meritocratic system. Ya know dudes like in that Aristotelian fashion where you give the virtuous folk the flutes to get maximal benefits for society -- bruh. I suppose my position comes out of like  constructivism, social constructivism, nurture over nature/nurture over the hereditarian arguments, and radical fluid identity theory [which posits that many of the putative unchangeable characteristics, such as race or gender,will become irrefutably protean in the future given we reach the point where it's technologically possible to do things like switch genders or race more easily & or in a (more) irrefutable manner. Supposed unchangeable characteristics would become patently changeable & analogous to the clothes one chooses to wear or the colour of hair one chooses to have.]. So in conclusion, I’m like digging some of this stuff, but not all of it.

I do like his grow the pie vibes & his opposition to cherry-picking the 1% that would conveniently leave out the middle class of highly developed countries as opposed to the significantly less well-to-do countries.I dig him calling out some hypocrisy of them phony statisticians -- dude. 

Written By Sydney Barbour (a forked personality of Murdoch’s with a Voluntaryist perspective/bias)

[politicsmoribund]

Political Polyglotism

Political Polyglotism - the ability to speak many political languages

Дана: "Yo! Taylor's political polyglotism is really impressive she can speak conservatism's civility versus barbarism, progressivism's oppressor versus oppressed, and libertarianism's freedom versus coercion."

설현: "Damn I have enough trouble speaking progressivism's oppressor versus oppressed -- I'm surprised she can all those languages of politics. She must be really well read."

Дана: "Oh I also speak progressivism's oppressor versus oppressed -- that's my lingo"

설현: "Oh cool! Do you speak any other political languages?"

Дана: "No not really. I tried Libertarianism & I could only understand about half of what they saying & with conservatism I was totally lost".

Дана & 설현: Wow we wish we were like Taylor (able to speak many of the political languages) then we would be truly ""liberal by definition"".

Written By Charla Mcvey (a forked personality of Murdoch’s with a Radical Centrist perspective/bias -- who is also the Moribund Institute’s resident political lexicographer)

[politicsmoribund]

REFUTING A POINT FROM: "UNDERSTANDING MARXISM: Q&A WITH RICHARD D. WOLFF [JUNE 2019]"

"Richard Wolff claims capitalism is responsible for people's acceptance of the egregious immigration policy putting people in cages; albeit, tis more likely (in my opinion) that national populism or mercantilism is the cause. If he claimed that state capitalism was the cause of such policy. I would be much more likely to concede this point. Yet... state capitalism and mercantilism sound a lot like socialism to me. At least by popular denotation" 

P.S. A lot of the terms Richard Wolff uses seems rather propagandistic often aided by what he omits; albeit, pretty much every political ideologue uses propagandistic language besides maybe the radical centrists. 

-- Levi Mulder (a forked personality of Murdoch’s with a Republican perspective/bias with the Moribund Institute apart of the Politics subsidiary)

[politicsmoribund]

Commenting on a Point From: "Richard D. Wolff Lecture on Worker Coops: Theory and Practice of 21st Century Socialism" [See: 18:12 of Video]

"I don't think there is such a thing as a sensible capitalist who would dislike socialism if it was voluntary. Whether voluntary through the private sector or voluntary via the public sector, but with people having the option to opt out without penalty." Maxwell Murdoch from the Moribund Institute 

Written By Sydney Barbour (a forked personality of Murdoch’s with a Voluntaryist perspective/bias)

[politicsmoribund]

A Home For All The Ideologies? A Pan-ideological Utopia.

As a Jreg fan, methinks political ideologies should become tribe thingos that people could visit. It would be cool if all the ideologies could thrive. With the only rules being that everybody has the right to migrate/opt-out of an ideologies city/village/whatever. In the case, an ideology draws in masochists who feign to hate being tortured by the ideology most of the time. Should still have the right to migrate if they believed that the tortured outweighed the pleasure they got out of their masochistic whatnot. Libertarians could live in their Seasteads, Marxists could live in their phalansteries, Republicans could live in their McMansions, Democrats could live in their public housing, etcetera. People could raise capital in their secure job in a Marxist state and then move over to a Libertarian state for their investments. I believe these ideologies should have within their social contracts that they cannot vote outside their ideology; albeit, the way their ideologies are implemented would be protean. Thence the vote for policy would be more of an inconsequential thingo. In this system of pan-ideological utopia where people's vote is more nonessential than it otherwise would be; people's main tool for evincing their policy preferences would be to go where they're treated best.

Written By Charla Mcvey (a forked personality of Murdoch’s with a Radical Centrist perspective/bias)

[politicsmoribund]

Should Capitalists act like Socialists?

If capitalists act like socialists within a free-market system couldn't we have the putative benefits of socialism without the bureaucracy, rules, mandates, a superfluity of laws, and whatever else I'm not thinking of right now? My hope with this "capitalists act like socialists" idea is that capitalists should knock socialists out of the park with their altruism. Charity should be top of mind for capitalists. Capitalists should popularize charities to the point where governments have no reason to expand nor for much of the involuntary situations to occur. Aside - P.S. Does anybody here know how to get into Liberty for North Korea or to volunteer for them. How does one check if a charity organization is legitimate?

Written By Sydney Barbour (a forked personality of Murdoch’s with a Voluntaryist perspective/bias)

[politicsmoribund]

Do Libertarians eschew most partisan traps?

Is the US Libertarian party the only political party with staunch supporters who are aptly ready to call out the party when it does something dumb? Republicans & Democrats seldom seem to be able to call out their party. As of late, I've seen the Democrats who have this Micheal Sandal guy willing to say that the Democrats haven't put up a decent candidate to oppose Trump in 2020, but a lot of Democrats say that and sort of religiously endorse Biden anywho. Aside - ROFL the presidential race is between these two old, out of touch, Keynesians. Aside 2 - To be honest the Democrats had some ludicrous presidential nominees this year too like some new-age mystic lady [See: DnD]. Continuation - Yet, for this 2020 election, the Democrats had a promising rising star (a sort of Keynesian superhero) Andrew Yang who seemed willing to call out the democratic party for their bosh – for while at least. Sadly methinks he's given way to pragmatism; because of the putative Trump threat. Along with every other Democratic nominee, Andrew Yang endorsed Biden #Disapointing. Which in my mind twas somewhat sketch that all the Democratic nominees were willing to endorse someone like Biden. Someone with a lousy track record on immigration (very harsh), drugs (war on drugs leader), and worst of all a Keynesian. In regards to the Republicans and their people who would be willing to call out their party for its humbug. Would prolly be this Justin Amash guy who calls out the poor incentive structure within the US government all the time [See: Justin Amash on "Yang Speaks" juxtapositing how laws get passed in the statehouse versus how laws get passed in congress]. Plus, these Republicans have this Rand Paul guy who calls out the dumb nature of making it super impossible for most of the congress-people to have time to read the bills & whatnot. With the result of such having it so only the party leaders supposedly know what's in the bills. These main congress folk ends up whipping the rest of their partisan side into voting whichever way their part leaders, please. Finally, upon reflection, this Libertarian party is seemingly chockful of these highly individualized people – who (to be honest) are a bit too oppositional to everything. There was one VP candidate who stripped on stage apparently – I'd say that's very oppositional to societies tacit norms. I say the US's Libertarian party may have a superfluity of these disputatious folk. Yet the confounding variable to this situation may be the fact that tis a small 3rd party which draws the highly ideologically motivated or attention-seeking wacky-folk to run as candidates. Also, to that, I hear the Libertarian presidential race is pretty open and easy to join in comparison to the other parties – so that may give way to less established to join the race. In regards, to calling out political parties for doing dumb stuff. Methinks the Libertarian party shouldn't have picked Spike Cohen as it's 2020 VP pick –albeit I do understand that a podcaster may be good for marketing. I'd prefer to put up a qualified front for a presidential race. With Jo Jorgensen as the presidential pick (something which I approved of wholeheartedly) and Judge Jim Gray as the VP pick. – Murdoch Harris's 2020 Self Who is Leaning Libertarian & Interested In Ricardian Socialism & Anarchic Marxism Whatever Those Are Iteration

Written By Sydney Barbour (a forked personality of Murdoch’s with a Voluntaryist perspective/bias)

[politicsmoribund]

Socialism tis a Governmental System of the Future not the Present

Isn't the iterations of socialism that are coming out these days – making Socialism look bad? These days socialism is associated with icky centralization, bureaucracy, and bad regulations that are inbringing a need for more regulations that inbring a need for more regulations. We're stuck with electorial market-socialist poo-poo that vitiates our markets. A socialistic system that really shouldn't be tied to any sort of nation-state. Socialism is a governmental system of the future, not the present. Socialism is a governmental system for a land of decentralization, smart contracts supplanting lawyers, and scarcity being a thing of the past. Socialism doesn't seem to help any modern nation-state system. If only the Socialists had some sort of anarchic agorist type movement; instead of, this revisionist Marxist & reformist whatnot. Then these Socialists could more easily experiment with various iterations of their "ideology in process" instead of releasing substandard defective products i.e. poo-poo policies that inbrings higher costs of living which in turn makes a minimum wage seem necessary( a policy that only makes the problem worse). These versions of Socialism coming out as of late are substandard systems that inbring inflation year after year making fat-cats richer whilst removing rungs from the ladder of social mobility. Foisting a situation where everyone has to become a stock speculator, find alternative currencies, or find any other sort of method to eschew their national currencies. These poo-poo situations give the Socialists such a poor track record with their association with poo-poo Keynesianism which is such a half in the bag system. Methinks we should treat these socialists like governnauts [explorers of new forms of governance], and underwrite their exploration via crowdsourcing (voluntarily – unlike their present nonvoluntary icky Democratic Socialism feigning consent via substandard/not fully fleshed out democracy). Socialism please move to some seastead or something and find a way to make your ideology more voluntary and give people the right to secede from such voluntary ideology. Whilst these Socialists explore, and if we have to continue these nation-state systems – methinks the Austrian economists should be in charge. These Austrian economists are pretty baller with precluding the icky stuff associated with crony capitalism i.e. revisionist Marxism/market socialism/mercantilism/protectionism. Let's make these Austrian economists more popular. Then we should move into treating our governments like companies competing for customers & our companies should act as though they're all public interest companies with more explicit eleemosynary goals. Governments should be voluntary subscription model systems with people being incentivized to donate to others' welfare to eschew involuntary Socialism.

Written By: Levi Mulder (a forked personality of Murdoch’s with a Republican political bias) 

Murdoch will write under load of political characters. He has a dramatis personae of political writers including Elliot Mccreary [anarcho-syndicalist], Sydney Barbour [Voluntaryist], Jody Hewitt [socialist/democrat/market socialist/democratic socialist], Carson Malley [Environmentalist], etcetera. 

[politicsmoribund]

The GitHub Political Party

Advocates for a government where policy is managed via a respiratory hosting service that governs voluntarily via subscription plans. The GitHub Political Party would put in place a open-source government that stores revisions of projects for ideologies and policies. In practice the Github party would advocate for a voluntary society in which groups and individuals maintain and develop their culture or interests whilst maintaining a pluralist attitude valuing philoxenia (a love of strangers). Their philoxenia & their pluralist attitude are valued by each of the societies, despite them being apart of various schools of thought because they all consider the possibility that the other society is more correct. Each of these societies evinces a willingness to update their theories as more evidence becomes available. These voluntary societies treat their ideas like code where there are willing to update to new versions, fork into separate versions experimenting with different ideas, and are willing to boot up older iterations with the knowledge they obtained with newer iterations.Within these voluntary societies people will be able to vote with their feet or dollar ;in lieu of, diluted votes associated with regular democracy. -- Written by Murdoch Maxwell