CONservatards and Capitoolism

[Grug Arius]

Is everyone sick of CONservatards extolling the supposed virtues of capitalism?

Specifically, upper middle to upper-class CONservatards, but some middle class dogs begging for table scraps.

This form of CONservatard goes on and on about 'muh investment portfolio'. Often - but not always - is a middle aged fat lard sack or a skinnyfat douche, and usually with some kinda background in sales, management, lawl, or some other kinda paper-shufflin' pen-pushin' employment.

Ironically, these poople are fond of bitchinabout the dregs of humanity who suck off welfare, producing no value and being a drain on society.

Meanwhile, they likewise produce no value and are as a class of people no better than the welfare dregs the chafe about.

These poople GAME THE SYSTEM just like welfare dregs do. Financial voodoo within the byzantine banking/investment game produces nothing of value. There is no labor and no production, and considering that this system accelerates wealth inequality, produces no net value.

Welfare dregs with their govnoment subsidies are at least spending their free money on material items of value (and often of necessity)

Capitoolist CONservatards spend a lifetime engaged in works of often questionable value, and then squirrel their E-Z ZOGbux into financial schemes devised by the bankers, who are a class of people analogous to something like a brain parasite.

 

[Grug Arius]

Boomer conservatard lounging in Bora Bora financed by investments in multinational corps and predatory banking institutions, bitchinabout some dirt poor welfare collector spending his food stamps on potatoe chips dot jpeg

 

[kanethenotorious]

These types of people are the main reason I don't identify with the Republican Party. It's not the social issues or the social conservatives.

 

[Nikephoros II Phokas]

Like I've said before Ray-gun style fusionism/trickle down economics has run its course. Only now are people starting to wake up to it a bit because Globohomo, Inc. started pushing woke bullshit, but there are plenty of morons still peddling the hyper-idealized fantasy version of capitalism. One issue is that a lot of people don't understand (or are willfully blind) just how government has always had their thumbs on the scales in favor of Globohomo, Inc. Some of them insist that enacting government policy to correct this is unwise and they'll "vote with their wallets" despite the fact that the current economic system virtually assures there is no real competition. Then you have the Fed funneling money, through large banks into favored intermediaries like private equity firms that are basically kingmakers in our neofeudal economic system.

 

[Petr]

The oldest "conservative" objection to capitalism, or mammon, or material plenty in general, is that riches make you soft and weak. That is why Lycurgus banned trade from Sparta, for example.

Here is another famous classical example, that the historian Herodotus put in the mouth of Cyrus the Great:

https://anastrophe.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/perseus/citequery3.pl?dbname=GreekNov21&getid=1&query=Hdt. 9.122.4​

​

This Artayctes who was crucified was the grandson of that Artembares who instructed the Persians in a design which they took from him and laid before Cyrus; this was its purport: “Seeing that Zeus grants lordship to the Persian people, and to you, Cyrus, among them, let us, after reducing Astyages, depart from the little and rugged land which we possess and occupy one that is better. There are many such lands on our borders, and many further distant. If we take one of these, we will all have more reasons for renown. It is only reasonable that a ruling people should act in this way, for when will we have a better opportunity than now, when we are lords of so many men and of all Asia?” Cyrus heard them, and found nothing to marvel at in their design; “Go ahead and do this,” he said; “but if you do so, be prepared no longer to be rulers but rather subjects. Soft lands breed soft men; wondrous fruits of the earth and valiant warriors grow not from the same soil.” The Persians now realized that Cyrus reasoned better than they, and they departed, choosing rather to be rulers on a barren mountain side than dwelling in tilled valleys to be slaves to others.​

And here is commentary by the Straussian scholar Paul Rahe on that passage:

https://books.google.fi/books?id=Zymp_kM33ZcC&lpg=PP1&hl=fi&pg=PA74#v=onepage&q&f=false​

​

Herodotus ends his narrative of the Persian Wars with a description of the fate meted out to the Persian governor Artayctes – whom the Athenians had nailed to a plank as punishment for pillaging the tomb of the hero Protesilaus. Then, suddenly and without warning, the father of history transports us two generations back in time to the court of Cyrus the Great. There, he tells us, an ancestor of this same Artayctes had once approached the Great King with the suggestion that the Persians should take advantage of their newly won empire by migrating from their homeland, confined and harsh as it was, to a territory more favourable to human habitation. “It befits men who are rulers to do this sort of thing,” the man purportedly argued. “What finer time there could be – for we now rule over many men and all Asia?” Herodotus’ Cyrus was not much impressed. The Persians might take up this suggestion, he remarked, but only if they wished to rule no longer and to be ruled by others. “From soft countries,” he explained, “come soft men: it does not happen that the same soil produces an admirable harvest and men good in war.” If the ancient republics and the monarchies that lived on as their relics viewed technological progress with a jaundiced eye, it was because the ancients sensed that a science pledged “to come to the relief of man’s estate” was a science that promised to make of all countries “soft countries” and that thereby threatened to make all men “soft men.” It can hardly be fortuitous that the last word of Herodotus’ great work is the infinitive douleúein – “to be enslaved.”38​

 

[Grug Arius]

Yes^

Riches and soft-livin' decrepifies a man, at least in physique and in other ways as well.

On the other hand, extreme poverty often creates men who are barbaric wretches IMO

As in all things, balance is the key.

Making hundreds of thousands of ZOGbux by solely by the financial trickery (capitalism, in essence) of various investment 'vehicles' and 'products' (laughable terms, but the ones which capitalists prefer to use) means that a guy can stay plopped in a chair and never need do any real work nor produce anything in order to survive. This is not a well-balanced means of living at all. Its not much different than having a career counting cards at the blackjack table IMO

 

[Petr]

Yes^

Riches and soft-livin' decrepifies a man, at least in physique and in other ways as well.

On the other hand, extreme poverty often creates men who are barbaric wretches IMO

As in all things, balance is the key.

The Biblical Proverbs has teaching that applies exactly to this - that both material plenty and material deprivation can drive us away from the right path and God:

Proverbs 30 NKJV

​

7 Two things I request of You​

(Deprive me not before I die):​

​

8 Remove falsehood and lies far from me;​

Give me neither poverty nor riches—​

Feed me with the food allotted to me;​

​

9 Lest I be full and deny You,​

And say, “Who is the Lord?”​

Or lest I be poor and steal,​

And profane the name of my God.​

 

[Petr]