An economics, investment, trading and policy blog with a focus on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). We seek the truth, avoid the mainstream and are virulently anti-neoliberalism.
"Society has survived because it has developed a mechanism for concentrating violence on a limited number of victims. This he called the “scapegoating mechanism”. In fact the scapegoating mechanism exploits the very mimetic mechanisms that render it necessary for society’s survival. People who fall into violent, obsessive desire quickly lose their grip on reality. It is easy to convince them that the source of their frustration – their inability to satisfy their mimetic desires without running into violent conflict – is the fault of some group of scapegoats. It is important for the scapegoats to be a disenfranchised minority, so that the violence of society can be turned upon them without fear that they will be avenged. Here, again, Girard’s theory renders unsurprising that which economists and political scientists are at a loss to explain: for instance how the favoured ‘cure’ for economic depression is to visit structural violence upon low-paid immigrants, racial minorities, the homeless, the unemployed and the disabled."
Well nothing here goes over my head I can tell you that...
and its good you bring up scapegoating (btw a concept brought to you of mankind by the Hebrew Scriptures....) because that is what we do when we are blaming all of this on "the neo-liberals!" which is a figure of speech...
You guys are scapegoating a figure of speech, science is missing and is completely out of the scene, and will continue to get nowhere ....
"and its good you bring up scapegoating (btw a concept brought to you of mankind by the Hebrew Scriptures....) because that is what we do when we are blaming all of this on "the neo-liberals!" which is a figure of speech..."
Im not sure I really get your gripe here Matt. The criticism is about a constellation of ideas that many people in power hold in their heads together. These ideas make sense to them all and they make their decisions about what is the right thing to do based on these ideas. Many of us refer to that constellation of ideas as Neoliberalism as it seems that they are held together much of the time. Certainly you agree that some ideas are better than others so many here think "Neoliberalism" is wrong. Just like you think "Communism" is wrong or "Fascism"..... which are both figures of speech btw.
That was an excellent piece by the way and I must admit I had never known what Girard had to say about anything til that article. I recognized the name but was clueless to what he had ever said. Strong stuff
About Matt's post on scapegoating... this is relevant from an other thread where he used 'libertarianism' when attacking something and rephrased it as: "The solution to a situation in which there is inadequate authority being implemented is not for even less authority to be implemented...."
But why write this when you can summarize it using one word? Economy of language is very powerful and is something we do all the time in every area of knowledge to abstract concepts and ideas. My point being that is the same use case than "neoliberalism".
OFC when you are trying to make a serious argument you shouldn't relay on figures of speech and be exhaustive. The problem is not using figures of speech, the problem is not knowing your audience Matt.
There is no problem with your initial phrase in the context of this blog, it would be a problem is trying to communicate with a wider audience. Maybe that's the point you try to make so often?
I think that's a bit harsh there mate, thanks to the stuff Tom posts and comments I have learnt far more about sociology & philosophy here than anywhere else. Just finished Alex's Philosophy of debt...Really recommend it, one of those books I found hard to put down.
7 comments:
Very good article here by Alex Douglas. Will go over the heads of the people here probably though.
https://originofspecious.wordpress.com/2016/02/17/hayek-was-wrong-because-girard-was-right/
"Society has survived because it has developed a mechanism for concentrating violence on a limited number of victims. This he called the “scapegoating mechanism”. In fact the scapegoating mechanism exploits the very mimetic mechanisms that render it necessary for society’s survival. People who fall into violent, obsessive desire quickly lose their grip on reality. It is easy to convince them that the source of their frustration – their inability to satisfy their mimetic desires without running into violent conflict – is the fault of some group of scapegoats. It is important for the scapegoats to be a disenfranchised minority, so that the violence of society can be turned upon them without fear that they will be avenged. Here, again, Girard’s theory renders unsurprising that which economists and political scientists are at a loss to explain: for instance how the favoured ‘cure’ for economic depression is to visit structural violence upon low-paid immigrants, racial minorities, the homeless, the unemployed and the disabled."
Well nothing here goes over my head I can tell you that...
and its good you bring up scapegoating (btw a concept brought to you of mankind by the Hebrew Scriptures....) because that is what we do when we are blaming all of this on "the neo-liberals!" which is a figure of speech...
You guys are scapegoating a figure of speech, science is missing and is completely out of the scene, and will continue to get nowhere ....
In Europe that goat worships Allah.
"and its good you bring up scapegoating (btw a concept brought to you of mankind by the Hebrew Scriptures....) because that is what we do when we are blaming all of this on "the neo-liberals!" which is a figure of speech..."
Im not sure I really get your gripe here Matt. The criticism is about a constellation of ideas that many people in power hold in their heads together. These ideas make sense to them all and they make their decisions about what is the right thing to do based on these ideas. Many of us refer to that constellation of ideas as Neoliberalism as it seems that they are held together much of the time. Certainly you agree that some ideas are better than others so many here think "Neoliberalism" is wrong. Just like you think "Communism" is wrong or "Fascism"..... which are both figures of speech btw.
That was an excellent piece by the way and I must admit I had never known what Girard had to say about anything til that article. I recognized the name but was clueless to what he had ever said. Strong stuff
About Matt's post on scapegoating... this is relevant from an other thread where he used 'libertarianism' when attacking something and rephrased it as: "The solution to a situation in which there is inadequate authority being implemented is not for even less authority to be implemented...."
But why write this when you can summarize it using one word? Economy of language is very powerful and is something we do all the time in every area of knowledge to abstract concepts and ideas. My point being that is the same use case than "neoliberalism".
OFC when you are trying to make a serious argument you shouldn't relay on figures of speech and be exhaustive. The problem is not using figures of speech, the problem is not knowing your audience Matt.
There is no problem with your initial phrase in the context of this blog, it would be a problem is trying to communicate with a wider audience. Maybe that's the point you try to make so often?
"Will go over the heads of people here probably"
I think that's a bit harsh there mate, thanks to the stuff Tom posts and comments I have learnt far more about sociology & philosophy here than anywhere else.
Just finished Alex's Philosophy of debt...Really recommend it, one of those books I found hard to put down.
Very good article here by Alex Douglas. Will go over the heads of the people here probably though.
I was planning to post that today as weekend reading. Thanks for the reminder.
Post a Comment